The right camera
Everything you need to know, and then some, about the latest Canon Rebel at:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos400d/
It seems to be a good piece of gear although the reviewer, (who is held in high esteem by the site regulars), also has praise for the Nikon equivalents, but I see you already have some Canon lenses which would make the Rebel a good choice.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos400d/
It seems to be a good piece of gear although the reviewer, (who is held in high esteem by the site regulars), also has praise for the Nikon equivalents, but I see you already have some Canon lenses which would make the Rebel a good choice.
Heathrow Director:
"In my opinion the 17-40 beats the pants off my 24-105 L lens in terms of sharpness."
I am surprised at that as the 24-105L is highly regarded in DPReview. If anything a lot of opinion is the reverse and as a user of both I tend to agree although they are both excellent lenses. Do you think it is possible that your 24-105 autofocus may be less than it should be?
I have a 70-200 F/4 that is regarded as one of Canon's sharper lenses yet mine was quite soft at the short end. I sent it to Canon with an outline of my concern and asked them to check it and it came back more like it should have been.
I am very surprised that the difference you are getting is of the "beats the pants of" category.
"In my opinion the 17-40 beats the pants off my 24-105 L lens in terms of sharpness."
I am surprised at that as the 24-105L is highly regarded in DPReview. If anything a lot of opinion is the reverse and as a user of both I tend to agree although they are both excellent lenses. Do you think it is possible that your 24-105 autofocus may be less than it should be?
I have a 70-200 F/4 that is regarded as one of Canon's sharper lenses yet mine was quite soft at the short end. I sent it to Canon with an outline of my concern and asked them to check it and it came back more like it should have been.
I am very surprised that the difference you are getting is of the "beats the pants of" category.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,108
Received 2,952 Likes
on
1,259 Posts
I was gearing myself up to buy a Canon 350D just to find that it's being replaced by the 400D. Now normally this would mean that there should be some good 350D bargains, but where I live where everyone has to have the latest gadget, it's been removed from the shelves and is just not available any more. Does anyone have experience of the 400D and is it that much better that the 350D?
P.S. I wnat a Canon as I have some EOS lenses for my wet film camera, so I'm not considering other brands.
P.S. I wnat a Canon as I have some EOS lenses for my wet film camera, so I'm not considering other brands.
Strange as it may seem Canon have an outlet on ebay now selling refurbished cameras, the 350D included and are warrantied, I have a 350D and love it, the 400D though is a 10mp camera so would be a better buy over the 8mp 350D, it also has a built in sensor cleaning system, which is a definate advantage... damn those dust bunnies
, I would suggest you come over to the EOS forum and ask there, http://www.eos-forums.com/index.phpThe battery pack on it BTW makes it a better fit in the hand, and more comfortable to use.
TheVillagePhotographer.co.uk
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cotswolds UK
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dan, the 350D provides very good results, but is now an old device and is being consigned to the grave by Canon as things are moving on and you would get more bang per buck, by going to the 400D. Like the 300/350D, it is physically small and I urge you to wander off somewhere where you can handle it and see if it suits you. For comparison, compare it maybe with a Nikon D80 and just chuck them both hand to hand and see which feels the more intuitive and is the best fit for your hands. If the D80 wins and sadly, I think it might - then you could either hang on, because Canon have to have an EOS30D replacement in the wings, (larger, heavier and more robust) or see how much the dealer might give you for your existing Canon kit. If that is more than you think, then you have yet more options. I would urge you to do a comparison though. When you are shooting, all of that brainspace can be used for interpretation of your subject, rather than trying to remember how to fiddle it into another mode or what have you.
HD, I post process all the way. I actually enjoy it too and it allows me to rescue the odd minger that would definitely be as dead as a Dodo, were I shooting JPGs. Oddly, I find it therapeutic in another way too. Because I am intimately familiar with the charateristics of each shot, as a by product - and not a necessary one either - I have relearned much about photography, but in a homeopathic way, rather than the often dry as dust method of reading it all up. I think it can help you become as one with your camera, which just leaves me the old problem of why I keep getting shots of just one eyeball.
New lens yesterday. This is a great and fun way to become bankrupt. A 10-20mm Sigma wide angle which on its few test shots to date has given amazing sharpness and some dizzying perspectives that were previously denied me. In Film SLR terms, this is equivalent to a 15-30mm and it really does make your mind fizz. Absolutely no use for aviation at all, unless you have the nose pitot shoved up your left nostril when you shoot, but a great way of adding to and rounding out your kit from the opposite end.
Conan
HD, I post process all the way. I actually enjoy it too and it allows me to rescue the odd minger that would definitely be as dead as a Dodo, were I shooting JPGs. Oddly, I find it therapeutic in another way too. Because I am intimately familiar with the charateristics of each shot, as a by product - and not a necessary one either - I have relearned much about photography, but in a homeopathic way, rather than the often dry as dust method of reading it all up. I think it can help you become as one with your camera, which just leaves me the old problem of why I keep getting shots of just one eyeball.
New lens yesterday. This is a great and fun way to become bankrupt. A 10-20mm Sigma wide angle which on its few test shots to date has given amazing sharpness and some dizzying perspectives that were previously denied me. In Film SLR terms, this is equivalent to a 15-30mm and it really does make your mind fizz. Absolutely no use for aviation at all, unless you have the nose pitot shoved up your left nostril when you shoot, but a great way of adding to and rounding out your kit from the opposite end.
Conan
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New lens yesterday
There are some good opportunities for me to explore the envelope with my D200 in the next few weeks, so with any luck I will get a picture to be proud of. I have set it at fine .jpg setting which gives over 300 shots on a 2gb CF card, do the people in the know believe that this is a good option, as I have 2 cards so the RAW/JPG fine (85 photos) setting would not cause me too much stress. I normally manipulate images with Adobe 5 or MS photo editor.
TheVillagePhotographer.co.uk
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cotswolds UK
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Congratulations! If your secret supplier was Park cameras of Burgess Hill and you got the magical phone call in the last few days, then it might even be the lens with my name on it that you are now sporting. I got the call to action and having forgotten to advise them that I had got mine three months ago elsewhere, it will have defaulted to the next lucky person in the queue. When I explained that my own 18-200 had cost £479 as opposed to their not unreasonable £539, (Well done Great Western Cameras in Swindon) I thought I could detect a gulping sound on the phone. There are THAT few 18-200VRs kicking around, that there is a good chance that your lens could be "mine".
It is a great all round lens and covers a lot of ground, being equiv to 27-300 in film terms. Quality is very good really for general purpose work and you don't change lenses often with that one as the spout either, so any dust issues are minimised yet further. There is a bit of distortion, but hardly noticeable for most users and unless a devotee of "Top Trumps" is only of academic interest. It isn't a pro lens, but it is a wonderfully accomplished piece of kit and I am sure that you will be very happy indeed with it. The performance is impressive. A few thoughts on that lens though.
Vibration Reduction
The VR is very good, but if ever you put in on a tripod, then turn VR OFF. Also,the "Normal" position is for everyday use unless travelling in a car or flying, where "active" is the preferred choice.If you are a flingwing merchant then difintely use the active as this caters for the more unusual vertical and odd out of phase vibrations.
Aperture.
Most lenses are happiest at mid everything and although the lens isn't lightning fast, everyday shots both indoors and out will give you chance to shoot at something other than wide open and this will give you some sparkling results. It really is a great all rounder.
Contruction and build.
Small, lightweight and surprisingly so, when you factor in the VR Gubbins that live there too. It can have a tendency to "creep" especially if not on either the 18 or 200 setting. A lot of people are ribbing Messrs Nikon over this, though I have never found it a problem.
If you do put a filter on it, then use a good one. Even so, I find mine sharper without. With a Polarising filter or maybe an ND filter, this can allegedly spoof the camera metering slightly. (So says the Godlike Thom Hogan. He writes books for the D70 and D200 which are incredible. They are everything that Nikon manuals should be but aren't and are in my view, the finest and most definitive works available.) Use centre weighted or Matrix metering in this case and you might find better results.
72mm is a bit of an odd filter size. Most professional lenses are 77mm, so if you have, or plan on getting any of these, then it might be an idea to get a 77mm Polariser with a stop down ring to allow it to fit on the 72mm thread. Cheaper in the long run!
Teleconverters.
Err... Sadly - nope. 200mm is your limit on this lens.
It isn't the cheapest of lenses. Look after it and it will certainly look after you.
How you shoot, is a personal preference, but after making a bit of a splash with the cash, I do think it better to use the highest quality camera settings and especially so, with memory prices collapsing as they are. (Just seen a generic 4GB for £44) I would shoot RAW, RAW and then RAW, with the D50,D70 and D200, but that is me. Look for instance at REF, who as a new D70 owner is already producing some very good JPGs straight from the box and even his will get better the more one hones the process down and the better you get to know the camera. This is the beauty of a good DSLR of whatever manufacture, but I still prefer to fix my goofs afterwards in another editing suite. Anything I can do to help, then just whistle me up.
Conan
PS For software, a few further thoughts. I take it that by Adobe 5, you mean Elements v5 which supports all of the latest cameras. MS Photo Editor? Own view is to forget that one. A few software thoughts now.
Irfanview.
Free, cheap and very powerful for some editing but so good for other work such as resizing, renaming and other processes. Indespensible to all photographers
RawShooter Essentials.
Free and very powerful, this will let you edit and open RAW files with great depth and complete control. The Premium version was available until recently for about $99 I think, but this is history now. Adobe have purchased or acquired a controlling interest in the company (Pixamntec) and it is widely rumoured that they will be using this company's expertise in editing RAW files to incorporate in future versions of Photoshop. Compliments do not get higher than this. Amazingly, RS Essentials is still available. Grab it while you can.
PhotoBucket, Flickr, etc.
Put your albums online and share them. Basic packages are free and these are great tools. One use that comes to mind, is that if you wish to post a pic on Pprune, that it needs to be hosted elsewhere and referred to here by a link. These services do just that, amongst the more obvious album functions.
Nikon Picture Project.
Came with the camera. You might really like it. If so, then I suggest you write to Nikon, as you will be the first one that does. Many users prefer Nikon View 6.27 which is free to registered Nikon users and a goiod browser. For more intensive editing, it might be worth looking at Nikon Capture NX. It is very good indeed, though has no cloning or healing tools. Adobe Elements 5.0 is a cut back, though not crippled Photoshop and represents excellent value for money. PS is a massive and complex package for which photographers will only really use 10-15%. elements 5.0 will give nearly all of this at a far, far lower cost than the full Photoshop.
PPS - It is ok, beddybyes shortly - if flying and shooting from the sharp end with the D200 then go into the menu and find "Tone Compensation". If this is set to auto, then you might really get some harsh contrast and it is always easier to add contrast later rather than try to subtract it. Set a a lower value Infact, this is not bad advice, full stop. If in cockpit, some fill flash would be useful to give you some internal detail as well as that out of the window . Flash will NOT fire automatically, so as long as the head is down, so you will not get any frighteners there, if in ow light, but remember the AF assist light is easily bright enough on both D70 and D200 to stuff night adaptation. You can turn this off via the menu if needed. My own feelings on night flying with any camera, are simple - I just will not do it and will always leave the camera in the bag.
With flying shots, you can often get some annoying glare and reflection problems visible afterwards, so an old aviation trick, is to get a single black glove and use your hand as a lens hood. your hand will follow the contour and curvature of the glass better than anything else. Not quite DV, but the next best thing. Single black gloves are both useful and cheap. In fact, usually you can buy one and get one free. Worth shoving in your camera bag.
Another hint is to try and shoot through glass or perspex at as near a perpendicular angle to the surface as possible, which will reduce any colour casts that can appear and be a PIA afterwards. The Autofocus shuldn't play up by spoofing on the glass but if it does, then remember manual focus as a backstop. I would be surprised indeed if this was a problem though.
It is a great all round lens and covers a lot of ground, being equiv to 27-300 in film terms. Quality is very good really for general purpose work and you don't change lenses often with that one as the spout either, so any dust issues are minimised yet further. There is a bit of distortion, but hardly noticeable for most users and unless a devotee of "Top Trumps" is only of academic interest. It isn't a pro lens, but it is a wonderfully accomplished piece of kit and I am sure that you will be very happy indeed with it. The performance is impressive. A few thoughts on that lens though.
Vibration Reduction
The VR is very good, but if ever you put in on a tripod, then turn VR OFF. Also,the "Normal" position is for everyday use unless travelling in a car or flying, where "active" is the preferred choice.If you are a flingwing merchant then difintely use the active as this caters for the more unusual vertical and odd out of phase vibrations.
Aperture.
Most lenses are happiest at mid everything and although the lens isn't lightning fast, everyday shots both indoors and out will give you chance to shoot at something other than wide open and this will give you some sparkling results. It really is a great all rounder.
Contruction and build.
Small, lightweight and surprisingly so, when you factor in the VR Gubbins that live there too. It can have a tendency to "creep" especially if not on either the 18 or 200 setting. A lot of people are ribbing Messrs Nikon over this, though I have never found it a problem.
If you do put a filter on it, then use a good one. Even so, I find mine sharper without. With a Polarising filter or maybe an ND filter, this can allegedly spoof the camera metering slightly. (So says the Godlike Thom Hogan. He writes books for the D70 and D200 which are incredible. They are everything that Nikon manuals should be but aren't and are in my view, the finest and most definitive works available.) Use centre weighted or Matrix metering in this case and you might find better results.
72mm is a bit of an odd filter size. Most professional lenses are 77mm, so if you have, or plan on getting any of these, then it might be an idea to get a 77mm Polariser with a stop down ring to allow it to fit on the 72mm thread. Cheaper in the long run!
Teleconverters.
Err... Sadly - nope. 200mm is your limit on this lens.
It isn't the cheapest of lenses. Look after it and it will certainly look after you.
How you shoot, is a personal preference, but after making a bit of a splash with the cash, I do think it better to use the highest quality camera settings and especially so, with memory prices collapsing as they are. (Just seen a generic 4GB for £44) I would shoot RAW, RAW and then RAW, with the D50,D70 and D200, but that is me. Look for instance at REF, who as a new D70 owner is already producing some very good JPGs straight from the box and even his will get better the more one hones the process down and the better you get to know the camera. This is the beauty of a good DSLR of whatever manufacture, but I still prefer to fix my goofs afterwards in another editing suite. Anything I can do to help, then just whistle me up.
Conan
PS For software, a few further thoughts. I take it that by Adobe 5, you mean Elements v5 which supports all of the latest cameras. MS Photo Editor? Own view is to forget that one. A few software thoughts now.
Irfanview.
Free, cheap and very powerful for some editing but so good for other work such as resizing, renaming and other processes. Indespensible to all photographers
RawShooter Essentials.
Free and very powerful, this will let you edit and open RAW files with great depth and complete control. The Premium version was available until recently for about $99 I think, but this is history now. Adobe have purchased or acquired a controlling interest in the company (Pixamntec) and it is widely rumoured that they will be using this company's expertise in editing RAW files to incorporate in future versions of Photoshop. Compliments do not get higher than this. Amazingly, RS Essentials is still available. Grab it while you can.
PhotoBucket, Flickr, etc.
Put your albums online and share them. Basic packages are free and these are great tools. One use that comes to mind, is that if you wish to post a pic on Pprune, that it needs to be hosted elsewhere and referred to here by a link. These services do just that, amongst the more obvious album functions.
Nikon Picture Project.
Came with the camera. You might really like it. If so, then I suggest you write to Nikon, as you will be the first one that does. Many users prefer Nikon View 6.27 which is free to registered Nikon users and a goiod browser. For more intensive editing, it might be worth looking at Nikon Capture NX. It is very good indeed, though has no cloning or healing tools. Adobe Elements 5.0 is a cut back, though not crippled Photoshop and represents excellent value for money. PS is a massive and complex package for which photographers will only really use 10-15%. elements 5.0 will give nearly all of this at a far, far lower cost than the full Photoshop.
PPS - It is ok, beddybyes shortly - if flying and shooting from the sharp end with the D200 then go into the menu and find "Tone Compensation". If this is set to auto, then you might really get some harsh contrast and it is always easier to add contrast later rather than try to subtract it. Set a a lower value Infact, this is not bad advice, full stop. If in cockpit, some fill flash would be useful to give you some internal detail as well as that out of the window . Flash will NOT fire automatically, so as long as the head is down, so you will not get any frighteners there, if in ow light, but remember the AF assist light is easily bright enough on both D70 and D200 to stuff night adaptation. You can turn this off via the menu if needed. My own feelings on night flying with any camera, are simple - I just will not do it and will always leave the camera in the bag.
With flying shots, you can often get some annoying glare and reflection problems visible afterwards, so an old aviation trick, is to get a single black glove and use your hand as a lens hood. your hand will follow the contour and curvature of the glass better than anything else. Not quite DV, but the next best thing. Single black gloves are both useful and cheap. In fact, usually you can buy one and get one free. Worth shoving in your camera bag.
Another hint is to try and shoot through glass or perspex at as near a perpendicular angle to the surface as possible, which will reduce any colour casts that can appear and be a PIA afterwards. The Autofocus shuldn't play up by spoofing on the glass but if it does, then remember manual focus as a backstop. I would be surprised indeed if this was a problem though.
Last edited by Conan the Librarian; 21st Oct 2006 at 12:47. Reason: spolling chook
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: LGW
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That has to be one of the longest posts on any thread ever.
Very, very interesting and informative though.
Question I have been meaning to ask for a very long time... Why RAW?
I've done several experiments using RAW vs Fine .jpg on identical shots with the D50 and cannot for the life of me discern any difference in quality.
Haven't tried it for aircraft photography, more portraits of the Speedpiglets or static objects.
Is this because of an inadequecy of the D50, or Nikon Picture Project? I use Paintshop Pro 9 for processing which will not recognise RAW format (unless I'm doing something wrong there) so have to convert to jpg anyway which defeats any point in using RAW. Perhaps I am just still green behind the ears when it comes to the art of digital photography? (Lack of time to practice)
A thought has just occurred to me while I am not at my own PC to experiment. I have not yet tried a comparison print with RAW vs .jpg.
I am still flabbergasted by the quality of photograph I get from the D50, every click impresses me. Even Mrs SP feels the cost of the camera is justified. I wonder if I could stretch that to a lens or two?
Very, very interesting and informative though.
Question I have been meaning to ask for a very long time... Why RAW?
I've done several experiments using RAW vs Fine .jpg on identical shots with the D50 and cannot for the life of me discern any difference in quality.
Haven't tried it for aircraft photography, more portraits of the Speedpiglets or static objects.
Is this because of an inadequecy of the D50, or Nikon Picture Project? I use Paintshop Pro 9 for processing which will not recognise RAW format (unless I'm doing something wrong there) so have to convert to jpg anyway which defeats any point in using RAW. Perhaps I am just still green behind the ears when it comes to the art of digital photography? (Lack of time to practice)
A thought has just occurred to me while I am not at my own PC to experiment. I have not yet tried a comparison print with RAW vs .jpg.
I am still flabbergasted by the quality of photograph I get from the D50, every click impresses me. Even Mrs SP feels the cost of the camera is justified. I wonder if I could stretch that to a lens or two?
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ref: Lens source
Not from swindon or Burgess Hill ,and £489 also. Sadly now in the que for an SB800 flash but have been loaned an SB600 by the supplier until mine arrives. That is service for you.
Night photography: Fuji 1.5mp first generation digital camera through NVG lens:
This is a dark night and the distant lights are several miles away beyond water. The flare light source on the left is a sodium light providing fairly dim illumination.
Thanks for the info
T_M
Not from swindon or Burgess Hill ,and £489 also. Sadly now in the que for an SB800 flash but have been loaned an SB600 by the supplier until mine arrives. That is service for you.
Night photography: Fuji 1.5mp first generation digital camera through NVG lens:
This is a dark night and the distant lights are several miles away beyond water. The flare light source on the left is a sodium light providing fairly dim illumination.
Thanks for the info
T_M
Last edited by Tiger_mate; 21st Oct 2006 at 06:03.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Croydon
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another alternative when shooting through perspex/glass is to carry a mousemat with a hole cut in it for your lens. Stick this over the end of the lens with the matt black surface outwards and voila, no reflections!
Tiger, nice shot, I like the NVG idea, loads of potential.
I shoot RAW 99% of the time as all the data is there, this is partly because I was brought up shooting tranny film, (dont go there! ), at low asa, 25/50/100 to get the best quality.
I have three 1GB cards, these hold around 90 x RAW shots each, for my camera. I do this as if I lose one, or one becomes corrupt, as can rarely happen, then I only lose 90 shots rather than 150-180. I also leave a good five or so images unshot, so I only get 85 images per card. This is a 'personal' insurance that I don't overload the card with data and perhaps overwrite, or corrupt something I really want to keep. I do edit 'on location' too, but be sure to know how too, otherwise you could delete that once in a lifetime shot, or your entire card inadvertantly. It also eats into camera battery life.
You do have to remember to take them with you of course
not that I've ever sat on a hill patting my pockets and thinking
It is possible to set you camera so that when you turn it on the LCD panel shows NO CARD, a huge face saver!
And shooting through glass/perspex, take off any polarising filter, it can show the glass construction with a banding and/or rainbow effect which no amount of editing can ever undo.
I shoot RAW 99% of the time as all the data is there, this is partly because I was brought up shooting tranny film, (dont go there!
), at low asa, 25/50/100 to get the best quality.I have three 1GB cards, these hold around 90 x RAW shots each, for my camera. I do this as if I lose one, or one becomes corrupt, as can rarely happen, then I only lose 90 shots rather than 150-180. I also leave a good five or so images unshot, so I only get 85 images per card. This is a 'personal' insurance that I don't overload the card with data and perhaps overwrite, or corrupt something I really want to keep. I do edit 'on location' too, but be sure to know how too, otherwise you could delete that once in a lifetime shot, or your entire card inadvertantly. It also eats into camera battery life.
You do have to remember to take them with you of course
not that I've ever sat on a hill patting my pockets and thinking It is possible to set you camera so that when you turn it on the LCD panel shows NO CARD, a huge face saver!
And shooting through glass/perspex, take off any polarising filter, it can show the glass construction with a banding and/or rainbow effect which no amount of editing can ever undo.
Last edited by jumpseater; 21st Oct 2006 at 09:56. Reason: last para
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
otherwise you could delete that once in a lifetime shot
TheVillagePhotographer.co.uk
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cotswolds UK
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That has to be one of the longest posts on any thread ever.
Very, very interesting and informative though.
Very, very interesting and informative though.
SpeedyP sent me his first ever shot from his new toy and I was bowled over. With quality like that, I was convinced that he was shooting RAW and drilled home to me once more, what a cracking camera the D50 is. If they all come out like that, he could be right and not need RAW at all. If the missus is under the spell, act now and get some more lenses pronto.
You can't really do anything with a RAW shot using Picture Project.This is Nikons way of getting you to splash yet more cash on Capture NX. This is not a bad move, but many think (and reasonably too, IMHO) it should be included in the price of the camera. Paintshop 9.0 doesn't support the D50 (THEY want you to get v10 - depressing isn't it?) but you can use RawShooter Essentials in conjunction to give you a very powerful and zero cost editing package. It is only then, that you will begin to be able to use RAW properly for the first time, though again, you arent going to get better than that first shot of Ms. SpeedPiglet, which sticks in my memory and will do for a long time. The quality was just staggering.
TM, well done re your dealer. There are some good ones out there and if they have loaned you an SB600 you will get a taste for the superior SB800. With the D200 and its' commander mode, you have an immensely powerful tool, which will let you go wireless as well as providing you the very best in Flash systems. It isn't that cheap, but nor is any other manufacturers leading 'gun. I went for the Sigma EF500DG, which although compatible with the Nikon I-TTL system, doesn't sport the bells and whistles that the SB800 does. I have kicked myself since and especially after getting the D200. Mind you, with flas, I redeemed myself by purchasing two or three weeks ago, an Elinchrom portable flash studio and that is giving incredible results. Maybe a good job I can't mount it all on the camera though as I would only be able to get through double doors with that lot onboard...
On another thought, if away from base, the D200 does chew batteries up and certainly by comparison with D50/70 (which are as effective as fusion. They don't use charge but accumulate it) They are in short supply and expensive too. I use a pair in the additional MB D200 grip, but wasn't wildly keen on spending another 50 quid, thinking that one day, for a spare, that third party ones might become available. That day arrived today. £16.99 each and if you want details then please PM me.
In that tome last night, I forgot to mention a good piece of software for everyone to have up their sleeve. PC Inspector Smart Recovery, does just as it suggests and recovers file from seemingly stuffed cards. I used it the other week and although slow, it is fabulous and does just what it says. It is another free utility and one I urge you to think about, 'cos one day, the butt puckering moment will arrive and you won't be able to access your card. If anyone can't find it, Then give me a nudge and I will dig it up.
JS was right about polarisers and colour casts. When shooting through perspex, they can give rainbows everywhere that you don't want to see. Nice idea about the mouse mat though DE :-)
Photography is maybe at its best when you can capture something historical and the effective end of the cold war, is something to treasure for generations. memory might be one thing, but you still end up pinching yourself, when you look at the pictures. I would love one day, to be able to say that I had something a zillionth of a percent as memorable as those shots described by TM. I can live in hope, but am sure it will remain a dream.
Conan
Last edited by Conan the Librarian; 21st Oct 2006 at 12:44.
Guest
Posts: n/a
What's going right -
Thanks, CTL and Jumpseater.
Just back from across the water.
I now recognise the main issue which appears to be the ASA setting not dropping the shutter speed for the conditions in "Sports" mode.
As you say, the saw-tooth edges are definitely not on the original so perhaps the photobucket fix will sort the problem. I will try to re-load them again soon.
Given the distance I was away from the action, it seems that the SIGMA 200 did not perform too badly but I am now looking forward to my next trip with interest.
Funnily enough I had a look at some of my other stuff from two years ago and it was better although I certainly did not adjust the ASA.
Ahh, the light dawns, (no pun intended) it was a dull grey day with snow on the Welsh mountains and occasional bright periods which is why they came out better.
I will put them up in a separate Gallery if you have a comment.
I also think I will look at better quality monitors to get over the poor definition. Do you have any preferences of LCD over CRT or Plasma.
Imagegear
Just back from across the water.
I now recognise the main issue which appears to be the ASA setting not dropping the shutter speed for the conditions in "Sports" mode.
As you say, the saw-tooth edges are definitely not on the original so perhaps the photobucket fix will sort the problem. I will try to re-load them again soon.
Given the distance I was away from the action, it seems that the SIGMA 200 did not perform too badly but I am now looking forward to my next trip with interest.
Funnily enough I had a look at some of my other stuff from two years ago and it was better although I certainly did not adjust the ASA.
Ahh, the light dawns, (no pun intended) it was a dull grey day with snow on the Welsh mountains and occasional bright periods which is why they came out better.
I will put them up in a separate Gallery if you have a comment.
I also think I will look at better quality monitors to get over the poor definition. Do you have any preferences of LCD over CRT or Plasma.
Imagegear
TheVillagePhotographer.co.uk
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cotswolds UK
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A good way of ascertaining whether your monitor really is underperforming is to have a look through some of the albums generously contributed here by other posters. If you still feel slightly underwhelmed, then visit another little thread on C&I, where Monitors and colour are discussed (Copyright conanrant 2006)
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=247258
I am sure that the problem you had with your images is a PhotoB issue though. It is funny, but when you reload those and look at clean images, you will feel more benevolent about your monitor, I promise. There are issues with LCD but I use them all the time now and yet still have no room on my desk. Biggest problem I have seen with some LCD monitors is that unless you look at them dead on, that the image quality degrades rapidly with more angle off. This tends to be a thing of the past now. Response times are now good - though this is no issue for photo editing and the junk driver "enhancements" that often accompany screens will do nothing but mislead you too. The onward march of technology is great, but when for instance you look at mobile phones, you will be hard put to find any mention of actual phonecalls, the concept of which seems rather quaint, by latterday standards. Monitors are the same. you want them to do a simple and well defined job, but that rather screws up the game for the marketing dept. who might be out of work should you be such a heretic and this trend were to catch on.
If you find that your Welsh snowtop mountains are looking a bit under the weather, or more specifically grey, then it is but a metering problem. You will be about two stops under if you leave things as normal and this you can fix later with White balance, levels, curves or RAW compensation. Don't worry - the camera is ok but it is a fundamental of current metering systems and it is easily fixed.
Conan
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=247258
I am sure that the problem you had with your images is a PhotoB issue though. It is funny, but when you reload those and look at clean images, you will feel more benevolent about your monitor, I promise. There are issues with LCD but I use them all the time now and yet still have no room on my desk. Biggest problem I have seen with some LCD monitors is that unless you look at them dead on, that the image quality degrades rapidly with more angle off. This tends to be a thing of the past now. Response times are now good - though this is no issue for photo editing and the junk driver "enhancements" that often accompany screens will do nothing but mislead you too. The onward march of technology is great, but when for instance you look at mobile phones, you will be hard put to find any mention of actual phonecalls, the concept of which seems rather quaint, by latterday standards. Monitors are the same. you want them to do a simple and well defined job, but that rather screws up the game for the marketing dept. who might be out of work should you be such a heretic and this trend were to catch on.
If you find that your Welsh snowtop mountains are looking a bit under the weather, or more specifically grey, then it is but a metering problem. You will be about two stops under if you leave things as normal and this you can fix later with White balance, levels, curves or RAW compensation. Don't worry - the camera is ok but it is a fundamental of current metering systems and it is easily fixed.
Conan
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Way up north
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone - GO FOR Panasonic Lumix. Any version!
Best buy ever, and best zoom ever!!! Low priced!
Lens range: wide (35mm) to tele (420mm). Migawd.
Spent years searching for a lens meeting my needs.
My old analog Nikon 28-200mm zoom is now history.
I've come to heaven - happiness reads LUMIX!
Best buy ever, and best zoom ever!!! Low priced!
Lens range: wide (35mm) to tele (420mm). Migawd.
Spent years searching for a lens meeting my needs.
My old analog Nikon 28-200mm zoom is now history.
I've come to heaven - happiness reads LUMIX!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,108
Received 2,952 Likes
on
1,259 Posts
Ref: Lens source
Not from swindon or Burgess Hill ,and £489 also. Sadly now in the que for an SB800 flash but have been loaned an SB600 by the supplier until mine arrives. That is service for you.
Night photography: Fuji 1.5mp first generation digital camera through NVG lens:
This is a dark night and the distant lights are several miles away beyond water. The flare light source on the left is a sodium light providing fairly dim illumination.
Thanks for the info
T_M
Not from swindon or Burgess Hill ,and £489 also. Sadly now in the que for an SB800 flash but have been loaned an SB600 by the supplier until mine arrives. That is service for you.
Night photography: Fuji 1.5mp first generation digital camera through NVG lens:
This is a dark night and the distant lights are several miles away beyond water. The flare light source on the left is a sodium light providing fairly dim illumination.
Thanks for the info
T_M
But I can do that with my Sony F717 as it has full night vision compatiblity built in, indeed it even has a laser pattern enabling you to point it and focus on objects in total darkness.........
BTW worked on Pumas alongside the Wessex on 240 OCU at Odi for 5 years back in the 70's before going on to the Brand New Chinooks as the OCU formed
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This picture should have been almost impossible. It is taken through 2 panes of darkened toughened glass that created a visible second (ghost) image of everything in view. It is also taken at the extreme of the Nikon 18-200 VR zoom. The lens hood was in place and the lens placed as close to the window as possible. A polarizing filter was fitted. I know that is not sharp and crisp but under the circumstances that it was taken, I am delighted.
Nikon D200 / image reduced by 80%! for internet inclusion. Who can guess where, the clues are out there, but so are the red herrings. [See where am I thread]
Nikon D200 / image reduced by 80%! for internet inclusion. Who can guess where, the clues are out there, but so are the red herrings. [See where am I thread]
Join Date: May 2001
Location: up North
Posts: 661
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another shot, again not too sharp but I'd never have got it with a conventional camera.
I was typing away on this computer when I heard a roar. Grabbed the camera, opened the window and caught the aircraft appearing over the roofline. I had about two seconds to aim and shoot before it went behind the house. The aircraft was about a mile away.
Nikon D80 with 80-400 zoom.
I was typing away on this computer when I heard a roar. Grabbed the camera, opened the window and caught the aircraft appearing over the roofline. I had about two seconds to aim and shoot before it went behind the house. The aircraft was about a mile away.
Nikon D80 with 80-400 zoom.
Last edited by jabberwok; 23rd Sep 2007 at 01:57.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: South Norfolk, England
Age: 58
Posts: 1,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice picture ... but why would you have never got it with a conventional camera? I'd have thought that if anything a conventional film SLR would have been just as quick if not quicker?
SS
SS