New Camera!

[snow|3oarder]

Thanks Maciek.... I think? When I got my old job (the one I just left, the one I had for 5.5 years) I had no professional programming experience and no degree in CS, just a few classes under my belt and my own aptitude that someone recognized. So I went to work and took classes part time. Without the degree, I'd probably be stuck at my old job, or I'd be taking a lesser position with any new company. With the degree, now I can write my own ticket. No regrets. CS job market in Maine is looking bright for now.

Youre a good writer Jack, you could always be a patent attorney lol. :) Too bad it usually requires living close to a big city.

[patmoore]

BestBuy had a Sony HD camcorder out of the box for $1500 the other day but I'm still waiting for prices of the inbox ones to drop. I've had a 52" HD TV for two years and absolutely love it!

I just bought an RCA DVD burner that skips commercials with an HD interface for

$129 from www.woot.com (you should check woot everyday for the deal of the day). I guess the theory is that you can watch standard DVDs in HD. I added an optional HDMI cable but I can't really tell the difference. Probably my configuration.

Back to the original topic. Jack, I was looking at your camera at the store and showed it to the wife. We agreed it probably makes sense for me to find a job before buying any more toys.... I really do want that camera. Is anyone hiring???

[Gecko]

My wife came in from walking the puppy to tell me that there was an incredible electric stom on the way...I ran up to our balcony which faces SW and set up for about 45 minutes of shooting. I ended up with about 18 useable images and I didn't get wet

[patmoore]

That is a beautiful shot!

[Gecko]

That is a beautiful shot!

thanks, I learned to do those 17 years ago in school but with film then. Digital cameras record much more than film ever did at least in the way of color. I finally have a good place to shoot weather/sunset/landscapes from in my roof/balcony and I so love to do that kind of photography.

[eastcoasticerider]

HEY!!!Whats the trick to get tmy monitor to match what comes off the photo printer?...My photos look great on the screen of my iMac but they print out quite a BIT DARKER ON MY EPSON???? WHATS UP WITH THAT? ANY COMMENTS????or similar experiences?

[Gecko]

there used to be software to calibrate a printer to a monitor but I can't remember what it was. Now though the best bet is to insure that you are using Adobe colorspace on your computer and learn to "know" what looks right. Of course right now I really miss the Noritsu 621 which was as close to a WYSIWYG photo printer as I have ever seen in my 17 years as a photographer

[Donek]

HEY!!!Whats the trick to get tmy monitor to match what comes off the photo printer?...My photos look great on the screen of my iMac but they print out quite a BIT DARKER ON MY EPSON???? WHATS UP WITH THAT? ANY COMMENTS????or similar experiences?

Monitor calibration may be necessary. There are a number of devices out ther for doing so. There are usually adds for them in the photo magazines, but a google search will probably yield some results. Most important is probably your color space you're shooting in. sRGB will give you better results typically. Once you're sure you're in sRGB you can do a bit of manual color calibration of your own if you're on a budget. Print a color swatch on your printer and then try to match the colors on your screen to those printed using the controls on your monitor. You can probably get a lot closer this way. My monitor is very close, but I do so much printing that I'm able to make mental adjustments for the small inconsistencies.

Another speed tip for your machine is color quality on your display settings (windows users). It's tempting to use the highest quality, but most monitors will show such a small difference between 16 bit and 32 bit that it's not worth the extra processor time to bother. I set all my machines to 16 bit and they run dramatically faster.

[Jack M]

Back to the original topic. Jack, I was looking at your camera at the store and showed it to the wife. We agreed it probably makes sense for me to find a job before buying any more toys.... I really do want that camera. Is anyone hiring???

I am loving the camera. However don't despair. By the time you can buy, there just might exist the rumored $1500 Canon with a full frame sensor. Even if not, there is always <i>something</i> "better" coming along. Canon critics think the successor to the 30D will come sooner rather than later because the 30D wasn't a major upgrade to the 20D.

Monitor calibration - if you have Photoshop, run the Adobe Gamma program. It helps.

[patmoore]

I am loving the camera. However don't despair. By the time you can buy, there just might exist the rumored $1500 Canon with a full frame sensor. Even if not, there is always <i>something</i> "better" coming along. Canon critics think the successor to the 30D will come sooner rather than later because the 30D wasn't a major upgrade to the 20D.

Thanks, Jack. My knowledge is pretty limited here. If I understand things correctly, today's DLSRs have an APS-C format 23.4 x 16.7 mm as opposed to the traditional 35mm (24 x 36 mm?). If I were to get one of Canon's DLSRs offered today I was told I'd be able to use the telephoto lens from my wife's Rebel film camera. Is that not the case? If I can use it, will there be problems with distortion? I really appreciate the guidance.

[Jack M]

Thanks, Jack. My knowledge is pretty limited here. If I understand things correctly, today's DLSRs have an APS-C format 23.4 x 16.7 mm as opposed to the traditional 35mm (24 x 36 mm?). If I were to get one of Canon's DLSRs offered today I was told I'd be able to use the telephoto lens from my wife's Rebel film camera. Is that not the case? If I can use it, will there be problems with distortion? I really appreciate the guidance.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Canon/

Canon's pro DSLR's are full frame - the 1D and 1Ds. But nevermind, unless you want to be a full-time pro photog. Then there's the first "affordable" (*ahem*) full framed 5D which sells for a cool 3 large for the body only. The 30D ($1400) and 20D (on clearance) have 22.5 x 15mm sized sensors, not sure if that's APS-C or not.

ALL Canon DSLRs, including the Digital Rebel ($700?) accept ALL Canon EF lenses. So yes, your existing lenses will work. The D-Rebel, 20D, and 30D also accept the EF-S line of lenses which are built especially for these reduced-frame cameras. These sensors produce a 1.6 crop factor. That is, if you have a 100-400mm zoom lens, when you use it with one of these cameras it effectively becomes a 160-640mm lens. On the 5D and up, there is no crop factor. The crop factor is not a bad thing, it just means you have to do a little math when selecting lenses. I bought the EF-S 17-85mm IS USM with my 30D. So effectively that's 27.2-136. Canon built that lens to provide a "digital" equivalent to their popular EF 28-135mm IS USM. I like that it can go wide when I want. Here's a pic I took at the wide end:

anyway, get it?

[patmoore]

That clears it up.

Much obliged!

[Maciek]

Your sequences are clearly the best around for instructional purposes. However try to make a 20x30" poster out of one of the frames! I'll "settle" for my little 5fps 30D. ;)

Haven't made the jump to HD video yet - just got a TV though, so I'll be itching to. It's utter BS that the HD video cams are priced at such a premium - HD doesn't even require a 2mp sensor, which has been around for what, 7-8 years?

Jack,

How many posters did you make with your photos?

I tell you what. You can find some of pictures we do compose from number of weird material (from pros) in color magazines that you can buy in your favorite news stand or Barnes & Noble. Trust me that unless you really intend to do that professionally for a studio you are unlikely even notice that need for extereme resolutions.

Personally I have found that 4megapixels with Canon digic is good enough for most of letter sized pictures and I can show them on wall of my appartment including the same macro as Sean took... only with PowerShot A85... just for fun of showing how far you could push amateur camera if you know what you are doing and how (yes I own close-up converters even for this camera and cost is... $30-$50)... but I also own more advanced Canon equipment including serious lenses.

Also if you notice posters are not precise so you cannot look at them from close distance. The angular resolution of human eye is limited... so pheripherial vision. If a person wants to see picture then the person usually does not watch it scanning inch by inch. Now from farhter distance to see complete picture a person does not notice that it is made up of dot patterns.

[Jack M]

I agree that 4-5mp is "enough" for 95% of photographic uses. Heck, I even made a few very pleasing 8x10s out of pictures I had taken with my 4mp Canon S45, but that I had cropped from horizontal (landscape) to vertical (portrait) size. That's only 1704x1363 pixels, or 2.3mp. The only "need" for someone to have a 7 or 8mp point-n-shoot is to be able to use the digital zoom, and to say "mine is bigger".

A DSLR however, shouldn't have too low a pixel count because the sensor is physically much larger. So in order to have a good pixel pitch on a larger sensor, naturally the mp's rise. However even at 8.2mp (3504 x 2336), you're below 200dpi on any print larger than 17" x 11".

But my original point was only that you simply can't make even a good 4x6" print from a frame of video, which before HD was 640x480 pixels. I like that next winter I'll be able to just hold down the shutter button for someone's entire turn, get a good sequence, and make a poster out of the "money shot".

In the 3 months I've owned the camera I haven't made any posters yet, but I've got a few 11x14s that are absolutely stunning, and flawless.

[boostertwo]

But my original point was only that you simply can't make even a good 4x6" print from a frame of video, which before HD was 640x480 pixels.

One way I've found to bump up the resolution from video footage and get results suitable for making larger prints is to use an image-resizing program like Genuine Fractals. While the results are by no means as tack-sharp as those from a XXMP DSLR, they are passable for many print jobs.

<img src="http://i6.tinypic.com/1z4lfk5.jpg" border="0" alt="Jeff Patterson, A-Basin, CO">

Colleagues have reported that HD is a much better solution for multi-frame high-rez, but if you don't yet have an HD video camera, you may find GF is OK in the meantime.

[mirror70]

I like that next winter I'll be able to just hold down the shutter button for someone's entire turn, get a good sequence, and make a poster out of the "money shot".

Does the 30D have a continuous exposure/focus mode? I haven't been able to find the former. I think the AI Servo mode will do continuous, but I haven't checked that yet.

[Jack M]

Does the 30D have a continuous exposure/focus mode? I haven't been able to find the former. I think the AI Servo mode will do continuous, but I haven't checked that yet.

Gosh, I just assumed that in the continuous drive modes, the exposure was continuous as well. I'd have to double check, but I seem to recall seeing different exposure values between shots taken continuously. I do know that AI Servo works in the continuous drive modes, and surprisingly well. This little girl (not mine, neighbor's) was literally *running* towards me down this pier. 5fps continuous drive and AI Servo netted this keeper:

[mirror70]

I shot this in the 5fps mode, and you can see how the early shots are under exposed and the last is over. Maybe there is a setting I missed?

[carvedog]

I shot this in the 5fps mode, and you can see how the early shots are under exposed and the last is over. Maybe there is a setting I missed?

In the first frames the snow is predominately centered indicating lots of light and possibly prompting the camera to decrease exposure. The last frames are mostly trees and sky in the center of the frame.

Almost all digicams also record metadata in a sidecar file visible in photoshop and some other image editing programs. That will tell you exactly what happened exposure, fill flash, white balance and tons of other info.

Also Mirror70 by using the history brush and a backgroung layer you can "erase" the trees that overlap behind your rider. But booster is the master of this.

[boostertwo]

I shot this in the 5fps mode, and you can see how the early shots are under exposed and the last is over. Maybe there is a setting I missed?

For post-production work, I've had good results using image>adjust>curves (Ctrl M) for each layer in Photoshop.

[Jack M]

I shot this in the 5fps mode, and you can see how the early shots are under exposed and the last is over. Maybe there is a setting I missed?

Actually I think this sequence is perfect evidence that the camera <i>does</i> adjust exposure continuously. If it didn't, the underexposure of the first shot would have been seen throughout the sequence.

But yes, check the EXIF info.

[Kent]

Time for me to jump in with a question...

Rec'd a Rebel XP as a work gift and trying to pimp it out. Pretty cool so far...providing I have it set on full auto.

No jokes about the Rebel...as it's hard to compete with FREE.

So...looking for ideas on best value lenses. Remember...I'm a total hacker newbie photographer, but it would be nice to take some "action" shots from a distance. Can I buy a non-Cannon lense for cheap? Are the cheap lenses THAT bad. Do I really need IS?

Any links are appreciated..and I'm really going for the best "cheapest" lense.

Also, I need some help with all the other stuff....filters, flash, etc. Just tell me what to buy and I'll figure out how to use it.

K

[Gecko]

I've got over 20 years of good service with B-n-H in NYC. We (the navy) buy cameras's and other equipment from them all the time. Sigma Tokina and Tamron are good lenses, my preference is in the order listed. Cheap will be a problem if you go toooo cheap . If you want a Wide angle you'll need something wider than 20mm, I have a D70 and these are the lenses I have Sigma 12-24mm, nikon 18-70mm and a nikon 80-200 (which in truth stays home as I use my nikon 180 manual more). If I had it to do again I would buy the Sigma 10-20mm and the Sigma 18-125mm or 18-200mm as it is I really only carry my 18-70mm and am sometimes left needing more.

Flash make sure that you buy a flash that is dedicated for your camera (in other words a Canon Flash ). Anything else is a waste of time and money. I mean I can plot exposure and guide number pretty fast but as I approach 40 it's real nice to leave some of the tech stuff to a computer and just worry about composition.

Filters are essentially clear lense covers, no lense should ever be without one...period. That said price can vary from $10-$200 depending on brand. I usually go with whatever the house brand is in a shop since I know that in a year it's gonna get replaced anyway. Also look at a shops used filter bin (if they have one) deals can be scored there

[carvedog]

To make your life easier when shooting digital ( or film for that matter) make sure that all the filters are the same. If you use a UV filter use the same one on all lenses, or Skylight 1A or whatever other basically clear filter you use. Just seems easier to match output that way.

Gecko: the Nikon 80-200 2.8 ED lens is one of my favorites and the only zoom lens that I own ('cause it is so stinking sharp). Do you not like yours? Too heavy? Curious.

I've got over 20 years of good service with B-n-H in NYC. We (the navy) buy cameras's and other equipment from them all the time. Sigma Tokina and Tamron are good lenses, my preference is in the order listed. Cheap will be a problem if you go toooo cheap . If you want a Wide angle you'll need something wider than 20mm, I have a D70 and these are the lenses I have Sigma 12-24mm, nikon 18-70mm and a nikon 80-200 (which in truth stays home as I use my nikon 180 manual more). If I had it to do again I would buy the Sigma 10-20mm and the Sigma 18-125mm or 18-200mm as it is I really only carry my 18-70mm and am sometimes left needing more.

Flash make sure that you buy a flash that is dedicated for your camera (in other words a Canon Flash ). Anything else is a waste of time and money. I mean I can plot exposure and guide number pretty fast but as I approach 40 it's real nice to leave some of the tech stuff to a computer and just worry about composition.

Filters are essentially clear lense covers, no lense should ever be without one...period. That said price can vary from $10-$200 depending on brand. I usually go with whatever the house brand is in a shop since I know that in a year it's gonna get replaced anyway. Also look at a shops used filter bin (if they have one) deals can be scored there

[Gecko]

the 2.8/80-200mm is about the same weight as my 2.8/180mm. I spent 10 years shooting with the 180mm and it just feels right unlike the 80-200mm which while a very nice lens just doesn't instill me with the confidence that the 180 does.