# DSLR Users Corner!



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

Speak and show your pictures made by you DSLR!!! Discuss about lenses and any other thing here! (Canon users Wellcome! :rofl: ) 

I want to share with all of you that finally I got a great WIDE angle! The Tokina 12-24 mm. I hope I would take amazing pictures of skyscrapers with it!


----------



## The PhantoM (Apr 7, 2005)

Urban Dave said:


> Speak and show your pictures made by you DSLR!!! Discuss about lenses and any other thing here! (Canon users Wellcome! :rofl: )
> 
> I want to share with all of you that finally I got a great WIDE angle! The Tokina 12-24 mm. I hope I would take amazing pictures of skyscrapers with it!


The PhantoM reporting . I've got a canon Digital Rebel, i'll share my pics later. BTW your pics don't work


----------



## gohcan (May 31, 2004)

No pics Urban!
I hope to be soon a member of this corner...


----------



## hyacinthus (Nov 22, 2004)

dave, I can't see your pictures too.

Me still a DSLR newbie and learning. These are some pictures taken using D70 (bought in Mar 05) 

Using 70-300mm lens

















Using 18-70mm lens

























Using 50mm lens


----------



## nakedyak (Nov 6, 2004)

i'm about to buy a Canon 300d and when i do, watch out  the pictures will start pouring in...


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

Thanks for the advise! My pics dont' work. I will try to solve it ASAP


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

As you see, I love EXTREME WIDE ANGLES


----------



## gohcan (May 31, 2004)

Nice!!!

Ohh...spying your neighbors in summer? :naughty:


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

Sorry gohcan, no horny girls as neigbours


----------



## huaiwei (Jan 30, 2003)

My two attempts in playing around with DOF? 










This one was taken later in the day...


----------



## Style™ (Sep 15, 2002)

do they have a pulse?

by the long looks on their face, i guess not!


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

:rofl:
Which is the maxim aperture of you lense? Well, the one used with this photos? (I can't read the file exif!  )


----------



## huaiwei (Jan 30, 2003)

Aperture range of my lens? 3.5-6.3. Anyway, here is are the details for both photos:

First one:
Aperture: 6.3
Shuttle: 1/40
Focal length: 200mm
ISO: 200

Second one:
Aperture: 5
Shuttle: 1/6
Focal length: 60mm
ISO: 400


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

A friend of mine (and forumer, as arquitaja) has the Nikkor 50mm 1.8 and the DOF is SOOOO SHORT. You can get amazing portraits  And it's not an expensive lense.


----------



## huaiwei (Jan 30, 2003)

Nah....I am not into extensive portrait shots to invest in such a lens.


----------



## MILIUX (Sep 13, 2002)

Here's mine:

Nikkor 24-120mm VR Lens


----------



## jmancuso (Jan 9, 2003)

some pics with my new canon 300D/digital rebel:

with 28-80mm lens and UV filter...


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

Impressive pic matrixvolta and jmancuso
@huaiwei: The Nikorr 50 mm cost about 120$ or 140$  At least something in photography is "cheap"! Because you can find some Polarized filters for the same price as this lense.


----------



## AltinD (Jul 15, 2004)

Six days ago, I just bought my first DSLR camera, a Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ5, 5.0 MP and x12 optical zoom. Also a 512 MB SD Card.

I am a absolute beginers, so I have no idea at all how to use in the manual mode, but I remember that the aperture was up to 8.0 :lol:


----------



## AltinD (Jul 15, 2004)

What's the best way to take night pictures of stationary objects (with tripod), like skyline; leave it all to the camera's "night schenery" mode (ISO 80, flash Off, 8 sec exposure time) or should I program manually the camera? 

My camera has also a TIF mode. Do I really benefit in pic quality (image size apart) if I record the images in this format?


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

Altind: I guess in the beginning the preset mode is good, to get to know your camera. I would advise you though to experiment with different shutterspeeds, because sometimes 8 second exposures dont generate the desired effect. Some camera's even have a bulb function, which means the shutter stays open as long as you hold down the button, up to 999 seconds (on the EOS 350D). Obviously for nightshots you would need a remote, otherwise the movement of the camera due to pressing down the shutter-release button would create a blurry shot, but its more of an indication that there's more than 8 seconds  

I don't know how it works with your Panasonic, but with the 350D, in manual mode shooting Manually isn't all that hard really, and you learn loads. In the viewfinder, and on the lcd-display as well, there is a meter kind of thing which shows whether your shot is underexposed or overexposed, and when you change the aperture/shutterspeed, you see the meter move around. For nightshots though, you might want to ignore that meter, because you want to play around with certain light-effects.


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

This is what I like about DSLRs:

Resized image:









100% crop:









This was a test shot that I shot handheld, indoors. 

By the way, how and where can you see the exif data of your pictures?


----------



## huaiwei (Jan 30, 2003)

exif data? All the apertures and stuff? If you use Microsoft OS, just right click on the picture file, choose properties, and then details.


----------



## huaiwei (Jan 30, 2003)

Altind_Carnut said:


> Six days ago, I just bought my first DSLR camera, a Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ5, 5.0 MP and x12 optical zoom. Also a 512 MB SD Card.
> 
> I am a absolute beginers, so I have no idea at all how to use in the manual mode, but I remember that the aperture was up to 8.0 :lol:


Jeez...you took these shots in auto mode?! They are really beautiful!


----------



## AltinD (Jul 15, 2004)

^ Thank you sir. 

BTW as Chinese, how authentic you consider the decorations on that picture. That is a new shopping mall and one of the courts is Chinese themed, both in structure and decoration, the ship is lifesize (only the first pic, the other two are from the indian court).


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

The panasonic is not a DSLR, isn't? DSLR has interchangeble lenses. 
Best way to night scenary is or manual or the mode, that it's good for you say, but maybe 8seconds are too few! And always, noise reduction mode ON!


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

Download Opanda exif, and it's extension for firefox in www.opanda.com


----------



## huaiwei (Jan 30, 2003)

Altind_Carnut said:


> ^ Thank you sir.
> 
> BTW as Chinese, how authentic you consider the decorations on that picture. That is a new shopping mall and one of the courts is Chinese themed, both in structure and decoration, the ship is lifesize (only the first pic, the other two are from the indian court).


 Whoops...Urban Dave is probably right...you might be having a prosumer cam afterall!

But still, I am very much bowled over by those shots. The colours are dazzling! If I have a cam capable of producing such shots in auto mode, I wont bother ever switching to manual! 

As for the "authenticity", I am not an expert in Chinese art, but yeah, it appears that the colours and styles chosen were more or less alright, and do compliment the ship pretty well. Nice place!


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

About the camera, there is no doubt is really good!!! Colour and image are great!


----------



## Kit (Nov 9, 2003)

Altind_Carnut said:


> What's the best way to take night pictures of stationary objects (with tripod), like skyline; leave it all to the camera's "night schenery" mode (ISO 80, flash Off, 8 sec exposure time) or should I program manually the camera?
> 
> My camera has also a TIF mode. Do I really benefit in pic quality (image size apart) if I record the images in this format?


There isn't a right way to take pictures. For more control, you should be using the manual mode. How much you dial in will largely depend on the scene. For 135 format, it can be anything from 8 secs to 30 secs usually. 

Using Tiff allows you to post edit your images without any loss in quality. It gives you better control in producing the final image.


----------



## Kit (Nov 9, 2003)

Urban Dave said:


> The panasonic is not a DSLR, isn't? DSLR has interchangeble lenses.


SLR stands for single lens reflex(defines how light is being reflected to the viewfinder from the lens) and has nothing to do with interchangable lenses. Early DSLRs from Olympus (E10 and E20) has fixed lens on them.


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

And the Panasonic features the "light reflected wiewfinder"? 
Anyway a DSLR should be considered more than this, what about aperture and the possiblity of DOF? Many advanced compact digital cameras can control the aperture, but it's so limitaded. My old 885 Nikon Coolpix only had two values of aperture. "open and close"


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

http://www.pbase.com/urbandave/salo_automovil&page=all
Pictures of cars! Many pictures were took with my brand new Tokina 12-24, an amazing lens!!!!! Just an example!


----------



## huaiwei (Jan 30, 2003)

Huaha! Yellow fever! 

Did you use PS? What tools were used to tweak it? I ofen wonder what is the best mix and even sequence of tools to use...


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

I just resized the image, and then applied a small Focus Mask (I dont' know the exact command in english... is a default filter of PS)


----------



## AltinD (Jul 15, 2004)

Who needs this:












This camera belongs to a Dutch forumer


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

Eos 300D Black with a sigma.... but wich one?


----------



## AltinD (Jul 15, 2004)

^ If you mean "... which forumer", then is "Michiel".


----------



## AltinD (Jul 15, 2004)

Ok, my FZ5 isn't really a DSLR, but anyway:










.... taken with x12 optical zoom (max), in "Schenery - Night Schene" as a TIFF format, then PS and re-sized. The distance is some 4 km away, maybe more.


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

AltinD, I was refering to wich lense has the camera.
The picture looks nice! Maybe it has too many noise (or maybe its just dust, but it looks like noise...) Try to clean it with software like Neat Image.You can get this result:


----------



## hyacinthus (Nov 22, 2004)

ThaQuest said:


> hya,
> 
> congrats on the new nikon! do you miss the swivel screen and lcd preview of your previous sony? im thinking about getting a canon 20D this summer (although i might go with a G6) your photos are gorgeous by the way. huaiwei you got one too? arrghh im jealous, i need to join the dslr crowd.
> 
> jesse


Thanks Jesse. 

No, it's not a Sony. It's a Nikon. :colgate: I still use that for low angle shots which is not possible with DSLR. It's with my dad now in Beijing. I hope he knows how to use.  

Our photography instructor always reiterates this - It's the man behind the camera but not the camera that makes a good picture. I agree to an extent... cos there are certain photography tricks like stepwise/gradual zoom, flash sync and flexibility in the use of lens (subjected to budget) etc etc which could only be achieved using D/SLR (with much more control). No matter what decision you make, be it prosumer or DSLR, you can and have already been taking well-composed pictures. 

btw, Would you be showing us more pictures you took in Singapore (in SG sub-forum)? 

hya.


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

thanks hya.sky!!!!!!


----------



## huaiwei (Jan 30, 2003)

ThaQuest said:


> hya,
> 
> congrats on the new nikon! do you miss the swivel screen and lcd preview of your previous sony? im thinking about getting a canon 20D this summer (although i might go with a G6) your photos are gorgeous by the way. huaiwei you got one too? arrghh im jealous, i need to join the dslr crowd.
> 
> jesse


 Oh yes I became a rebel since I had to lug a 350D around?


----------



## hyacinthus (Nov 22, 2004)

Yesterday, about 360 nikonians turned up with their Nikon DSLRs at The New Paper Big Walk (Singapore). Great event for photography, win great prizes and getting to know other nikonians too! Here's a group picture :colgate: 









I am in there too... hehe... but, won't tell you where I am. :lol:

Bigger version here

The yellow jersey T (available in both ladies/mens version) is sponsored by Nikon Singapore.


----------



## babystan03 (Jun 10, 2003)

^
I see u but I won't say where you are.....:lol:


----------



## hyacinthus (Nov 22, 2004)

hmmm... I can't find myself in the smaller picture at first... sharp eye.

I LOVE Nikon! :colgate:


----------



## babystan03 (Jun 10, 2003)

^
What a nice way to advertise......


----------



## hyacinthus (Nov 22, 2004)

Building after-sales customer relationship is very important.

Nikon is very generous with the free Jersey T, door gifts, lucky draw prizes and competition prizes. Great way to know new friends too. No need to pay to participate but you must already own a Nikon camera and use it to participate in the competition. They even hired a regular bus (with D70 livery) to bring us to other spots to take pictures of the event and provide us with lots of water... 

Even a canon film SLR user whom I met yesterday lamented why Canon did not organise such an event for them. Kudos to Nikon!


----------



## babystan03 (Jun 10, 2003)

^
Wah so good.....I shall consider nikon......:yes:


----------



## drwho (Sep 7, 2003)

cool,so Nikon does such events for Nikonians


Huaiwei should start a meeting like that for Canonians


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

mg:! I wish Nikon organize this kind of events here in Spain! Here the customer service is quite bad  (It's nor organized by Nikon, a Spanish company called Finicon is who makes the post-selling service)


----------



## huaiwei (Jan 30, 2003)

hyacinthus said:


> hmmm... I can't find myself in the smaller picture at first... sharp eye.
> 
> I LOVE Nikon! :colgate:


 Haha I see you too!  I want that tshirt!


----------



## huaiwei (Jan 30, 2003)

drwho said:


> cool,so Nikon does such events for Nikonians
> 
> 
> Huaiwei should start a meeting like that for Canonians


 Ney...I doubt I would. To be honest, my heart is still with the Nikon brand name, and sometimes I actually felt embarrased having to call myself a Canonian?


----------



## noli (Apr 16, 2004)

I was an SLR user but went digital, and got myself a Sony DSC P200 Cybershot. I know its not a DSLR but Im happy with it. If you guys want you can check my photo blog and tell me what you think of the quality of the photos taken by the Sony. Personally Im happy even though I cant go fully manual like you DSLR users.


----------



## hyacinthus (Nov 22, 2004)

huaiwei said:


> Haha I see you too!  I want that tshirt!


you want to end up like him 










hehe... so easy to spot? btw, I doubt you want to wear a ladies jersey which has a shapely cut. Try clubsnap to ask if anyone wants to sell theirs to you, (if you are really interested.)


----------



## hyacinthus (Nov 22, 2004)

Koreanczyk said:


> I was an SLR user but went digital, and got myself a Sony DSC P200 Cybershot. I know its not a DSLR but Im happy with it. If you guys want you can check my photo blog and tell me what you think of the quality of the photos taken by the Sony. Personally Im happy even though I cant go fully manual like you DSLR users.


Just my personal experience. I have a coolpix 5400 (Digital Prosumer) and a Nikon D70 (DSLR). My experience with both cameras tells me that though 5400 can handle some day shots almost as well as D70, it loses out in indoor/dim places where flash is not allowed (can use 50mm f1.8 lens for D/SLR), shots which requires continuous shooting fast i.e. action/bird photography, night photography, macro photography and shots involving DOF etc.

In fact, talking about quality, it depends on the target usage size and media. Are you using it for website at 450x300px or or a 4R print or a A3-size poster or a full-size double-decker bus livery? The comparison in quality is distinct as the required size goes larger.

I think film SLR (in slide format) is still the best. Obvious disadvantages are not able to check the shots instantly and cost of developing it.

Guess you do mostly landscape/architecture shots in daytime for maybe website/4R prints? If so, a Sony P200 is probably sufficient and more convenient to carry around.


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

When I just got my DSLR and shot pictures with it, I found out that there were more options to my DSLR, yet the image quality wasn't all that much better than a P&S. I was slightly disturbed, and wondered whether the kit-lens was limiting the camera's ability. Then I ordered the EOS magazine (which is a very good mag, and I can recommend it to anyone, and definitely DSLR amateurs like myself) and the issue was addressed, much to how I thought it should. The difference between a dslr and a normal digicam is that shots from a digicam are more compressed in-camera, since the manufacturer assumes that the shots will be printed automatically. Therefore, the quality may look just as good, or sometimes even better than a dslr. Obviously, this is not the case. Dslr shots (provided you pursue the highest, or at least higher quality than a digicam) are shot less compressed, and require post-processing to create top-notch images. Of course, not everybody wants to post-process their images, and you can set the camera to set sharpness etc. in-camera, much like a digicam will do by default, but the danger with this is that you can't undo these applications, just like you can't undo the effects added by a digicam either. The best of course is to just shoot in RAW, but this is not always an option, due to cf-card space. 

Many people frown upon post-processing, at least on this forum. At first I also felt that you then let the computer do the work, instead of yourself and the camera. But then I saw that, in film photography, when film is developed, the post-processing is done by using superior chemicals, which add a lot of quality to the image. In the digital age, the developing of film has become the post-processing of images, and should not be frowned upon.


----------



## hyacinthus (Nov 22, 2004)

agree with th0m.  

Even DSLR photography class encouraged Photoshop to enhance your pictures.


----------



## hyacinthus (Nov 22, 2004)

However, to add... 

I have yet seen a p&s camera that can take good indoor seminar shots (under dim lighting conditions i.e. yellow downlights) as compared to using a D/SLR with 50mm f1.8 lens w/o flash and w/o photoshop enhancements (using correct settings, of course).


----------



## huaiwei (Jan 30, 2003)

hyacinthus said:


> you want to end up like him
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Was there a picture? Cant seem to see it...how about the url for the thread? Thanks!


----------



## noli (Apr 16, 2004)

hyacinthus said:


> Just my personal experience. I have a coolpix 5400 (Digital Prosumer) and a Nikon D70 (DSLR). My experience with both cameras tells me that though 5400 can handle some day shots almost as well as D70, it loses out in indoor/dim places where flash is not allowed (can use 50mm f1.8 lens for D/SLR), shots which requires continuous shooting fast i.e. action/bird photography, night photography, macro photography and shots involving DOF etc.
> 
> In fact, talking about quality, it depends on the target usage size and media. Are you using it for website at 450x300px or or a 4R print or a A3-size poster or a full-size double-decker bus livery? The comparison in quality is distinct as the required size goes larger.
> 
> ...


My interest are traditional asian architecture or urban shots. Yeah, I shoot my photos during the day, so the camera is sufficient. Even if I had a DSLR I would still shoot the same things, so it doesnt pay for me to get a DSLR. To be honest, I find the size liberating. Im kind of an opportunist photographer. I dont really go out for the sole purpose of spending hours shooting photos. When I see a shot while Im out that looks promising, I take the shot. Being able to literally put the camera in my pants pocket is great after shooting with a film SLR for years. This way I literally have my camera with me at all times. I never part with it.


----------



## hyacinthus (Nov 22, 2004)

huaiwei said:


> Was there a picture? Cant seem to see it...how about the url for the thread? Thanks!


Here's the url => http://gallery.clubsnap.com/data/500/DSC_8768.jpg. Tell me what is that guy holding?


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

hyacinthus said:


> However, to add...
> 
> I have yet seen a p&s camera that can take good indoor seminar shots (under dim lighting conditions i.e. yellow downlights) as compared to using a D/SLR with 50mm f1.8 lens w/o flash and w/o photoshop enhancements (using correct settings, of course).


Yes, definitely. It's also noticable in zoom-shots, and macro shots. Digicam's don't have nearly as much bokeh as dslr's.


----------



## babystan03 (Jun 10, 2003)

hyacinthus said:


> Here's the url => http://gallery.clubsnap.com/data/500/DSC_8768.jpg. Tell me what is that guy holding?


Still can't see......hno:


----------



## huaiwei (Jan 30, 2003)

hyacinthus said:


> Here's the url => http://gallery.clubsnap.com/data/500/DSC_8768.jpg. Tell me what is that guy holding?


 Hm...url of the photo gallery or the thread its posted in clubsnap? Dont think they allow hotlinking anymore.


----------



## hyacinthus (Nov 22, 2004)

huaiwei said:


> Hm...url of the photo gallery or the thread its posted in clubsnap? Dont think they allow hotlinking anymore.


 :sleepy: Now?


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

Traidor!!!!! A Canonist dressed like a nikonian!


----------



## Kit (Nov 9, 2003)

Now, where are the Pentax shorts and Minolta shoes?


----------



## hyacinthus (Nov 22, 2004)

:lol: Actually, this is common... nikonians wearing canon vest... canonians wearing nikon T/cap... depends who is the sponsorer.  But, this case is weird. He's wearing a nikon T+vest but using a canon camera for the competition... his pictures would be rejected cos it's not taken using a nikon.

In Singapore, there is another regular event for photographers too. Call Photo Marathon (usually held in Sep/Oct). Canon was sponsoring the event in the past 2 years. All are allowed to take part (even Nikon, Sony, Fujifilm etc brand users) but are required to wear Canon vest when the participants hunt all over the island to take pictures for the competition. 

Kit, so far I've not seen any camera brand which had their logos on shoes/shorts. too low to be seen :colgate:


----------



## babystan03 (Jun 10, 2003)

Anyone using Pentax *ist DS DSLR?? how is it??


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

I havent' sorry! But as far as I know, uses the same CCD as nikon D70, a sony one, so image quality should be good! 
If you want to see pictures took with this camera, you should visit www.pbase.com -> Camera database -> Pentax -> and de *ist DS 
As far as I know is the smallest cam in the market


----------



## hyacinthus (Nov 22, 2004)

My birthday present!  Nikkor 10.5mm f2.8 lens.  

Picture taken using it.


----------



## nakedyak (Nov 6, 2004)

amazing. I'm gonna try to get me a 12-24 Sigma aspherical lens at some point


----------



## babystan03 (Jun 10, 2003)

Thats nice, Hya.....:yes:


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

hyacinthus said:


> My birthday present!  Nikkor 10.5mm f2.8 lens.
> 
> Picture taken using it.


mg: Fisheyes take amazing pictures of street life!!!! I hope you enjoy it a lot and show us your pictures!


----------



## hyacinthus (Nov 22, 2004)

ya... and i had lots of fun playing with it. 

I've posted some in hk subforum thread http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=82214&page=3


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

Thanks for the link hyacinthus! Wich is the vision angle of the lense?


----------



## hyacinthus (Nov 22, 2004)

Urban Dave said:


> Thanks for the link hyacinthus! Wich is the vision angle of the lense?


you meant what is the angle of view? 180 degrees.


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

:O Yeah, I mean angle of view. I suppose that in a D70 should be a little bit less than 180, isn't?¿


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

Wow, that fisheye is amazing. I'd like to get my hands on one, but I think I should get a decent Wide Angle, or Ultra Wide Angle first. Won't really need an extensive range of zoom, since I'll mostly do architecture shots. The only thing that bothers me about a fisheye is that you have to pick your shots carefully, and you can only take so many shots on one trip, because the effect is nice, but having it on all your shot is quite tiresome (to me, anyway). 

Hyacinthus, did you have to crop your images because of vignetting, or do they cover the full sensor?


----------



## hyacinthus (Nov 22, 2004)

@Dave
Less than 180 :? 

But, the nikon website claimed "the first fisheye lens designed specifically for digital SLR photography is also the first to achieve a full-frame 180 degree picture angle" 

From: http://www.nikon.com.sg/PRODUCT/LENSES/AFNIKKOR/AF-Fisheye-10.5mmDX.htm

@th0m

Of course not all shots using fish-eye. Otherwise, very boring too. Used it on close-ups and tight places like in a temple, MTR, restaurant etc. I didn't crop the images.  If you meant the pictures in HK subforum, I just resized and added some words to make it interesting. :colgate:


----------



## hoogbouw010 (Sep 10, 2002)

These two images (London/Canary Wharf and London/Houses of Parliament) are from an Olympus E-20 with an add-on Raynox DCR-FE180 full-frame fish-eye (180 degrees on diagonal line). The corners are black because of vignetting. The thing weights 0.7 KG and I dropped it out of my sweaty hands on the roof of a Hong Kong hotel, so now both the outside and inside glass has cracks. These two are from before this accident though.


----------



## hyacinthus (Nov 22, 2004)

@hoogbouw010 

cool pics!  At least, you had clear blue skies during your HK trip in Apr... mine was dull greyish skies and cloudy in May... I want to visit Europe one day too. :colgate:

So sad to hear about your fish-eye lens.  Perhaps, you could have bought a replacement while you were still in hongkong? Maybe, cheaper? I was indecisive about getting a lens in HK cos their lower-priced nikon lens (grey set) usually means no warranty. The sales person there advised me that fish-eye lens is simple (cos it's a prime lens) and if I broke the lens, no warranty could cover that too. The results of the lens tested at the shop and the savings of S$250 between a grey set in HK and a warranty set in SG was enough to make me want it. Anyway, it's a birthday gift.

@th0m
Now, I understand why you asked if I had cropped my pictures. No, I didn't crop them and vignetting did not appear in all my fish-eye pictures.


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

hyacinthus said:


> @Dave
> Less than 180 :?
> 
> But, the nikon website claimed "the first fisheye lens designed specifically for digital SLR photography is also the first to achieve a full-frame 180 degree picture angle"


mg:! I thught it was not DX! How much do it cost to you?


----------



## hyacinthus (Nov 22, 2004)

Urban Dave said:


> mg:! I thught it was not DX! How much do it cost to you?


S$850 after conversion from HKD.


----------



## nakedyak (Nov 6, 2004)

so, Nikon has the 10.5 fisheye DX , and the smallest Canon has is 15mm? Does anyone know of a 10mm fisheye for Canon AF mounts?


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

There is a 10-20 mm for Canon. But not a fisheye...
Maybe some sigma in canon mount?


----------



## hyacinthus (Nov 22, 2004)

@nakedyak

So, far the smallest fisheye which Canon can use is Sigma AF 8mm f/4.0 EX. 

I remember reading some forums saying that Canon camera bodies can use Nikkor lenses using an adapter but not Canon lens on Nikon camera bodies... not too sure about the effects though. Perhaps, you can post the question in your local photography forum?


----------



## hyacinthus (Nov 22, 2004)

@nakedyak

Maybe, this link will help you to decide if the Sigma 8mm lens is good for your Canon body.

http://www.chem.ox.ac.uk/oxfordtour/tutorial.html


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

I supose that putting a Nikon Lense in a Canon body (with adaptor) would make you lose the AF.


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

hoogbouw010 said:


> I dropped it out of my sweaty hands on the roof of a Hong Kong hotel, so now both the outside and inside glass has cracks.


That hurts a lot!!!!mg:


----------



## hyacinthus (Nov 22, 2004)

This sounds like good news to people with DSLR. 

--------------------------------
*Microsoft and Imaging Industry Leaders Unveil Support for Digital Camera RAW in Windows*

Adobe, Canon, Fujifilm and Nikon are working with Microsoft to provide seamless digital camera RAW support in Windows.

REDMOND, Wash. - June 1, 2005 -- Microsoft Corp., together with leading companies in the digital imaging industry, today announced enhancements to the family of Windows® operating systems that will enable consumers to easily work with RAW files in current and future versions of Windows. Working closely with digital imaging industry leaders including Adobe Systems Inc., Canon Inc., Fuji Photo Film Co. Ltd. and Nikon Corp., Microsoft plans to deliver native support for digital camera RAW images in the next major version of Windows, code-named "Longhorn."

In addition, Microsoft is enhancing the digital imaging experience for Windows XP with the upcoming availability of the Microsoft® RAW Image Thumbnailer and Viewer for Windows XP, allowing consumers to view thumbnails and preview and print Canon and Nikon RAW files from Windows Explorer in Windows XP. These features, as well as the ability to organize and edit Canon and Nikon RAW files, will also be available in a future version of Digital Image Suite.

Microsoft also announced it is developing a certification program for third-party RAW image codecs that will ensure their solutions provide a consistent experience for consumers who are using RAW image files. With this new RAW support across the Windows platform and products, Microsoft is enabling a seamless experience for consumers working with RAW digital images and delivering an extensible architecture for hardware and software industry partners.

"The explosion in popularity of digital photography on Windows continues to progress and evolve as consumers discover the quality benefits of digital camera RAW," said Amir Majidimehr, corporate vice president of Windows Digital Media at Microsoft. "By working with industry leaders to extend support for RAW in Windows, we are removing the obstacles for consumer use of RAW and enabling a seamless platform for the next era of digital imaging innovation."

"Aggressive price moves in the digital SLR space are expected to increase demand for digital SLR cameras to achieve an average annual growth rate of 12 percent between 2005 and 2009. IDC expects that significant growth will derive from consumers who desire higher-quality images," said Ron Glaz, program director of digital imaging services and solutions at IDC. "Microsoft's implementation of the RAW file format in 'Longhorn' will simplify access to RAW files, and that is expected to increase the use of the RAW file format by various types of digital camera users."

RAW image capture is becoming increasingly important to beginning and professional digital photographers because of its ability to preserve an image's fidelity. Often likened to a digital negative, a RAW image is preferred by many photographers who feel it preserves the subtle color and detail possible with today's digital cameras. Unlike a JPEG, which is processed in the camera, a RAW file is processed on a PC, where the exposure and color can be adjusted after the image has been captured. However, each new camera model introduces changes to RAW image files; this in turn requires that digital imaging applications must also be updated to support these changes. Microsoft is working with its partners to help solve this problem.

Native RAW Support Coming in "Longhorn"

Microsoft worked with imaging leaders to develop the digital camera RAW architecture in "Longhorn" and to provide the best digital photography experience for Windows consumers. "Longhorn" will deliver dramatic innovation in RAW support for independent software developers, camera manufacturers and consumers. Hardware and software partners will benefit from the standardized architecture for image codecs, which allows them to contribute their own codecs to be certified and implemented in Windows.

Microsoft's platform approach provides built-in support for RAW files, enabling Windows-based applications to use all supported image types, including RAW. This architecture enables software applications to seamlessly support new image types upon codec certification by Microsoft. In addition, "Longhorn" will provide an application programming interface (API) that enables software vendors to exercise a higher degree of control over the RAW conversion in their applications, while enabling market opportunities for professional-level conversion tools.

For consumers, the ability to work with RAW image files just as easily as with JPEGs today will allow them to take advantage of the growing support for RAW in digital cameras and imaging software. Consumers will have more choices as new camera models are introduced because the new architecture in "Longhorn" makes it possible for all software programs on Windows to easily work with RAW image files.

RAW Image Thumbnailer and Viewer for Windows XP; Future Digital Image Suite Will Support RAW

In addition to announcing the imaging enhancements planned for the next version of Windows, Microsoft is helping Windows XP consumers realize the potential of RAW files. The Microsoft RAW Image Thumbnailer and Viewer for Windows XP will soon be available for free download* at http://www.microsoft.com. The RAW Image Thumbnailer and Viewer enhances the Windows XP photography experience by providing consumers with thumbnails, previews, printing and metadata display of RAW images directly in Windows Explorer. In addition, a future version of Microsoft Digital Image Suite will offer the ability to organize, edit and convert RAW files.

Founded in 1975, Microsoft (Nasdaq "MSFT") is the worldwide leader in software, services and solutions that help people and businesses realize their full potential.

* Connect-time fees may apply.

Microsoft and Windows are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Microsoft Corp. in the United States and/or other countries. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.

Note to editors: If you are interested in viewing additional information on Microsoft, please visit the Microsoft Web page at http://www.microsoft.com/presspass on Microsoft's corporate information pages. Web links, telephone numbers and titles were correct at time of publication, but may since have changed. For additional assistance, journalists and analysts may contact Microsoft's Rapid Response Team or other appropriate contacts listed at http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/contactpr.asp.

Industry Partner Support for Digital Camera RAW in Windows

"We believe Microsoft's plans to deliver native support to digital camera RAW images in the Windows operating system is good news to consumers. RAW images are valued as one source of expanding the digital imaging world, and we welcome the possibility that more and more digital camera users will have the opportunity to experience and enjoy the world of RAW."

- Tomonori Iwashita
Director and Deputy Chief Executive of the Image Communication Products Group
Canon

"Microsoft's support of digital camera RAW in both Windows XP and future versions of Windows is an exciting development that will make RAW image files much easier to use for the consumer. With these plans, users of Fujifilm cameras will enjoy a seamless, high-quality experience whenever working with Fujifilm RAW files on Windows-based PCs."

- Kenji Watanabe
General Manager, Marketing
Electronic Imaging Products Division
Fujifilm

"Nikon is supporting Microsoft's new operating system and compatible software, which will enable efficient and accurate handling of Nikon Electronic Format (NEF) RAW digital image file format. Through collaboration with Microsoft, we are confident that the expanded potential to use Nikon's NEF will contribute substantially to the overall development of the photography industry's use of RAW files among the broadest market."

- Kasuyuki Kazami
General Manager
Nikon


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

Yeas! It's a very important new! We won't need to open the Nikon Programs just to peview the NEF files!


----------



## Moolio (Oct 3, 2004)

I'm getting an EOS 350D in a couple of days. I rock! 

Just wanted to let you know.


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

Welcome to the club


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

Moolio, longing for you pictures! Enjoy the camera!


----------



## nakedyak (Nov 6, 2004)

yeah, my digital rebel was supposed to be here a week ago, but UPS lost it. UPS sucks.


----------



## hyacinthus (Nov 22, 2004)

moolio said:


> I'm getting an EOS 350D in a couple of days. I rock!
> 
> Just wanted to let you know.


Enjoy! Have fun! 



nakedyak said:


> yeah, my digital rebel was supposed to be here a week ago, but UPS lost it. UPS sucks.


sorry to hear about that. What would they do to compensate your loss?


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

UPS really sucks! I know a guy from a spanish photography forum that bought a lense and the lorry transporting it had an accident and burn. UPS didn't want to pay anything!!! Fortunatly the shop that sold the lense, made an insurance and they send another lense.


----------



## Moolio (Oct 3, 2004)

> Welcome to the club


I take it you have a 350D too? There seems to be quite a lot of Digital Rebel/XT users here. 



> Moolio, longing for you pictures! Enjoy the camera!


I will, thanks! So happens that I will get the camera at my parents' cottage, so my first photos will prolly be scenery shots. 



> Enjoy! Have fun!


Thanks!


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

Justme, I agree about always wanting the widest angle with architecture shots. However, if the shots at 10 mm with the Canon are crap (and I've seen some examples), then there's no use for me ponying up 200 euro's for something that's there, but doesn't work very well. From test-shots that I've seen, the Tokina has sharp corners even wide open on all focal lengths, the Canon appears not to be. 

If I feel I will need the extra 2 mm, I'll probably wait for the Sigma 10-20, to see if it matches up with the Tokina. If so, then I'll have the best of both worlds, an affordable UWA, 10 mm, and performing as well or maybe even better than Canon.

I'd like to have all Canon glass (I've only recently gotten into glass-acquiring mode, so its not as impressive as it sounds ), but if there comes something better along from another brand, I'm not too shy to give it a look.


----------



## nakedyak (Nov 6, 2004)

sounds like a great package, thats almost exactly what i wanted to get


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

Sikario, I don't know much about the Sigma lens, but the 50mm f1.8 is a GREAT pickup especially for its price, its really a bargain. The build is not impressive, but works, and the motor can be noisy from what I've heard, but for the pocket change you spend on it that's no valid commentary. As far as accesories go, extra batteries are always nice, I don't have a second pack because I'm a poor bastard. If you feel the 350D might be a bit small for your hands, I'd advise you to get the Battery Grip, so that you have a bigger camera, add battery-life, and you can also also take vertical shots easier (there's a shutter-release button on the Grip).


----------



## ch1le (Jun 2, 2004)

ill hopefully join Moolio and the others here in august. As my camera got stolen a day ago im planning on getting a 350D/XT. Wish me luck


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

I hope ch1le you are more lucky with your new camera!


----------



## Moolio (Oct 3, 2004)

ch1le said:


> ill hopefully join Moolio and the others here in august. As my camera got stolen a day ago im planning on getting a 350D/XT. Wish me luck


You're getting a 350D? Great! I hope you get it A.S.A.P.


----------



## ch1le (Jun 2, 2004)

Yeah, well, as i told you guys my last camera (7months old) got nicked  
Hope to get this new one by the 7th of August.

Have you got your camera now ? 
we are going to rock with our cameras


----------



## ch1le (Jun 2, 2004)

okay, now im a bit between 3 cameras..
D50, D70 and EOS350D

Can you guys tell me the Pros and Cons?


----------



## Moolio (Oct 3, 2004)

> Have you got your camera now ?


YEAH BABYh!!1 You can see some of my pics in Talo -forum. Check the Aula -section.



ch1le said:


> okay, now im a bit between 3 cameras..
> D50, D70 and EOS350D
> 
> Can you guys tell me the Pros and Cons?



You might wanna talk to Toni about the D70. He's got one, you know. The best thing about 350D is the 8MP sensor, I think. It really enables huge crops. Also, the noise levels are negligible, colors are good, and resolution is quite impressive. The kit lens is not anywhere near the quality of D70's Nikkor kit lens, but at least it's alot cheaper.


----------



## ch1le (Jun 2, 2004)

yeah, but did you buy any other lenses with it? I think someday in the future im going to buy Canon EF-S 17-85mm F4,0-5,6 IS USM for it...

I'm glad you got your camera so soon, i still have to collect a few cents for it 
anyway im certainly heading to Talo to check pics out


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

The 17-85mm is a decent lens, but not stellar. For stellar performances, comparable to the first class Nikkor performances, you should look into the L glass that Canon has. The best comparable zoom-lens to the kit-lens would be the 17-40 f/4 L. Granted, you pay about as much for your lens as you do for your body (or way more when it comes to other lenses), but those lenses are built like tanks (in a good way, although they're not lightweights either), and have solid performances.


----------



## Sikario (Feb 5, 2005)

ch1le, I have been pondering over the same question for some time. But the 350D comes out on top everytime I do the research. But then it is down to personal preference. They're all very competent cameras, but I simply prefer the 350D and the selection of lenses available.


----------



## Moolio (Oct 3, 2004)

ch1le said:


> yeah, but did you buy any other lenses with it? I think someday in the future im going to buy Canon EF-S 17-85mm F4,0-5,6 IS USM for it...
> 
> I'm glad you got your camera so soon, i still have to collect a few cents for it
> anyway im certainly heading to Talo to check pics out


Afaik the EF-S 17-85mm is a good but expensive lense. If you got the money, go for it. I myself have the 350D kit lense only. I'll prolly buy a tele zoom lens of about 50-300mm next. Right now I don't have the money, though, so it'll take a few months. It's a great camera anyway. I've had it for just under a month now, and already I've taken some one thousand to maybe fifteen hundred shots. It's so enjoyable to use. These days I kinda get a bit cranky if I can't go out to take some shots.


----------



## ch1le (Jun 2, 2004)

arghhhh

okay now im down to D50 and 350D... both are perfect.

would you tell me which kit lense is better?

The D50's AF-S Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6G ED
or the 350D' EF-S 18-55mm


grrr, i think im leaning more towards the D50


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

Canon's kitlens is not spectacular, I don't know about the Nikkor lens. Nikon's kitlenses are usually better. But if you are getting into the lens business already, then you could also buy a different lens without buying the kit. You can get a 50mm f/1.8 for the price of the kitlens. Its a better lens, although its not a zoom. Way better app, and sharpness is unreal.


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

Nikon lenses, the 18-70 are great lenses, much more better than the 18-55. Depending on your needs, maybe the D50 would be too amateur, maybe 350D would look like this too, but at least it has some improvements compared with D50 (2mpx more)


----------



## Moolio (Oct 3, 2004)

Urban Dave said:


> Nikon lenses, the 18-70 are great lenses, much more better than the 18-55. Depending on your needs, maybe the D50 would be too amateur, maybe 350D would look like this too, but at least it has some improvements compared with D50 (2mpx more)


BuMp!

I just read a review about D50 at dpreview.com, and they claim that it has even lower noise levels than 350D... (WTF)? It appears that 350D is better only in terms of:
A) pixel count (8.0 MP vs. 6.1 MP) 
B) continuous shooting (2.8 fps vs. 2.5 fps)
C) ISO range (100-1600 vs. 200-1600, although given D50's noise levels it doesn't make any difference)
D) WB finetuning (D50 doesn't have that feature)


D50 certainly seems a very good buy.


----------



## ItsConanOBrien (Oct 9, 2004)

I'm thinking about getting either a D50 or a 300D. If you go for the D50, let us know how it works out.


----------



## Moolio (Oct 3, 2004)

ItsConanOBrien said:


> I'm thinking about getting either a D50 or a 300D. If you go for the D50, let us know how it works out.


Actually, I already bought a 350D, but ch1le is still pondering the two. I'm fairly sure he'll make a pretty big deal of his camera once he buys it, so don't worry.


----------



## WpG_GuY (Dec 28, 2002)

I just got my DSLR, the Canon XT what do u guys think of these night shots?


----------



## babystan03 (Jun 10, 2003)

hyacinthus said:


> If you look at the images produced, you will understand.


I see.....:yes:


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

My new toy, replacing the basic 70-300 of my original kit. In the future I would by a multipilcator, to get more mm


----------



## tata (Jun 17, 2004)

Guys, is Nikon D90 or D200 for real or it's only a make-believe?


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

It's not for real, at least right now. But there are strong rumors that a camera such this will be annouced in September-August. Will replace D100 and will be semi-pro.


----------



## Moolio (Oct 3, 2004)

Urban Dave said:


> My new toy, replacing the basic 70-300 of my original kit. In the future I would by a multipilcator, to get more mm


Oh that's just gorgeous. :drool: :master: I'm still playing with EF-S 18-55 mm cheap-shit, and i'm just aching to get something that actually can take sharp images. Lucky you.


----------



## hyacinthus (Nov 22, 2004)

@Dave
Any pics from it?


----------



## hyacinthus (Nov 22, 2004)

babystan03 said:


> Wow.....S$1370 with Kit lens?? so tempting......


If you are looking for the new Anti Shake DSLR 5D with Kit Lens 18-70mm from Konica Minolta, it is in town today.

Price quoted from Alan Photo at Sim Lim below *S*$1,400 with GST and free 1 Gb Compact Flash.


----------



## babystan03 (Jun 10, 2003)

hyacinthus said:


> If you are looking for the new Anti Shake DSLR 5D with Kit Lens 18-70mm from Konica Minolta, it is in town today.
> 
> Price quoted from Alan Photo at Sim Lim below *S*$1,400 with GST and free 1 Gb Compact Flash.


Frankly speaking......very,very tempting...... Maybe I'll consider getting one in year end......:yes:


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

hyacinthus said:


> @Dave
> Any pics from it?


Not yet. So busy these days, but I hope soon I could make some shots!


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

Moolio said:


> Oh that's just gorgeous. :drool: :master: I'm still playing with EF-S 18-55 mm cheap-shit, and i'm just aching to get something that actually can take sharp images. Lucky you.


I hope that's just a figure of speech, because if you're not getting sharp pictures from your kitlens, then either you're doing something wrong, or your lens is a bad copy.

As basic and ill-reputed the kitlens may be, it should produce sharp images, and there are certainly lenses out there that produce worse images for more money.


----------



## Moolio (Oct 3, 2004)

th0m said:


> I hope that's just a figure of speech, because if you're not getting sharp pictures from your kitlens, then either you're doing something wrong, or your lens is a bad copy.
> 
> As basic and ill-reputed the kitlens may be, it should produce sharp images, and there are certainly lenses out there that produce worse images for more money.


I dunno. I've taken so far around 2700 pics with the kitlens (with and without a tripod), and every single time I've had to sharpen the pics with my software later on. I wonder if it is a defective copy. 

What kind of inproper use could cause the lens to deliver too soft images?


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

Moolio, could you share some examples?


----------



## Moolio (Oct 3, 2004)

Urban Dave said:


> Moolio, could you share some examples?


Sure, here are some straight out of the camera. As you can see, they are no where near sharp. I just can't understand what causes it, I clean my lens properly, I have tried different settings - I can't think of anything I might be doing wrong.


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

Which aperture are you using?


----------



## Moolio (Oct 3, 2004)

Urban Dave said:


> Which aperture are you using?


Honestly I can't remember, cause I've taken these a month or so ago. I generally use a very small aperture in photos like the upper one, so I doubt that is the problem. The lower one, on the other hand, was taken from just a matter of meters away from the subject (it was a zoo), so even a fairly large aperture shouldn't be the reason for the softness. 

In general softness like the one I'm struggling with is not a problem as I can usually sharpen the images without any compromises, but still it does bother me. I prolly should go back to the store for consultation.


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

Go bakc for consultation, maybe your camera has backfocus, it's something very often in digital cams. You could also try to test some high quality lenses (borrowed by a friend, or something like that). If they still look not very sharp, there is a small problem.
Normally lenses are much more sharp in the middle of the aperture, betwen f/8 and f/11.


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

Moolio: In general soft images will occur at the widest apertures, and as Urban Dave said, if you can (meaning if there's enough light) try to shoot between f8 and f11. I only use f3.5 (on the wide end) when I'm indoors and I'm already at ISO 1600 and 1/10 sec or so. ISO grain can be corrected, softness is harder. 

It is kind of a misconception that because you have to sharpen images, your lens doesn't produce sharp images by itself. Even with an L lens you will be sharpening your images afterwards. 

Here are two images, taken with the kitlens, one is post-processed (sharpening, contrast, saturation, nothing special) and one is straight from the camera, only resized. The image was shot in JPG, Large. I used the 10 quality in PS to save it, here's how they look:
EXIF data: 1/250s f/8.0 at 51.0mm iso100 

Edited picture:









Straight out of camera:









100% center crop from unedited shot:


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

th0m, amazing shot!


----------



## Moolio (Oct 3, 2004)

Second that, Dave. 

It may be that you guys are right. I've prolly been using either too small or too large apertures. May be it's just me, but the images do appear to improve when using f:8 - f:11 instead of something closer to the two extremes. Thanks guys!


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

You're welcome! Good to hear your shots are improving when stopping down. Usually every lens has its 'sweet' spot, the f-stop where they're sharpest, but generally f/8-11 is a safe bet anyway. Of course there are some advantages to shooting at faster f-stops. You have a smaller Depth Of Field which is really nice for portraits, and your viewfinder is usually brighter at faster f-stops. And the most obvious that you can shoot at lower light


----------



## aleph_null (Aug 19, 2004)

here's the first look at the new *Canon EOS 5D*

http://reviews.cnet.com/Canon_EOS_5D/4505-6501_7-31481139.html?tag=cnetfd.sd

sweet.


----------



## Moolio (Oct 3, 2004)

hazardously_wasted said:


> here's the first look at the new *Canon EOS 5D*
> 
> http://reviews.cnet.com/Canon_EOS_5D/4505-6501_7-31481139.html?tag=cnetfd.sd
> 
> sweet.


That IS sweet. :applause: So sleek and streamlined (the most important aspect in any pro-camera :laugh: ) If the burstrate is only 3 fps, I am a bit dissappointed, though. Still, I guess it's understandable for a 13mp sensor.


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

Well, if they would increase the frames per second then it would be competing with other more expensive camera's that Canon still has in production. This camera will be hot. I would get one, if I had 3.5k  But if I had 3.5k, then I'd just buy some tasty glass  hehe.


----------



## Token (Aug 25, 2005)

that must be frank gehry's guggenheim museum, thom?


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

Camera's price is also amazing!!! XD


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

Token said:


> that must be frank gehry's guggenheim museum, thom?


Token, yes it is. There are more pictures in my gallery, address is in my sig.

@Urban_Dave: The price is competitive, but I'd personally spend the $ on lenses before buying a better body.


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

Maybe it's competitive to Professionals (compared with the Nikon D2X), but for advanced amateur users, maybe the top price for a camera (only body) is about 2,000 €


----------



## ch1le (Jun 2, 2004)

bought me a SIGMA 70-300mm F4-5.6 DG today.... (wanted the same kind of Tamron but they were out and they wouldnt get them for months...)

Not the best lense in the world... but as good range and will supplement my kit lense well...


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

Congrats ch1le. Enjoy it and we wait to see the results!


----------



## ch1le (Jun 2, 2004)

a little test shot with grey weather and slow shutter... thats why it isnt as good as i would like it... and sorry for the tilt...

ISO 400
F9 (should have used something like 12)
1/200
92mm










edit: a bit off the background of the picture... the building on the right is the second Tallest building in Tallinn (union bank) 94m, and the building in the back is the tallest in Tallinn at 105m... anyhow... i like the reflection of the church... its totally surrounded by scrapers  Oh and also the street name is TOWERHILL 2


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

Looks sharps and no visible noise for ISO 400 ;D


----------



## ch1le (Jun 2, 2004)

/\ yeah ....low noise level is the strongest side of EOS 350D


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

Yes, I know. It's a great camera without doubts! If I would buy my DSLR now (I bought it a year ago!) I would purchase the 350D.


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

Really? Why would you choose it over your Nikon? (You've got the D70, right?)


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

Well, that would be in case of no have a DSLR nowadays and want to buy one. 350D is 1 year and a half newer than the Nikon D70, so it has some improvements, like lower noise and more ressolution. I didn't have any preference for Canon or Nikon because I didn't own any older SLR, so no possibility to use old lenses. But I dont' have any regrets for my D70, I like it, it's very good for my necessities and I hope it would long a lot of time!  When I bought it, I could choose betwen D70 and 300D (10D or D100 were to expensive) and I choose the D70 because it's a little faster than 300D, better build (I felt the 300D in my hands, and it was soft and so platic, and D70 had better ergonomics, at least for my hands) and allows more controls, like puntual medition. Fortunatly, nikon also released a new firmware (used in D70s) that makes the camera focusing better.


----------



## BuffCity (Jul 29, 2004)

*Question*

Hey everyone.

Alright, I'm looking at getting a DSLR, I am either going with Canon (my current cameras are these and are GREAT) or Nikon who my dad recommends and he used these back when he went to photograhy school in NYC in the 70s.

I don't really want a low grade DSLR, I'm looking for something I wont have to upgrade in a year or two from purchuse. I have outgrown my Canon G5 and have started doing things that are stretching the limits of my Point and Shoot. I have used an SLR before and I know how well that it's...time.

I need a recommendation as far as camera body model, and lenses to get...anyone have any ideas?



btw...
Does anyone know how to reduce glare and spots from Sodium lights or any lights while shooting streetscapes of cities? Filters or what?


----------



## Sinjin P. (Jul 17, 2005)

Vivitar


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

Buffcity, which is your budget? There is a brand new camera, the Canon 5D really great one, but it's quite expensive (3500$ aprox)
Then there is Canon 20D, really good, semi-pro
Another brand new camera is the 350D for advanded users, also, as the 20D 8 mpx
Nikon features the D50 and D70s, really good cameras but maybe they will be replaced in a few months by a new Nikon Model.
Then you have the D2X, a great machine, but also expensive, about 4500$.


----------



## fenix (Aug 21, 2004)

hazardously_wasted said:


> here's the first look at the new *Canon EOS 5D*
> 
> http://reviews.cnet.com/Canon_EOS_5D/4505-6501_7-31481139.html?tag=cnetfd.sd
> 
> sweet.


im really looking into upgrading my 20d for that. but i dont know if i can compensate spending 2 grand more (2x 20d's) for just a fullframe sensor. the new 24-105L IS looks promising however..


----------



## Moolio (Oct 3, 2004)

BuffCity said:


> Hey everyone.
> 
> Alright, I'm looking at getting a DSLR, I am either going with Canon (my current cameras are these and are GREAT) or Nikon who my dad recommends and he used these back when he went to photograhy school in NYC in the 70s.
> 
> ...


You might want to keep in mind that buying a mere high-end body won't guarantee good results. As I'm sure you know, if you buy, say, EOS 5D you're still going to have to buy a nice lens in order to reach 5D's full potential (on top of having to have a lot of expertise). I'd say you're looking at at least $4500-5000, if you're going to invest on 5D, for example. If you're planning on something even more expensive, like D2X, then you really need to be prepared to spend a lot.

Having said that, both of the above are amazing cameras, professional quality. I'd would start (I did, actually) with 350D, but that's just me. With a budget of 4000 dollars you can get the body (~$1000 in the US, I think), and a very nice range of lenses. You have to remember that the lens really does take precedence over the body in good image quality.


----------



## Moolio (Oct 3, 2004)

Sikario said:


> A tilt shift lens would be very useful if you like shooting archetecture.


Or medium format camera, but that's not gonna happen either, is it? :laugh: No but seriously, don't those Canon TS-E (or smt) lenses cost tons of money?


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

Sure they do, but not more than most other L primes.


----------



## MILIUX (Sep 13, 2002)

Moolio said:


> Or medium format camera, but that's not gonna happen either, is it? :laugh: No but seriously, don't those Canon TS-E (or smt) lenses cost tons of money?


Ahh boo. L lens is not the top lens. If you look at the lens indivisually some much cheaper Tamron and Sigma lens can beat the quality and sharpness. There are many L lens out there where the wide angles are soft. 

I would seriously consider 17-35mm f/2.8-4 Tamron lens. The quality is just superb.


----------



## gooth (Nov 1, 2005)

Recently I bought a ND4 filter. Yesterday i was making some test shoots with day light. That's what i did: I focused to a subject in motion, and then (with 0,3segs) i followed to the subject. It's difficult to get sharp the main subject, but you can get a nice effect:


----------



## nakedyak (Nov 6, 2004)

just got my Sigma 10-20mm today :-D


----------



## ch1le (Jun 2, 2004)

/\ you lucky son of a gun!


----------



## MILIUX (Sep 13, 2002)

From what i have read in reviews, there is a problem with 17-85 IS especially in 17mm area. I think i should go with Tokina 12-24 f/4 and Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 as a duel combo.


----------



## Sikario (Feb 5, 2005)

nakedyak said:


> just got my Sigma 10-20mm today :-D


SNAP!! I got mine yesterday too! Should be getting a 50mm f/1.8 tomorrow.


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

How's the CA on the Sigma? That's what I'm mostly worried about with that lens, plus corner sharpness.


----------



## nakedyak (Nov 6, 2004)

Yeah, i'll be getting a 50mm 1.8 in a month or so. The CA is certainly an issue, considering this lens is basically the cheapest and widest lens on the market for DSLRS...I'm only using it for fun and landscapes really, so i'm not that worried. Other lenses will outperform it i'm sure. Here's one i took of my house just for an example


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

^^ Wow! Really amazing! I hope you have a lot of fun with it!


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

^^UP!


----------



## Lucky 24 (Aug 10, 2003)

Hey, I can finally participate in this thread. 
I got an XT 2 days ago. Look forward to learning the nuances of SLR photography.


----------



## Jape (Feb 8, 2005)

Count me in! 

I have been DSLR user since last September. My equipment collection is not too huge yet - oh lord those lenses are expensive! First two months my only lense was EF 50mm / f1.8 - bought it just 'cause it was the cheapest one available. I'm not a big expert, but I would say it's the best lense you can get under 200€. It's good for portraits and that kind of stuff, but too narrow for architecture and landscapes. A few pics by me - taken with EF 50mm:



























Very awkward in landscape photography but I used it a few months by default.










But EF 28mm/f2.8 is definitely better for common use - bought it some weeks ago. Some EF 28mm stuff by me:




























Using polarisation filter is a good way to make strong and tasty colors:








Price naturally depends on where you buy it, but usually it's something around 40€.



nakedyak said:


> The CA is certainly an issue, considering this lens is basically the cheapest and widest lens on the market for DSLRS... Here's one i took of my house just for an example
> http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a371/nakedyak/widehouse.jpg


Wow! That lense is very wide, definitely ideal for landscape and architecture shooting. But I think the widest lense is Peleng 8mm fisheye - rightly it's for video cams, but with adapter it works with some Canon DSLRs:

http://ttv.paksut.net/photo/WideComparison/ - Shows really how wide it is. With it you have to be carefull if you don't want to have your toes in your pics.


----------



## nakedyak (Nov 6, 2004)

those pictures are great! The 50 f1.8 is definitely a valuable lens, i plan to get one in about a month.


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

^^ Great pictures! 50 mm lenses are really really amazing!


----------



## MILIUX (Sep 13, 2002)

th0m said:


> How's the CA on the Sigma? That's what I'm mostly worried about with that lens, plus corner sharpness.


Then get yourself a Tokina 12-24. I plan on getting that.

From the reviews i read, it's much better in quality compared to Sigma or Canon. Less softness in wide angle.


----------



## nakedyak (Nov 6, 2004)

The Sigma 12-24 is supposed to be a lot better than the 10-20 as well. I got the 10-20 purely because it was cheaper


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

^^ Sigma 12-24 is a full frame lense, and Sigma 10-20 (and Canon 10-20 , Tokina 12-24, Tamron 11-18) is APS-Size sensor, that's why it's cheaper.


----------



## gooth (Nov 1, 2005)

What's the difference between all them, Urban?


----------



## Aryan (May 21, 2004)

I have a question about my new 350D. It marks my first venture into amateur photography, and so far I've been very impressed with the results. It seems to have trouble AFing on objects close up, but apart from that I've not had any problems. I'm planning on buying the 50mm as I've heard it is a fantastic lens to have in your armoury, but it'll have to wait until the kidney money gets to me(I'm a student). 

What are good subjects to take pictures of using the kit lens? It doesnt seem to be very good for wide angle shots, and I've not really had a chance to test it on the telephoto range. Also, what lighting and other conditions are best suited to it?


----------



## Tony (Oct 24, 2002)

Lens have set distances to which they are capable of focusing (especially zoom lens), but you should try flipping it to manual focus and giving it a try.


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

All subjects are good for kitlenses


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

I used the kitlens for about 6 months before I bought the 50mm, and I mostly used the lens for wide architecture/city life shots. Given the focal length of 18 to 55 mm, that is actually the most suitable subject for this lens. Due to its close focusing ability (which is common in wide angle lenses) it can be used for 'macro' photography to some extent, although a true macro lens will obviously do way better at that. 55mm is hardly tele, although it does become 88mm effectively due to the crop factor. If you want to shoot tele (an indication you want to is if you're constantly on the 55mm end of your kitlens) I'd suggest getting a tele zoom (70-200 for example, although since you don't have too much $, maybe look for a bit cheaper zoom) for that.

As far as focusing, you shouldn't expect too much. I recently replaced the kitlens with the 17-40L, which has USM. I was in awe at the focusing of that lens, it is amazingly fast and silent. But you pay for that, and it will still hunt a bit when its dark. I wouldn't suggest manually focusing with the kitlens, the viewfinder of the 350D is not very big, not very bright (mostly due to the f3.5 max of the kitlens) and the focusing ring isn't very helpful either. For close-up photography, an easy suggestion is manually focusing the closest you can, then walk to your subject, or away from it, until it becomes sharp (sorta like foot-zooming, you'll get used to that when you buy your 50mm and lose the commodity that is called zooming). Since it is relatively close you will be pretty ok to judge whether its sharp or not. 

For the rest, I'd say use the lens for anything you want to use it for. It's actually quite capable, I've found out. If you can, and don't mind the large depth of field, try shooting at no faster than f8-11. At that aperture it will provide quite sharp pictures, wide open it will produce softer images.


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

^^ Most of the lenses has it's best performance (sharp) between f8-11


----------



## Tom_Green (Sep 4, 2004)

COUNT ME IN 


YEAHHHHH ..................................

EOS 350D rocks


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

Urban Dave said:


> ^^ Most of the lenses has it's best performance (sharp) between f8-11


True, but a lot of (mainly the ones on the upper segment) lenses are pretty good if not tack sharp wide open. With the kitlens this is definitely not the case. I would really only use a 3.5 if I'm already at ISO 800/1600, whereas with a better lens I'd be more comfortable at f4 already. Primes that go from 1.4/1.8 are usually very sharp one stop down already. From 1.4 to 11 is a long way


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

^^ Great Tom Green to see you in the DSLR Users Corner! 

Th0m, t'hats right. Normally in tele's and other objectives (not primes) high values of aperture (2.0, 2.8, etc) are use for bockee (blurry background) and of course for fast and easy focusing. For example, with my SIGMA 70-200 2.8 I do not normally shoot at 2.8, only when I try some portrait, nature shoot or so.


----------



## MILIUX (Sep 13, 2002)

For those who use RAW (i expect all you DSLR owners to use them) what software do you use to convert RAW and post process?


----------



## Aryan (May 21, 2004)

th0m said:


> I used the kitlens for about 6 months before I bought the 50mm, and I mostly used the lens for wide architecture/city life shots. Given the focal length of 18 to 55 mm, that is actually the most suitable subject for this lens. Due to its close focusing ability (which is common in wide angle lenses) it can be used for 'macro' photography to some extent, although a true macro lens will obviously do way better at that. 55mm is hardly tele, although it does become 88mm effectively due to the crop factor. If you want to shoot tele (an indication you want to is if you're constantly on the 55mm end of your kitlens) I'd suggest getting a tele zoom (70-200 for example, although since you don't have too much $, maybe look for a bit cheaper zoom) for that.
> 
> As far as focusing, you shouldn't expect too much. I recently replaced the kitlens with the 17-40L, which has USM. I was in awe at the focusing of that lens, it is amazingly fast and silent. But you pay for that, and it will still hunt a bit when its dark. I wouldn't suggest manually focusing with the kitlens, the viewfinder of the 350D is not very big, not very bright (mostly due to the f3.5 max of the kitlens) and the focusing ring isn't very helpful either. For close-up photography, an easy suggestion is manually focusing the closest you can, then walk to your subject, or away from it, until it becomes sharp (sorta like foot-zooming, you'll get used to that when you buy your 50mm and lose the commodity that is called zooming). Since it is relatively close you will be pretty ok to judge whether its sharp or not.
> 
> For the rest, I'd say use the lens for anything you want to use it for. It's actually quite capable, I've found out. If you can, and don't mind the large depth of field, try shooting at no faster than f8-11. At that aperture it will provide quite sharp pictures, wide open it will produce softer images.


Thanks for the advice... :cheers: 

I've been using manual focus a lot. I've been taking pictures of some of fossil replicas, and when you want to focus on a particular region of an object, AF doesn't seem to work. The focusing ring does seem to be unhelpful, when it comes to the fine tuning, its plasticy feel will take time to get used to. 

I took it out on the streets on last night, to see how it could handle night shots. I haven't got a tripod yet, so I needed to use a little creativity when it came to keeping it still for the 30 second or so shutter times, but all in all, I was quite impressed. I had a problem with focusing, mainly because of the small tunneled viewfinder. Can't wait to see what the results would be like with a tripod and some more practice. 

Another minor complaint would be the 1.8" screen, it makes reviewing pictures difficult until you get home. I can understand the need to cut costs, but many p&s cameras now come with 2.5" screens, you would have thought canon (and other DSLR manufacturers) would be a little more generous in this department. 

But all in all, a fantastic camera. Originally, I wasn't planning on buying a DSLR, and was just going to opt for a sub £100 P&S. I had always been interested in photography, but thought it would be prohibitively expensive. Can't wait to see how good the results will be in a couple of months time when I get the hang of it!


----------



## nakedyak (Nov 6, 2004)

got the 50mm 1.8 II today  its pretty nice. i've got a few pictures up in my Christmas Break gallery if you want to check that out...


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

@Aryan: Yeah at night its better to manually focus, although it can be even harder to judge whether something is in focus. I don't know if you read the manual of your camera, but ont he 350D there is a * button, on the right upper corner of the back of your camera (the symbol for it is on the top of the camera) and if you press that and look through the viewfinder (or look at the LCD screen) you will see red dots (or black stripes through the LCD) which are your focusing points. If they all light up, the camera will pick the best focusing points itself (try it by half pressing the shutter-button). With the scroll-wheel you can select single focus points, and the camera will the focus on that single point, which is really nice if you want something off-center in focus. I don't know if you're familiar with that feature, but it should help greatly with AF.

@nakedyak, nice pictures. f/1.8 is just really sweet huh  BTW, do you have a 70-200 2.8 as well? I saw you had some pictures at 192 and 200mm at 2.8. If so is it the Canon or the Sigma and are you happy with it? I'm thinking about getting the 70-200 f4 from Canon, but I don't know whether it'll be fast enough, but I don't have the $ for the 2.8.


----------



## ch1le (Jun 2, 2004)

dang you guys, you are giving so good rating to the 50mm 1.8 that i think ill buy it...


----------



## nakedyak (Nov 6, 2004)

th0m said:


> @Aryan: Yeah at night its better to manually focus, although it can be even harder to judge whether something is in focus. I don't know if you read the manual of your camera, but ont he 350D there is a * button, on the right upper corner of the back of your camera (the symbol for it is on the top of the camera) and if you press that and look through the viewfinder (or look at the LCD screen) you will see red dots (or black stripes through the LCD) which are your focusing points. If they all light up, the camera will pick the best focusing points itself (try it by half pressing the shutter-button). With the scroll-wheel you can select single focus points, and the camera will the focus on that single point, which is really nice if you want something off-center in focus. I don't know if you're familiar with that feature, but it should help greatly with AF.
> 
> @nakedyak, nice pictures. f/1.8 is just really sweet huh  BTW, do you have a 70-200 2.8 as well? I saw you had some pictures at 192 and 200mm at 2.8. If so is it the Canon or the Sigma and are you happy with it? I'm thinking about getting the 70-200 f4 from Canon, but I don't know whether it'll be fast enough, but I don't have the $ for the 2.8.


Yeah, i have a Tokina 80-200mm f2.8. I'm very happy with it considering its probably the best lens i have. I would imagine that either the sigma or canon 70-200mm 2.8s would be great lenses, and also the 70-200mm F4 Canon as well. The only problem i have with mine is the focusing is sometimes slow, but if you had a USM lens of HSM for sigma, that would be really great. everyone should own a lens of this focal length


----------



## Sikario (Feb 5, 2005)

Miliux - I use Photoshop CS2 to convert my Raw files.


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

I use Nikon Capture.


----------



## TexasStar (May 3, 2004)

Taken with a Canon EOS 20D. No tripod and the Kit Lens. 
Image zone mode (landscape)
I was astounded.




_Canon EOS 20D
Canon EF 50mm f/1.4
Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6_


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

TexasStar, very nice image indeed  What is the exif data?


----------



## TexasStar (May 3, 2004)

th0m said:


> TexasStar, very nice image indeed  What is the exif data?


I appreciate the kind comments.
And here is the exif data. (Or just click on the original picture.)


----------



## nakedyak (Nov 6, 2004)

looks very sharp for handheld at 1/2 sec exposure. nice job


----------



## TexasStar (May 3, 2004)

nakedyak said:


> looks very sharp for handheld at 1/2 sec exposure. nice job


Thanks, I just remember not breathing and willing my pulse to stop.
(That last one takes a lot of practice.) :jk: 

Next time, I'm taking a tripod.


----------



## jbkayaker12 (Nov 8, 2004)

My boyfriend gifted me a Pentax Optio 60 camera as a Christmas present and I'm satisfied with the pictures so far. I'll upload some of the pics later on.


Pearl of the Orient Seas - The Philippines


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

Congratulations jbkayaker12! 
But Pentax Optio 60 camera isn't a DSLR, isn't?
Great photos, anyway.


----------



## Koreanczyk (Jul 17, 2005)

jbkayaker12 said:


> My boyfriend gifted me a Pentax Optio 60 camera as a Christmas present and I'm satisfied with the pictures so far. I'll upload some of the pics later on.
> 
> 
> Pearl of the Orient Seas - The Philippines



Wrong thread. Not a DSLR.


----------



## Tom_Green (Sep 4, 2004)

I want to make such a pic.








This is what i could do.








Exposure time 1/1250, ISO 1600.
The pic is too dark (i used 3 lamps). Do you think i should use the flash? An exposure time of 1/2000 would be better, i think. 
I have a EOS 350D with an 18 - 55mm lens.


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

I don't know if you can make those shots with a regular lens, or whether you need a Macro or Tilt/Shift lens.


----------



## nakedyak (Nov 6, 2004)

definitely use a flash, its almost impossible to do it without. its extremely tricky getting pictures like that.

here's a few i've tried over the past year




























they suck and i'm completely not satisfied with them, but its such a pain trying to get everything to work right.


----------



## gooth (Nov 1, 2005)

Help Please!!
What do you think about this line on the left side?










Nothing specially happened, just -2 or -3ºC, but not snowing at this moment.


----------



## MILIUX (Sep 13, 2002)

You got a hair in your DSLR sensor. Get it out!


----------



## gooth (Nov 1, 2005)

MILIUX said:


> You got a hair in your DSLR sensor. Get it out!


It's not a hair  I've cleaned the sensor many times and made some pics with f22 and it's clearly a line in the sensor or in the mirror.


----------



## MILIUX (Sep 13, 2002)

costly!


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

Hmm. Weird. By looking at the 2 pictures it seems as though the line slightly moved a bit in between the pictures. I don't know what this would mean. I don't think it's a hair, because a hair would never have such a big impact in an image, certainly not if its out of focus. Maybe it's something to do with the lens. Do you get the same results with different lenses?


----------



## ch1le (Jun 2, 2004)

doesnt look like a crack either imo, way too "curvy"..


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

^^ You can't see them, but they are there. (talking about dust and other "friendly" particules) 
It's just cleaning time for your sensor


----------



## Hviid (Jan 8, 2005)

Is it possible (or do you guys know anywhere on the internet, not including ebay) where you can get cheap DSLRs? And by cheap, i mean maybe around the $600 US mark?


----------



## nakedyak (Nov 6, 2004)

Urban Dave said:


> ^^ You can't see them, but they are there. (talking about dust and other "friendly" particules)
> It's just cleaning time for your sensor


what do you use to clean your sensor dave?


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

DLL_4ever said:


> Is it possible (or do you guys know anywhere on the internet, not including ebay) where you can get cheap DSLRs? And by cheap, i mean maybe around the $600 US mark?


Maybe you can find a used EOS 300D for around that price. I'm sure Denmark has its national version of eBay just for Danish users, why don't you check that out. Probably more reliable if you don't want to go through eBay (because on eBay you can probably get one). If you want to go with Nikon you'll probably have to spend more $. Either way $600 is not really a lot of money to play around with. You can of course start out with a film-camera, or get the older digital models D30 or D60. Those have less MP (around the 4mil mark) but are still very decent camera's.


----------



## gooth (Nov 1, 2005)

Problem solved, thanks to...









To celebrate that, i've bought this tele:


----------



## Hviid (Jan 8, 2005)

th0m said:


> Maybe you can find a used EOS 300D for around that price. I'm sure Denmark has its national version of eBay just for Danish users, why don't you check that out. Probably more reliable if you don't want to go through eBay (because on eBay you can probably get one). If you want to go with Nikon you'll probably have to spend more $. Either way $600 is not really a lot of money to play around with. You can of course start out with a film-camera, or get the older digital models D30 or D60. Those have less MP (around the 4mil mark) but are still very decent camera's.


Hmm.. what about this camera: Konica Minolta Maxxum 5D. Some websites are selling it brand new, with the lens and everything, for $520 US!  Is that an amazing deal, or is the camera just not that great?


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

I'm not really familiar with it, but I think they don't have a very wide selection when it comes to lenses. Both Nikon and Canon have over 50 lenses to chose from. I don't know about Konica Minolta. Bigger companies have more money for R&D and can usually come up with more, better and newer stuff. Of course, there are exceptions to the rule, but it certainly helps.

What you should realise is, that once you've chosen a system, you usually stick with that system for the rest of your photographic life. It is very expensive to switch from one brand to another when you have thousands of dollars invested in the other brand. If you become a pro it might be cheaper to switch because you make money with your gear, but as an amateur, and definitely as an amateur with no knowledge about DSLRs, you should stick with one brand. And in that case, its better to start with a brand that has potential. $600 is already quite a lot of money, but then again, you get an awesome piece of equipment in return.


----------



## sugbuanon (Oct 28, 2005)

Urban Dave said:


> AltinD, I was refering to wich lense has the camera.
> The picture looks nice! Maybe it has too many noise (or maybe its just dust, but it looks like noise...) Try to clean it with software like Neat Image.You can get this result:



hi there dave! im still new to photography.. actually i started with my new found hobby just last december after a cousin of mine gave me his canon a300.. im still experimenting with it on how i could get better quality pics..

i usually edit my pics using adobe photoshop.. so can neat image be downloaded from the net.. i really want to try this software.. 

btw, is it okay if ill post some of my pics on this thread.. maybe you could give me some advice.. thanx!!!


----------



## sugbuanon (Oct 28, 2005)

here are some of the shots i took using my canon a300.. is there anyway to improve my pics.. i think they look "dry".. thanx guys!!!


----------



## LondonerUpNorth (Oct 19, 2004)

^^^ The Canon A300 is NOT a DSLR camera, so you've posted in the wrong place.

Anyway.... Count me in! Just bought a EOS350D. I already have an EOS1000F (Film cam) with a 100-300mm lens, 50mm and 35-80mm as well as the kit lens. I'm used to film SLR but it took about 20 minutes to learn the different features. I'll post some pics soon!


----------



## gooth (Nov 1, 2005)

^^Yeah, buying a DSLR is like start to learn to take pics again


----------



## sugbuanon (Oct 28, 2005)

what does DSLR stand for? i really have no idea bout those cameras.. thanx


----------



## Moolio (Oct 3, 2004)

sugbuanon said:


> what does DSLR stand for? i really have no idea bout those cameras.. thanx


digital single lens reflex


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

sugbuanon said:


> what does DSLR stand for? i really have no idea bout those cameras.. thanx


Models like Nikon D70, D100, D200, D2h, D2X, Canon 300D, 350D, 10D, 20D, 5D, 1D Mark II, Olympus E-500, E-300, Pentax *istD, Minolta Dymage 5D (i think)


----------



## sugbuanon (Oct 28, 2005)

okay thanx guys..


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

^^ You're wellcome!


----------



## LondonerUpNorth (Oct 19, 2004)

Basically a camera which uses only one lens for viewing and taking the picture. This lens is almost always removable and a different one fitted. Their main disadvantage is size but the advantages are countless.


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

Damn, this 70-200 gives a whole new meaning to the word 'Canon'  Really happy with it, but also have to get used to the reach and the camera-shake (which is usually not a problem for wide angles) but this lens is sharp! Wowsers.


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

^^ Congrats th0m!
In my opinion size (for DSLR) it's not a problem. The SLR were as big as DSLR. Good pictures need good equipment (in quality terms: sharpness, colour aberration, etc. Obviously a good picture (composition, subject, moment, light, etc) is made by a good photographer).


----------



## sugbuanon (Oct 28, 2005)

im now using neat image in editing my pics instead with photoshop.. it greatly improves the quality of my pics.. thanx again to this thread and to dave!!!


----------



## gooth (Nov 1, 2005)

Some tests with my sigma 28-200.



















200mm, 1/50, f9.0


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

Looks pretty good gooth! On the second shot the focusing seems to be a bit off though.

Oh btw, a general rule for shutterspeeds is the 1/focal rule. So if you shoot at 200mm, your shutterspeed should not be slower than 1/200s. This greatly reduces camera shake as a factor of unsharp images. Of course this depends from person per person, some people have more steady hands than others. (this in response to seeing you shot at 200mm with 1/50 s)


----------



## tata (Jun 17, 2004)

Hi guys, what is the meaning of 'clear matte field'?

thanks your for enlightment.
tata


----------



## gooth (Nov 1, 2005)

th0m said:


> Looks pretty good gooth! On the second shot the focusing seems to be a bit off though.
> 
> Oh btw, a general rule for shutterspeeds is the 1/focal rule. So if you shoot at 200mm, your shutterspeed should not be slower than 1/200s. This greatly reduces camera shake as a factor of unsharp images. Of course this depends from person per person, some people have more steady hands than others. *(this in response to seeing you shot at 200mm with 1/50 s)*


I think that i was so lucky when i shot this time :lol:


----------



## gazgunman (Sep 12, 2002)

hey guys I have a Nikon D50 with Tamron 18-200mm Di II lens. 

Can i get a Nikon 2x converter for the set up? I remember reading somthing somewhere about it not working with Auto Focus, is this true? 

TIA


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

A 2x converter negates 2 stops. So if you have a 2.8 lens, you get a 5.6 lens. I think you lose AF when your minimum aperture is f8, unless, and I don't know how this works with Nikon, you have a 1 series Canon (pro body). This may be different with Nikon though. Seeing as the Tammy 18-200 is a 3.5-6.3 lens (damn, that's 1 1/2 stop difference) you'll have about an f7 on the wide end, but a whopping f13 on the long end (which is really what you want the TC for, the long end)

One other thing. A converter usually only gives satisfactory results when you have a lens on that is optically very good. The converter usually deteriorates the image quality (and the 2x more than the 1.4x) so if you start out with a bad lens, the result with a converter are gonna be horrible. In either way, I would not stick a converter on anything slower than f4 (and even then, use a 1.4x, only use a 2x with a 2.8 lens).


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

Here are some shots I took with the 70-200:


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

Great shoots!!!! We want more!


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

Heheh, alright, here are two nightshots, but they are taken without a tripod, just pressed my camera against a little pillar and held it steady, so they're not very sharp:


----------



## staff (Oct 23, 2004)

Awesome nonetheless! I think I'll be getting the 70-200mm f/4 L and the 17-40mm L soon. I just can't wait.


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

Cool, those are my two sweetest lenses atm  Can't go wrong with either, no wonder they're the 2 most popular L lenses Canon has. 

I should be getting my Peleng 8mm fish-eye within a week. It's a cheapo Russian lens, but apparantly its not too bad, either way it's a nice little fun lens


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

Btw, to get you to speed up the process of acquiring your L lenses, here are some shots with the 17-40, heheh :























































Now go get those lenses


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

You would be a good Canon promoter!


----------



## staff (Oct 23, 2004)

Awesome photography! Thanks for sharing those.


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

We are still wating for more.


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

I'm a student, sometimes I need to study, Dave


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

^^ I am also a student, and a worker too :rofl:


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

Exactly. And accordingly, I don't see you posting images 

I have lots of 17-40 images, just not a lot of 70-200 images.

To see them, just go here: www.pbase.com/th0m , that's where I always upload the creme of the crop of my shots


----------



## Tom_Green (Sep 4, 2004)

I took some pics with an EOS 5D (3300€) 

The camera is really really nice


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

Nice, I'd like to shoot with a 5D some time  Not as much as I'd like to shoot with a 1Ds, but still


----------



## Hviid (Jan 8, 2005)

My plan for the last month or so was to upgrade my current Panasonic LZ2 to a Panasonic FZ30 (because thats all i could afford)... however... i just came home from a trip to Blacks Photography store with my Dad, and we were (both) extremely impressed with this 1 DSLR that we saw. It was a Pentax *ist DL. After playing with it for a while, and after i explained to my dad how much better a DSLR camera would be instead of a high-quality compact camera, he told me that he could lend me an extra couple of hundred dollars towards a DSLR (instead of the Pano FZ30) :banana: :banana: :banana:

I litterally jumped in the air, because i had asked him many times before to lend me a bit more money towards a DSLR but he said no theres no point, and blah blah blah.

ANYWAYS...

I was wondering, which of these DSLR kits would you recommend me going with?

- Pentax *IST DL W/18-55 Lens Digital SLR Kit.
- Olympus Evolt E-300 Digital SLR with Zuiko 14-45mm f/3.5-5.6 Lens Kit.
- Nikon D50 Digital SLR Camera w/ 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G.
- Kinoca Minolta Maxxum 5D, 6.1 Megapixel, SLR Digital Camera Kit with Minolta Maxxum 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6(D) AF DT Zoom Lens.

Thanks for the help!


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

As a Canonian, I must say I am a bit offended that you did not include a Canon option as one of your choices 

As such, I cannot give you any help 

(Well I can't give you any help, because I don't know a great deal about any of those camera's )

Just out of curiosity, did you try any other camera's besides the Pentax? 

Because pretty much any DSLR will impress you, compared to a point and shoot.


----------



## Hviid (Jan 8, 2005)

th0m said:


> As a Canonian, I must say I am a bit offended that you did not include a Canon option as one of your choices
> 
> As such, I cannot give you any help
> 
> ...


I tried all of the ones i mentioned... and you're right, they all impress me. I love the weight, size, look, feel, etc. of all of them. The reason i didnt include the Canon 350D or 300D is because of the price, they would cost me another couple of hundred on top of what i have now... I would add 1 (or both?) onto the list if you could find them for the same price range as the others (between $600 and $800 US with the lens). 

I understand that the most important choice in buying a camera, especially a DSLR, lies within the "feel" of the camera. Like i said i tried out all 4 cameras listed above at the store, and i really liked the feel of all of them.. Each of those DSLRs come with the exact same features (pretty much). So... How do i decide? One guy told me to just flip a coin.. lol.. maybe i should do that...


----------



## jmancuso (Jan 9, 2003)

you can get a 300D (digital rebel) on the cheap since they are the predessor model to the 350D (the XT) and are no longer produced. i bought my 300D back in april when the XT came out for $700USD (w/o lens) and i love it.


----------



## Hviid (Jan 8, 2005)

Sorry to disappoint you Canonians  But i've gone with the Olympus Evolt E-300 (w. the 14-45mm f/3.5-5.6 Zuiko EZ Zoom Lens and 40-150mm f/3.5-4.5 Zuiko EZ Zoom Lens).  :banana: (This is my final decision.. no more switching!!!)


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

^^ Great choice! I was going to recomend you the Olympus or the Nikon!


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

Yeah, congratulations on your choice  Olympus makes some sweet Zuiko glass


----------



## Hviid (Jan 8, 2005)

Thank you all :cheers2:


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

So, where are the pictures? 

You have to be 'initiated' into this thread, you know


----------



## Hviid (Jan 8, 2005)

th0m said:


> So, where are the pictures?
> 
> You have to be 'initiated' into this thread, you know


I ordered it online, so its gonna take atleast another week unfortunately... 

I'm lookin' forward to the initiation though


----------



## pss (Aug 20, 2005)

I just switched to the Nikon D50.

Enough of taking photos for "fun" I need to figure out how to switch over to selling some of this stuff. :bash:


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

Great pictures! Which lenses are you using?


----------



## pss (Aug 20, 2005)

The "stock" lens. Nikkor dx 18-55mm ed

It won't be soon when I can afford to drop $400-900 on a lens.


----------



## gooth (Nov 1, 2005)

Great pic mate :applause:


----------



## nakedyak (Nov 6, 2004)

took this the other night, just thought i'd share it with you chaps :cheers: 

100 seconds, f4, ISO 100 @ 10mm


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

18-55 from the kit performs really well!


----------



## pss (Aug 20, 2005)

Merci!

I love the kit lens...Obviously 55mm isn't good enough so I will probably move up toward 200mm soon.

One of the biggest challenges I have is creating effective DOF. I can only get "DOF" if I do Macro shots. But say I wanted to shoot a person and blur the bg I cannot seem to get the manual focus ring to adjust the focal plane. I tried to keep the aprature at f/5 or f/3....but no cigar. Any tips?


----------



## pss (Aug 20, 2005)

I have two more questions for DSLR users here:

First, I may need to do sports photography, what focal lenghts should I conside in a lens? Second, Nikon users, what lens do you have for the above question? Thanks again


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

Just switch to A (Aperture) mode, and you will chose the f/ that you want. (low values for portrait)

About fotography, 300 mm should be enough, you could buy for example a 200 mm 2.8 and multiplicators 1.4 and 2. You will get great resoults. Lense with fast focusing (better is f2.8 (allow x2 multiplier) or f4 (only x1,4 or x1,7 multiplier), IF and HSM or SWF (comercial names for fast focusing engines)

I do not shoot sports, so I can't help you, sorry 
I do not shoot


----------



## nakedyak (Nov 6, 2004)

I"d say a 70-200mm lens is pretty versatile for most sports situations, obviously the faster the better. 2.8 if you have the money


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

I guess depending on what kind of sports you shoot, you'll need something in the 200-300 range. Teleprimes are better at this, but obviously bigger, more expensive and heavier, and not flexible at all. I don't know how serious you are about sports-photography. 

Also keep in mind that image stabilization (VR for Nikon) has no use for sports, because you need fast shutterspeeds to freeze the action (but I'm sure you were aware of that). So yeah, 2.8 is definitely the best, but also expensive and heavy. I don't know what Nikon you have, but you should be prepared to be shooting at iso 800-1600 a lot of the time if you can't afford a fast lens.


----------



## gooth (Nov 1, 2005)

Up!!

Today I've ordered this flash:









http://www.pixmania.co.uk/uk/uk/30091/art/sigma/flash-ef-500-dg-st.html

I hope i receive it on this week. I'll show you some tests and pics.


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

Cool. I will probably purchase a flash gun in the future, but as of now I can't justify the cost since I barely use a flash. Would like to see the results!


----------



## Sikario (Feb 5, 2005)

I have the EF-500 Super DG as pictured, got it last year, it's a great flash gun, and much better value in terms of features compared to the canon equivalents.


----------



## gooth (Nov 1, 2005)

Oh thanks Sikario. Is your cam an EOS350D? With this flash and this lens it seems really professional.


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

That definitely looks like a 20D. What lens did you use Sikario? Seems like a sweet set up.


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

^^ Gooth, how much did it cost?


----------



## gooth (Nov 1, 2005)

Urban Dave said:


> ^^ Gooth, how much did it cost?


232€


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

^^ Not bad! Now I must decide, a flash or a multiplier...
More or less same price, but I doubt I would use a lot the flash. You will problably use it a lot. Your picture of heavy metal musicians were great.


----------



## Sikario (Feb 5, 2005)

th0m said:


> That definitely looks like a 20D. What lens did you use Sikario? Seems like a sweet set up.


Yeah it's a 20D, the lens is my Sigma 10-20mm.


----------



## fenix (Aug 21, 2004)

Guys, check this out. Modified 1.6x (APS-C) Super Wide-Angle lenses on a Full Frame 35mm Digital SLR.

http://www.avbuzz.com/photo-model/200601/3l-060130/index.htm


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

That's a great comparison! That was something we already know, but we haven't seen 
Maybe APS - Size on a FF would not be for professional, but for amateurs, in a future with cheap FF you can get good results of wide angle shoots cropping and cloning the image.


----------



## fenix (Aug 21, 2004)

Urban Dave said:


> in a future with cheap FF you can get good results of wide angle shoots cropping and cloning the image.


hmm... I wonder when that would be. Hopefully it will happen in our life time


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

That will definitely happen in our lifetime. I think it will happen within 2-3 years.

As for the APS on FF, only the Tamron seems to be 'usable' below 16-17mm (for as far as you can tell, all that the comparison really shows is vignetting, I'm sure the corner sharpness is really bad!), at which point it's probably better to get a 16-35/17-40 so you have more reach and less obsolete lens. I mean, if you have a 10-20 lens that only works from 17-20, or a 17-40 lens that works the whole range, which one would you pick?


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

Just allow Nikon or Sony (Konica-Minolta), or Fuji to develope some FF. The war will start and prices will get down.
1 year and a half cameras cost nearle 1/2!!!!
My D70 cost me 1200€ and now you can have D50 or E-300 for only 700€ or a little more.


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

But is Nikon going to make FF? It seems like they're sticking with their 1.5x crop.


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

^^ They will do despite they are saying not. DSLR are advancing to SLR (I mean, have the same features than a 35 mm.) FF allows more MP. and standar use of lenses (no more x to old lenses)
The problem is that Nikon doesn't make its own CCD or CMOS, so right now only Canon has the technology to use them in FF. 
A couple of month ago I read on the Internet that Fuji had plans to develop FF. Remember that Fuji features Nikon Mount.
Sony, that provided the CCD for D50 and D70 now has bought Konica Minolta, so I think that things will change in DSLR world.


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

Well, FF is not directly related to megapixels. You can have as many megapixels in a 1.6 crop body as you would in a FF body. For instance, the 1D Mark II N has more pixels than the 5D, but is a 1.3x crop body. So FF is not inherently related to MP. Yes you have a larger sensor, but the amount of megapixels depends on the pixel density.


----------



## Tom_Green (Sep 4, 2004)

My father played yesterday with the cam. Today i took some pics..... 

The pics are CR2 files. WTF? O_O
Can i change them to jpeg?


----------



## gooth (Nov 1, 2005)

^^That's RAW format my friend. Use an application to convert to JPG. For sure, you have one in the CD of the camera applications.


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

th0m said:


> Well, FF is not directly related to megapixels. You can have as many megapixels in a 1.6 crop body as you would in a FF body. For instance, the 1D Mark II N has more pixels than the 5D, but is a 1.3x crop body. So FF is not inherently related to MP. Yes you have a larger sensor, but the amount of megapixels depends on the pixel density.


That's it, 1D MARK II has more density than 5D.


----------



## Hviid (Jan 8, 2005)

Well.. i FINALLY got my camera today!! :banana: (it wasnt the Oly E300 though that i said earlier... it's the Oly E1!) :banana:









Oh man.. im in love with this thing.. its so HUGE! And sexy 

Unfortunately i could only afford to get the 14-45mm lens for it.. but hey.. its a good start! 

With it, i also baught the Olympus FL-36 (external flash)








(unfortunately they didnt have any FL-36's in at the time so they gave me a temporary FL-20, which is the same one you see in the pic above. They ordered the FL-36 from somewhere else, and as soon as it comes in they'll phone me and then we'll switch )

I also baught a 1GB compact flash memory card









...

Now, i just need to sit down, read the manual, and then go out and test this baby... don't expect to see any pics though for atleast a day or 2  I don't like posting crappy photos, and i know this is going to take me a WHILE to learn how to use properly. :cheers2:


----------



## mumbojumbo (Dec 8, 2004)

DLL_4ever said:


> Well.. i FINALLY got my camera today!! :banana: (it wasnt the Oly E300 though that i said earlier... it's the Oly E1!) :banana:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


My oh my, How old are you?

Isn't this like your 3rd camera? I'm 15 years old and I had to save my allowance for a year to buy my Panasonic FZ5. But yeah, I'm probably not as hardcore as you. I just like taking pictures during vacations.

How much was it? I bought mine for aroudn 600$ (No, I didn't get ripped off, I live in Canada).


----------



## Hviid (Jan 8, 2005)

mumbojumbo said:


> My oh my, How old are you?
> 
> Isn't this like your 3rd camera? I'm 15 years old and I had to save my allowance for a year to buy my Panasonic FZ5. But yeah, I'm probably not as hardcore as you. I just like taking pictures during vacations.
> 
> How much was it? I bought mine for aroudn 600$ (No, I didn't get ripped off, I live in Canada).


I'm 17, and yes this is my 3rd camera.. but only my 1st DSLR 

The camera itself is worth $1800 (canadian) but since its a 2½ year old model, they (the store that i baught it from; Henrys) were selling it for almost half price ($1000 canadian). The external flash was around $200, and the memory card was $130. So in total, i payed about $1500 canadian ($1300 US). I can honestly say thats the best money i've ever made my parents spend on me  LOL... (i have to pay them back of course, once i start working again).


----------



## mumbojumbo (Dec 8, 2004)

DLL_4ever said:


> I'm 17, and yes this is my 3rd camera.. but only my 1st DSLR
> 
> The camera itself is worth $1800 (canadian) but since its a 2½ year old model, they (the store that i baught it from; Henrys) were selling it for almost half price ($1000 canadian). The external flash was around $200, and the memory card was $130. So in total, i payed about $1500 canadian ($1300 US). I can honestly say thats the best money i've ever made my parents spend on me  LOL... (i have to pay them back of course, once i start working again).


Wow, nice deal. 

Have fun with your new camera. I'm not planning on getting a new camera anytime soon. Its just a small hobby after all.


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

Wellcome to the big DSLR family!


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

I bought a Canon EOS 50E today! It's a SLR from 1995. I'm gonna do a little old-skool photography


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

^^ :O


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

It'll give me sweet wide-angle


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

How much did it cost to you?
A Tokina 12-20 or Sigma 10-20 also give sweets wide angles


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

How much did it cost to you?
A Tokina 12-20 or Sigma 10-20 also give sweets wide angles


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

It cost me 90 euro's  A Tokina or Sigma is nice, but this is more versatile in a way. Plus I'd like to learn how to shoot film as well. I'll enroll in a course that also teaches me how to develop my own black&white film in a darkroom.


----------



## Hviid (Jan 8, 2005)

Urban Dave said:


> Wellcome to the big DSLR family!


Thanks :cheers2: ... this is thing is so hard to use.. i have a real hard time controlling the light in the photos (all my photos are either too dark or too light). I also have a hard time controlling the shutter speed...  I'll learn though... eventually


----------



## gooth (Nov 1, 2005)

Good luck DLL. In the beginning sometimes it's difficult, but finally you'll be able to take great shots. It's easier than you can think.


----------



## Hviid (Jan 8, 2005)

/\ well when you come from a fully-automatic P&S camera to a fully manual pro DSLR you bet its difficult 

Anyways... i think i've figured out the basics of how to take "alright" photos... 
Here's a few i took a couple of hours ago...


----------



## gooth (Nov 1, 2005)

Really nice shots. Great colors :yes:

BTW. Let me introduce you my new friend. I got my flash  A pic with Sikario's style.


----------



## Hviid (Jan 8, 2005)

/\ that's awesome! Congrats


----------



## mumbojumbo (Dec 8, 2004)

Wow! The cat pic is amazing! I should've saved up for a DSLR


----------



## Hviid (Jan 8, 2005)

mumbojumbo said:


> Wow! The cat pic is amazing! I should've saved up for a DSLR


Thanks  I defidentally think you should save up for a DSLR... It'll cost a lot, but it's worth it. (atleast in my opinion )

The first night shot i took with my camera:








F-Number = f/22
Exposure Time = 50 sec.
ISO-Speed = 100
Exposure Compensation = -1 step

This photo has been editted quite abit with Photoshop... the original is just WAY too dark.. does anyone have any suggestions on how i can lighten it up (without using photoshop...)?


----------



## Aryan (May 21, 2004)

You can't really do much without affecting the image quality (aside from tinkering with brightness), which is why it is usually a good idea to shoot in RAW. 

Not bad though, I love snow before anyone's messed it up walking through it. 

I've just noticed those white pixels. It looks like you may have a few dust particles on your sensor.


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

DLL: You can up the the ISO values.


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

DLL you should not point to the light. If you are using central medition or punctual medition, just set to the center your camera will give measure for a lot of light. Use lower f stops too.
Anyway, subject doesn't seem to be lighted, at leas left walls and the back of the car.


----------



## th0m (Oct 14, 2004)

Lower than f22 is really ill-advised though (and on a lot of lenses not even possible). It will NOT improve your image quality. I know that "stopping down" will improve your image quality, but most lenses have their 'sweet-spot' at around f8 or so, and deteriorate after that.


----------



## Hviid (Jan 8, 2005)

Here's another one i tried tonight... turned out A LOT better 









F-Number = f/3.5
Exposure Time = 10 sec.
ISO-Speed = 100

If anyone is interested, i took a bunch of random photos of my little town earlier today.. i'm quite pleased with the results! 
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=315571


----------



## Aryan (May 21, 2004)

I've got micro small hairs on the pentaprism of my 350D, how do I get rid of them?


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

^^ Dont' worry about them if they don't affect the image quality.


----------



## MILIUX (Sep 13, 2002)

Canon 30D officially out!

http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=139&modelid=12929

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-7891-8214

A new 2.5-inch, 230,000 pixel rear LCD monitor with wide viewing angle
Canon's more flexible Picture Style menu, which replaces the Parameters menu of the 20D
Sharpening of in-camera JPEGs can be turned off, which is a first for a Canon entry-level or midrange digital SLR
ISO 100-1600 is now selectable in 1/3 stop increments
ISO can be set without taking one's eye away from the viewfinder
Increased burst depth: 11 frames for RAW CR2 shooting, 30 for Large Fine JPEG and 9 for RAW+JPEG
A more-durable shutter that's rated for 100,000 cycles
A slightly-shortened mirror blackout time of 110ms; Canon's specification for shutter lag remains the same as the 20D at 65ms
Viewfinder information now includes a dedicated Flash Exposure Lock (FEL) indicator
Switchable High-Speed Continuous (5 fps) and Low-Speed Continuous (3 fps) frame rate settings are now included
An Auto setting in the Long Exposure Noise Reduction Custom Function
The ability, like several more-pricey Canon digital SLRs, to simultaneously apply long exposure noise processing to one picture while capturing another
The addition of a 3.5% spot metering mode
0.15 second camera startup time
A more-precise 4-increment battery charge indicator
Reduced energy compensation, for a promised improvement of 10% more frames per charge
No more new folders created every 100 photos; in the 30D, a folder can hold 9999 photos
A new automatic rotation option that enables verticals to not be rotated on the rear display but appear rotated in compatible browser software on the computer
The ability to zoom in on a photo in Quick Review mode
During playback, the image+shooting data screen will display either an RGB or Brightness histogram, file size and will optionally display AF markings
Improved Jump function
Refined multicontroller operation
More-detailed error code information, which now appears on the rear LCD monitor (in addition to the top LCD panel); the camera settings information screen will also display Images Failed to Transfer when the WFT-E1/E1A is in use and a transmit error occurs
More ways to wake the camera up from an Auto Power Off snooze
Direct image transfer from the camera to a computer using the PTP protocol
A revamped software package that includes Digital Photo Professional (DPP) 2.1, EOS Utility 1.0 (a new image transfer, camera settings and camera control application), Image Browser 5.6 (Mac) and ZoomBrowser EX 5.6 (Windows); DPP adds user-settable noise reduction and support for RAW files from the Canon EOS D2000 and D6000
New and potentially useful direct printing capabilities (plus a dedicated direct print/image transfer button)

--------------

Finally, the camera i have been waiting for. My wallet is ready!


----------

