New Gear. Drool!!!!

B
Posted By
Buko
Feb 12, 2004
Views
30859
Replies
2452
Status
Closed
R
Ram
Feb 12, 2004
Off topic:

Have you noticed how incredibly, almost unbearably brighter your monitor looks after leaving the dpreview torture chamber?
P
Phosphor
Feb 12, 2004
Got OS X, Ramón?

Use Command + Option + Control + 8 on pages like that.
L
LRK
Feb 12, 2004
Use Command + Option + Control + 8 on pages like that.

I didn’t know about that trick. Very good!
L
LRK
Feb 12, 2004
I’m waiting for the next generation of Nikon within the $1,000 range. Does anyone know anything?
L
LRK
Feb 12, 2004
Sylvain: Thanks so much for the link. This looks pretty impressive. From your link I found this link <http://www.dpreview.com/articles/nikond70/> where you can see a side-by-side comparrison of the Nikon D70, the Nikon D100, and the Canon EOS-300D. I’ve got a lump in my throat and my heart just skipped a beat. 🙂
H
halscheyer
Feb 12, 2004
The latest Shutterbug magazine stated that Nikon is going to come out with an 8 MP, 8x Prosumer model 8700 in the near future to compete with the Sony F828. It will probably be in the $1000 range as is the F828. I bought an F828 on Jan 2nd and have taken approx. 200 pix with it and i love it. I can crop out a small portion of the JPEG file and enlarge it to 8×10 without loss of detail – like having a 600mm telephoto lens. If Nikon is your favorite, be patient, it won’t be long.
L
LRK
Feb 12, 2004
Halscheyer:

An 8 Megapixel? I’ll wait!!!

Thanks!
Linda
R
Ram
Feb 12, 2004
Phosphor,

Got OS X, Ramón?

Yes and no. It’s installed in the new G4 but I don’t use it. I boot up in 9.2.2.
GB
g_ballard
Feb 12, 2004
Shutter speeds of 30 to 1/8000 sec. ensure full creative control.

I have to wonder WHY these cameras don’t shoot any slower than 1/30th?

That’s MORE limiting (to me) than a 1/60th flash sync…
JV
John_Vitollo
Feb 12, 2004
Wait no more Linda – the 8 Meg point and shoot Nikon CoolPix 8700 has been announced and more:

< http://nikonimaging.com/global/activity/pma/2004/pma04produc t.htm>
L
LRK
Feb 12, 2004
Oh my gosh, I feel faint John… 🙂
AW
Allen_Wicks
Feb 12, 2004
The 8700 lacks interchangeable lenses, so don’t bother drooling too much. It may well be the best of the non-removable lens digicams, however:
<http://www.nikoncoolpix.com/main.html>

The D70 is IMO the best (announced) US$1k value at the moment: <http://www.nikonslr.com/home.php>

The D2x is the one I am waiting for…

————————————–
My apologies for referring to animated Nikon websites. IMO way more than 90% of such animated sites are LAME – folks go to such sites for information, not to watch cartoons.
JV
John_Vitollo
Feb 12, 2004
An 8 Meg Point and Shoot camera – I’ll drool all I want!
R
Ram
Feb 12, 2004
G,

I have to wonder WHY these cameras don’t shoot any slower than 1/30th?

I read that as 30 seconds to 1/8000 sec.

The digital SLR I’m playing with right now has shutter speeds of 30 seconds to 1/4000 second and a flash-sync speed of 1/150 sec.
GB
g_ballard
Feb 12, 2004
I read that as 30 seconds

I think you read right 🙂

The last time I looked in this price range it was 1/30th. This time my eyes must have glazed over…
L
LRK
Feb 12, 2004
I agree John. 🙂

I want to know more about the Nikons and noise. I have heard that there might be problems with noise.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Feb 13, 2004
I have shot more than 20k images with a Nikon D100 and find noise to be a minimal issue with properly lit shots. All digicams (with Nikon not being substantially better or worse than others), however, will suffer from noise to varying extents with grossly underlit and/or very slow exposure pix. Nikon does have a selectable noise filter for such pix, but I never select it. When I do have an underlit shot I fix it with duplicate screen layers and then spot out the noise using the clone tool, which is pretty easy.
P
PShock
Feb 13, 2004
Canon, people — CANON!

Now, THESE are truly worthy of spit running down yer’ face …

<http://web.canon.jp/Imaging/eos1dm2/html/21.html> <http://www.powershot.com/powershot2/pro1/index.html>

-phil ; – )
JV
John_Vitollo
Feb 13, 2004
Canon also has a new 8 Meg Point and Shoot that looks sweet:

<http://www.powershot.com/powershot2/pro1/index.html>
C
Cindy
Feb 13, 2004
Not to mention Canons SLR cameras.
CC
Chris_Cox
Feb 13, 2004
Now get me 8 MP in something the size of an OptioS….
Linda–

THe camera I brought to Photoshop World.. the one you used.. is a D100.

So check out those images for noise (use the ones shoot in RAW format)
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Feb 13, 2004
You guys don’t know how to read in Manual it is 1/8000 to 1/30 and in several of the auto Modes it is 1/4000 to 8 Secs and in a couple of the Auto Modes it is 1/4000 to 30 Secs and these same modes have a Bulb/Time Setting of up to 10 minutes.
R
Ram
Feb 13, 2004
Wade,

Who do you mean by "you guys"?

You guys don’t know how to read in Manual it is…

Watch out; someone might accuse you of not knowing how to write. %D
P
Phosphor
Feb 13, 2004
ón!

When I first started coming around here years ago I popped on Wade for his writing abilities all the time.

Now, I just try to read between his lines, learn what I can from him, and chuckle at the rest!

🙂
L
LRK
Feb 13, 2004
Bonnie,

That’s true and I was very impressed with the quality. I love my own Nikon and I guess that’s why I want another one. But still, I am open to suggestions and will research all my options before making a purchase.

Linda
B
Buko
Feb 13, 2004
The Fuji S3 has 2 sensors per pixel a regular one for the shadows and mids and a second one to expose for highlight detail. and has a 12 MP image.

doesn’t anyone find this to be truely awsome.
R
Ram
Feb 13, 2004
Phosphor,

I also enjoy Wade’s posts very much, agree with a lot of what he says, and love his work. I was just kidding him because of his earlier remark.
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Feb 13, 2004
Why I don’t right no good!
AW
Allen_Wicks
Feb 13, 2004
The SLRs in the current crop of Nikon/Canon/Fuji SLR digicams are indeed awesome. Which is "best" is very individual and based on needs, except that at the compete-with-medium-format end the Canon 1Ds rules – until Nikon comes out with the D2x…

The 1Ds plus Canon Tilt/Shift lenses are almost enough to make me switch to Canon. However, decades of abusing Nikons from the tropics to snow country have created almost total brand loyalty in me. I will wait to see how good the D2x is, and unless Nikon really screws up (not likely unless they overprice it) I will buy one.
CC
Chris_Cox
Feb 13, 2004
Buko – no, because you get a 6 MP image. Yes, it might have better hilight detail, or do HDR exposures — but it’s still a 6 MP image.
Z
Zeb
Feb 13, 2004
There’s a tiny Casio 6MP if you’re interested.
<http://www.dpreview.com/news/0402/04021303casioexp600.asp>
B
Buko
Feb 14, 2004
Buko – no, because you get a 6 MP image.

OK I was just at the Fuji site you get a 12 megapixel image because you have 2 sets of sensors.

APS size 12 megapixel (S-pixel: 6.45 million, R-pixel: 6.45 million) Super CCD SR sensor technology for high image quality with wide dynamic range Produces 12.1 Million (4256 x 2848) recorded pixels or choice of (3024 x 2016), (2304 x 1536) and (1440x 960) pixels
CC
Chris_Cox
Feb 14, 2004
No, you get a 6 MP image with alittle more hilight and shadow detail. Each pixel just has 2 sensors associated with it for the detail.

The 12 MP is their usual "our sensors are better than yours so we can upsample" crappola.
T
Todie
Feb 14, 2004
Chris, Fuji’s interpolated 12MP images seem to be better than other cameras’ 12MP interpolated images.
MO
Mike_Ornellas
Feb 14, 2004
but my amp goes to 11…….
CC
Chris_Cox
Feb 14, 2004
Todie – not really.
AK
ashley_karyl
Feb 14, 2004
The S3 will probably be a very good option for many users with great colours and a useful dynamic range. The only negative I can see in this upgrade is that while it is still effectively a 6MP camera the new Raw files are going to be really big from what I have heard reported, so flash cards are going to fill up after very few images when you shoot RAW. I was surprised to see all the bashing on the Fuji forum over at dpreview though because I have always thought that Fuji are producing great cameras for the money.

The new Canon 1D II will be all the camera that many pro photographers need, while being fast and tough as well. With a good 8MP sensor showing super low noise it will no doubt be successful, but I still think that unless speed is paramount and when quality is important the 1Ds is still the best all round solution on the market.

I am really happy that Kodak finally seems to have solved the quality issues with the 14n and its looking like being the camera that it should have been when it was first introduced 1 year ago. This will hopefully force Canon to be more reasonable on the price front and also means that Fuji won’t be able to charge too much for the S3 while pressure will mount for Nikon to introduce something spectacular.

The only problem is that from recent history, Canon always seems to be about 2 years ahead of the other makers with R & D and I suspect that when Nikon finally introduces something comparable to the 1Ds, Canon will immediately announce the update to the 1Ds which will be so good any improvements made thereafter will be purely academic.
Z
Zeb
Feb 14, 2004
Did you notice the price drop on the Nikon D1X? Hopefully a D2X soon? The Canon 1Ds is still the only one worth having though.
B
Buko
Feb 14, 2004
Well even with the S2, Bringing it into PSCS camera RAW, the upsample in the render is mindbogling. I’m thrilled at the detail and sharpness that is held. So thanks Chris and the rest of the crew. photoshop combined with the new generation of digital cameras is truly awsome.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Feb 15, 2004
The statement "Canon always seems to be about 2 years ahead of the other makers with R & D" is IMO not exactly true. Yes Canon owns the high end at the moment with the 1Ds, but cameras like the D1, D100, D2h, D70 have all been basically state-of-the-art at their price points when introduced; not 2 years behind. Canon and Nikon are playing leapfrog at the high end of DSLR photography, with awesome products from both firms.

Some of the "forward R&D" items Canon has introduced are things I personally prefer not to complicate a camera system with. But that is just my 0.02 based on negligible Canon experience.
AK
ashley_karyl
Feb 15, 2004
hmm it took Nikon 2 years to produce a camera that could compare to the Canon 1D. The D2h was introduced a couple of months back with basically comparable performance to the old 1D, however, Canon have immediately replied with the 1D mark II which is faster, has the option to shoot twice as many megapixels and none of the noise issues associated with Nikon’s LBCAST sensor. The fact that the 1D mark II is now an 8MP camera opens up numerous other markets to Canon that Nikon just cannot touch with the D2h or D1X.

Nikon still has nothing to compare to the 1Ds that has already been available for about 15 months and there was no mention of an update at the PMA either, so we can be fairly sure that there will be another 6 months at least to wait and there is already much talk about a new update to the 1Ds later this year.

What I think we are seeing in terms of market change is that Canon has the technological edge but at a higher price. When Nikon does introduce a competing camera it costs less as witnessed by the D2h and D70, however, its also true that until Nikon introduces competing products Canon has little motive to lower it prices in a market place where demand is exploding. The Canon 10D also must have made Nikon’s task a real headache when it was introduced 1 year ago because it cost a lot less than the Nikon D100 initially.

I have some experience with Nikon cameras having owned 3 in the past, but that was all pre-digital era. The real problem for the Nikon user as I see it is that while the cameras may be great to handle, ultimate image quality is definitely a long way behind Canon at the high end although they are now competing hard at the low end with the D70 that looks like a great camera. In a time when countless pros are making the switch to digital I hear of many Nikon owners making the move to Canon but rarely the other way around.

In 3 to 4 years I think quality differences will be purely academic, however, Canon has created an impression of momentum that is hard for Nikon or any other manufacturer to match, so while the quality of digital capture is still rising Canon look like the clear winners to me. Just for the record, I am not a Canon zealot and would be happy to shoot with anything that does the job. I would really like to see far more competition between the manufacturers at the high end because it would force all of them to produce better products at lower prices and with fewer defects.
L
LRK
Feb 15, 2004
This is a great thread. I appreciate you all so much!

Linda
B
Buko
Feb 15, 2004
So with all this talk of the Nikons and Cannons does does Fuji S2 and S3 compare?
AK
ashley_karyl
Feb 15, 2004
The advantage that both Nikon and Canon have over Fuji at present is their prestigious legacy if you like as makers of 35mm SLR cameras.

Fuji’s problem as it moves from film to digital is its need to tap into a market of lens owners who will be willing to use their cameras and I suspect that if they were given a chance, the S3 would be marketed with either the Canon or Nikon mount, but Canon won’t play ball nowadays as its aim is total market domination. Nikon are happy to sell camera bodies to 3rd party manufacturers because this increases their revenue while giving consumers more reason to stay with the Nikon lens range, however, they won’t supply top quality bodies like the D1X to Fuji or Kodak because at that point it would seriously undermine their own brand sales especially as Fuji are clearly very good as far as sensor technology is concerned.

What will the situation be in 5 years time? your guess is as good as mine but I can foresee a sort of merger between Nikon and Fuji as a lifeline for both. For Fuji to start marketing its own bodies and lenses with a quality comparable to Nikon and then build up a loyal client base would take many years, while Nikon would clearly benefit from having the expertise and not to mention money from one of the worlds leading image makers.

Judging by everything I have read, the real battle here is not actually about selling digital cameras at all but in creating a base of future lens buyers because that is where the real money lies. Once you have a few lenses with any given system it becomes almost impossible to justify selling everything and switching to a competing product. Digital capture demands very good lenses to deliver the best results and future state of the art lenses capable of doing justice to future generations of sensors will be very expensive indeed.

As for Fuji in the short term, I think a great deal will depend on their price position within the market. They don’t have access to tough professional bodies like the new Canon 1D II with fast auto focus, so no matter how good their sensor technology is they will have difficulty in pricing their products too high if they want to remain attractive to consumers. Assuming that Fuji can enter the market at the right price point with the S3 and I am guessing that this may even be lower than the Canon 10D, I believe they can continue to carve out a useful cut of the market as a discerning choice for owners of Nikon lenses or new DSLR buyers that don’t need a tank like construction or super fast performance, but want all the advantages of excellent image quality at a reasonable price and this could include many advanced amateurs as well as pros.
AK
ashley_karyl
Feb 15, 2004
Buko to ask how the Fuji S2 and S3 compare to Nikon and Canon will depend very much on your needs. My main reason for choosing Canon was that I already owned 5 lenses or I would have seriously considered going down the Fuji route.

We don’t yet really know enough about the Fuji S3 either from a price or quality standpoint. My bet is that it will produce very good colours and generally pleasing images that are more than usable for many applications. Perhaps not a complete revolution compared to the S2, but nevertheless a useful upgrade. With that said, it’s unlikely that it will be comparable to the 1Ds for resolution which will be a limitation for some and its obvious weak point is the body construction and slow operation compared to cameras from other makers offering comparable image quality, so it will have to remain reasonably priced.

If you really require tank like construction and a durable shutter etc the Fuji is probably not a great idea but I think the whole concept of only using camera bodies built like the old Nikon F for use in the tropics is overstated, so if you don’t intend on going to war they are simply unnecessary for may users including pros. Taking two amateur camera bodies on a shoot is probably a lot safer than one pro body.
B
Buko
Feb 15, 2004
I have the S2. I liked what I saw image wise over the Nikon D100 at the time. I also have Nikon lenses, an old F2 F3 F4 user. Other than the S2 being a bit slow, after 7 shots because it has to write to disk, I really like the S2 and it has served me well so far. I was hoping that the S3 would be some awsome upgrade from the S2.
AK
ashley_karyl
Feb 15, 2004
Many users of the S2 have been disappointed by the announced changes in the S3 but I think it is premature to be so pessimistic before some sample images and a price have been released.

The main complaints were about maintaining the old body and not seeing an increase in megapixels, however, megapixels are far from being the only component in making a good image and the S3 may yet surprise us. I agree that the S2 produces better images than the D100, so with the S3 promising greater dynamic range with more detail in both the shadows and highlights it could set a standard in overall image quality for others to aspire to or at least high quality images at a price point other manufacturers cannot match. Let’s wait and see.
B
Buko
Feb 16, 2004
Well if the S3 images are the same quality as the S2 images with greater highlight detail, that’s pertty darn cool. I’ve be playing with enlarging the RAW files with camera RAW in CS. even at the largest setting the interpolation is impressive.

maybe the S2 price will drop and I can get one for cheap.
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Feb 16, 2004
This digital thing will never catch on! You’re all fooling yourselves!

But what did I say! So sensitive!
AK
ashley_karyl
Feb 16, 2004
I’ve been doing a little research Buko and although its nothing official, the common consensus is that the S3 will cost just under $3000 in the US when released. Fuji obviously thinks that the new sensor technology is something pretty special if they intend to demand that sort of money and most people felt it should cost around half that price to remain attractive to potential buyers.
B
Buko
Feb 16, 2004
THanks, I’m going to talk to my camera store maybe I can get a good deal on a S2. For 3 grand I’d rather get a G5 right now.
L
LRK
Feb 16, 2004
John V: Are you looking to buy a new camera? If you are, which one would you be inclined to go with?
JM
Jelle_Mellema
Feb 16, 2004
Besides photo-journalists do you really need a digital camera that’s build like a tank. In the old days you bought a camera that would last you for the rest of your live and would provide you with the same image quality as long as you owned the camera.

Now camera’s that are designed like the Canon D1 are "absolute" for most pro’s after one or two years, just because a better one comes out with a better quality sensor. So what’s the point of buying and paying a premium price for a camera that most likely is going to be replaced as soon as a better one comes out?! The only reasons I can come up with is tax deduction, a good show for the client and it feels better in your hands.
AK
ashley_karyl
Feb 16, 2004
In the case of a camera like the new 1D, it has incredible auto focus and fast handling that most cheaper bodied cameras cannot match. The 10D offers a really nice compromise on build quality without having to spend too much and while the auto focus is acceptably fast for most people it isn’t nearly as precise as the 1D. In practice it means you are more likely to get a fast moving subject in critical focus at F2.8 and exactly where you want with a 1D, while with a 10D you may need to go to F4 and just hope the main subject is in focus.

As far as the question of body construction alone goes however I agree with you totally.
JM
Jelle_Mellema
Feb 16, 2004
That’s a valid point, I guess for $3000 or more you can expect more then only a stronger body. I think the buffer and how fast you can shoot again are one of the most important things you have to look at when buying a pro digital camera.
AK
ashley_karyl
Feb 16, 2004
Just as a matter of interest, how many of us really care about the 101 features in all these digital cameras? For years I did nearly 100% of my work with a Hasselblad 500CM and later a 501CM which were both totally mechanical with no inbuilt light-meter and manual focus, but the irony is that I was able to work remarkably quickly and precisely shooting models as they ran on a beach or moved around in the studio. On the few times I picked up the Eos 1, I found it so simple, it felt like I was flying.

From my perspective, all I am looking for from a digital camera is a reliable body with good ergonomics and reasonable speed coupled to an outstanding sensor. All the rest is just smoke getting in the way of taking good pictures and I am concerned at the tendency of manufacturers to put too many useless buttons on the modern digital cameras although Nikon are much better in this respect than Canon. It seems that with every update we are offered more features and options when all we really need in a professional or semi-professional camera is ease of use to avoid making mistakes or missing the shot while shuffling through menus.
JM
Jelle_Mellema
Feb 16, 2004
It’s just like cell phones; I asked a sales clerk at Best Buy if It was possible to make phone calls with a particular cell phone I was looking at, they where advertising only the gadgets. He didn’t understand my joke……

And most menus are not really written with the creative mind in mind.
Z
Zeb
Feb 16, 2004
After looking at these EOS 1DMkII images I don’t feel that I’m missing as much as I thought I was. < http://www.canon.co.jp/Imaging/eos1dm2/html/eos1dm2_sample_1 e.html>
T
Todie
Feb 16, 2004
You may have.
(in RAW, not JPEG)
AK
ashley_karyl
Feb 16, 2004
I printed a couple of the other shots after uprezzing to 20×30 inches at 300dpi and they looked pretty good and roughly equal to medium format film quality. the 1D is an improvement on the 10D in every sense but not enough in terms of resolution to make me want to buy one at that price. The 1Ds still seems to be the only camera out there with enough quality to do any job I could ever throw at it.

Its worth mentioning that Canon have said other sample images will be released in about a month or so using final production cameras and not a pre-release model as in this case, so we may see some further improvement. Rumours about the update to the 1Ds include a 15MP Fovean type sensor in which case any arguments for continuing to use film will be forgotten very quickly.
Z
Zeb
Feb 16, 2004
It was the inconsistancy between the left and right sides of the frame that concerned me most, it could have just been that particular zoom lens or sensor misalignment or something else completely. The lower right image quality of the night time shot (7) was poor.
AK
ashley_karyl
Feb 16, 2004
I see what you are saying about image 7. It could be an issue with a pre-release camera in which case they would have been better not to have shown it or maybe it was a weakness in the quality of the lens. Perhaps the biggest current limitation in the quality of digital capture is not the sensors but the lenses which were originally designed for film and just don’t cut it anymore.

Wide angle lenses in particular seem to suffer badly at the edges where a good sensor shows up any weakness in resolving detail. With my own camera I have noticed that I can shoot at F2.8 using the super sharp 100mm macro and the image will show good detail straight out of the camera, whereas with the 28mm lens everything appears pretty soft unless I close down a couple of stops and its not just a question of depth of field. Many lenses have trouble providing sufficient resolution to allow digital capture to really shine.
L
LRK
Feb 17, 2004
There’s almost too much information for me to digest here. I’m so dense with cameras anyway… really need to take a class. I think I’ll watch the reviews and make my decision based on that.
Z
Zeb
Feb 17, 2004
What do you want to know?
L
LRK
Feb 17, 2004
Zeb: I guess I want just the basics that will help me determine which new digital is best. I get conflicting reports from my friends. The digital I currently own is the Nikon 990 and I pretty much use the automatic settings for most everything. I want to buy a newer digital with the best quality, highest resolution, and ease of use possible for around $1,000.00.

I like the Nikon and wanted to buy another one… but I’ve been getting advice against it. I’ve seen some of the Canon’s shots and am very impressed. I also have been told that the Canon is cheaper and the lenses are better.

Yet… I was impressed with Bonnie’s Nikon D100 when she brought it to PSWorld last summer.

It would help if I understood all the terminology, etc. but have a full plate for learning new stuff right now.
Z
Zeb
Feb 17, 2004
There you go!
<http://www.dpreview.com/news/0402/04020908canonpro1.asp> Anything else I can help you with?
C
Cindy
Feb 17, 2004
Linda, that camera is probably a very good camera if you want a fixed lens meaning you cannot buy lenses for this camera. It might not be a bad idea for you since you like automatic settings etc. Just be aware that if you ever want more of a zoom for this camera you cannot change it.
L
LRK
Feb 18, 2004
Zeb,

This does look pretty exciting. Thank you!

Gee, then I read Cindy’s post… no telephoto lens can be added? 🙁
Z
Zeb
Feb 18, 2004
There is an extender which makes it into a 300mm equivalent, but no interchangeable lenses. Less problems with dust on the sensor.

See also:
<http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/glossary>
for general information about digital cameras.
L
LRK
Feb 18, 2004
Please bear with me and what might appear to be foolishness.

How far would this lens reach in lay terms… Say I wanted to zoom in on the stork that visited our pond last week. I’d say he was 200 feet away. Would I be able to get a good closeup shot of him with this lens?
Z
Zeb
Feb 18, 2004
Nope, 300mm is about a 6x in binocular terms. You would need a super telehoto lens on an SLR but they are serious money.
Check out the 1200mm f5.6L Canon lens ~$60 000.
L
LRK
Feb 18, 2004
lol… I’ll pass on that…

So how many feet away could I shoot and get a good closeup?

Linda
C
Cindy
Feb 18, 2004
Linda I don’t think you will be happy without the ability to add a zoom lens. The one I used at the zoo was a 75-300mm. I would like more and have that option.

If I were you I would go to a camera store and have them set you up with a camera and a 75-300 mm zoom. Then go out of the store and have a look at some signs or something so you can see for yourself just how much of a zoom you get. You don’t have to buy it and I am sure they would be more than happy to help you out.

I do have a 28-135mm zoom which is what I keep on the camera most of the time so the lens that which that camera Zeb suggested is a really good range so it just depends on what you want. The built in lens is also equivalent to Canons "L" glass which is really good glass.
L
LRK
Feb 18, 2004
I just checked to see what my Nikon 990 Zoom is and I believe it is 8-24mm. If this Canon is 28-200 mm, that’s quite a difference. It might be all I really need.
Z
Zeb
Feb 18, 2004
To be fair you didn’t include bird photography in your requirements. That camera is not really suited to long range bird photography, but you could set up a small ‘hide’ and use remote control. Amazingly it has a 3cm (just over one inch) close focus so if you could get close enough you should have a pretty detailed photo. Your 990 was a 38-115mm equivalent so the Canon is nearly twice that plus it has over twice the number of pixels so you should see a dramatic increase in picture quality.
L
LRK
Feb 18, 2004
Cross posted with you Cindy… I’m reading your post #75 now.
C
Cindy
Feb 18, 2004
Check out the 1200mm f5.6L Canon lens ~$60 000

"L" glass is Canons best. I personally cannot afford the "L" glass in this stage of the game and I get pretty fair photos. I wouldn’t get the "L" lenses until I started making serious money with my camera.
L
LRK
Feb 18, 2004
Zeb: I can generally get within 60 feet of most of the birds on our property. Whereas birds are not my primary interest I would love to be able to capture them.

Another subject I have shot before and may be asked to shoot again is horse shows. I wonder how this camera would do with jumping horses. Actually I did pretty good with my 990 but had to click in advance to finally catch the horse as it was going over the jump.

BTW, thanks for the glossary link. I’ll hang onto it.
L
LRK
Feb 18, 2004
Cindy: The Canon PowerShot Pro1 is looking pretty impressive for the price.

I want as much bang for the buck as I can get. This seems to have a lot of bang.
Z
Zeb
Feb 18, 2004
Well even at 60′ you won’t get much detail on a small bird, a stork would be bigger but it’s not meant for that.
As far as I’m aware the camera is not on sale yet and the shutter lag is not mentioned in the specifications but it will be much faster than the 990, and could be used for horse shows.
C
Cindy
Feb 18, 2004
It does sound like a great camera. Like I said, it just depends on what you want. You may be very happy with a point and shoot but I personally want to be able to expand. That is why I got the cheaper body. I can invest in lenses and upgrade the body in a year or two and still get great photos.
L
LRK
Feb 18, 2004
Thanks very much for pitching in Zeb. I appreciate you breaking it down for me.

This review was released Monday, 9 February 2004. I wonder what else is around the corner. 🙂
L
LRK
Feb 18, 2004
Cindy: You are much more of a photograher than I am. I want to be able to "cheat" (for lack of a better word) enough to produce high quality images for my clients (and my own pleasure) in the most efficient and cost effective way possible.

Thanks for your input as well Cindy.
Z
Zeb
Feb 18, 2004
Canon is said to be releasing dozens of new cameras this year, mostly compacts, as Cindy said depends on what you want, every camera is a compromise of some sort.

There’s also a Nikon 8700, just to confuse you;
<http://www.dpreview.com/news/0401/04012805nikoncp8700.asp>
L
LRK
Feb 18, 2004
Zeb: I think this is the one that John V. showed me. It looks pretty exciting too. I take it the Canon is considered Professional but this one not? Also the Canon L lens is better?
Z
Zeb
Feb 18, 2004
I think the term professional is a marketing term. Both would both give exceptional image quality. Canon ‘L’ means they either have special glass or design in their lenses.
Wait until they become available and try them, sometimes how they feel in your hands is a big deciding factor and how easy they are to use.
A digital SLR is another option but a decent lens will take you beyond your stated budget.
L
LRK
Feb 18, 2004
That’s a good idea. I will wait and try them Zeb. I’m not quite ready financially but hope to be after I finish a job I’ve been working on.

I feel I can justify the $1,000.00 since I recently braced myself to pay around that much to have my printer repaired. After I fixed it myself I decided I would use the money I saved for a much anticipated new digital. 🙂
R
Ram
Feb 18, 2004
Linda,

I just checked to see what my Nikon 990 Zoom is and I believe it is 8-24mm. If this Canon is 28-200 mm, that’s quite a difference. It might be all I really need.

Apples and oranges. The effective field of view and the resulting zoom effect vary according to the size of the sensor, just like an 85mm lens is by no means a telephoto on a medium format camera. Each digital camera has a certain "magnification" factor to let you know what the approximate equivalent is in terms of 35mm photography.

The lens of the Canon PowerShot Pro1, according to dpreview, is indeed the equivalent of a 28-200mm zoom lens in terms of 35mm photography.

Your Nikon Coolpix 990 is rated by dpreview as a 38mm to 115mm equivalent in terms of 35mm photography, even though its actual focal lengths go from 8mm to 24mm.

Therefore, the effective maximum focal length (again compared to 35mm) of the Canon PowerShot Pro1, would be less than twice the maximum focal length of your Nikon Coolpix 990. It is in fact, less than 75% more "powerful" (200 divided by 115 = 1.739130435).
R
Ram
Feb 18, 2004
As a matter of fact, all other things being equal, a 38-115 lens (3.03 zoom ratio) would tend to be better in quality (chromatic aberration, pincushion and/or barrel distortion, etc) than a 28-200 (7.14 zoom ratio).
L
LRK
Feb 18, 2004
Oh my, Ramon. That’s quite enlightening about the zoom lens comparrison. Thanks for pointing that out.
R
Ram
Feb 18, 2004
You’re welcome, Linda.

As long time foe of zoom lenses in general, personally I wouldn’t touch a camera that had a non-interchangeable lens with a 7.14 zoom ratio (28-200) like that Canon with a ten-foot pole. That’s just my personal preference.
L
LRK
Feb 18, 2004
Glad to know your take on it Ramon. I think I’ll give myself a month or so before making up my mind.
L
LRK
Feb 18, 2004
In light of this information the Nikon is weighing in a little heavier.

The COOLPIX 8700 comes loaded with all the essential accessories: a battery and charger, an A/V cable, a USB cable and the comprehensive Nikon View software package. The camera is also compatible with a host of optional accessories, including wideangle, telephoto and fisheye converters. It can also be fitted with a Lens Hood that uses lens filters. In addition, the COOLPIX 8700’s accessory shoe accommodates a number of Nikon’s external Speedlights.
C
Cindy
Feb 18, 2004
Your decision should be interesting with all the input.
R
Ram
Feb 18, 2004
The COOLPIX 8700 comes loaded with …

Ouch! It has an 8x-zoom lens. 🙁
L
LRK
Feb 18, 2004
Cindy: I’ll take one of each. 🙂

Ramon: 8x-zoom lens = Sad face?
R
Ram
Feb 18, 2004
Yes, very sad. 🙁

The larger the zoom ratio, the more compromises the lens designer has to make in terms of quality (as I said before: chromatic aberration, pincushion and/or barrel distortion).

Just look at the better zoom lenses for SLRs. You’ll find they come in such focal lengths as 28-80mm (2.85 zoom ratio), 85-200mm (2.35 zoom ratio), etc.
R
Ram
Feb 18, 2004
On the other hand, look at dirt-cheap lenses like Samyang (a company that only sells noodles in its native Korea), or the Samyang lenses sold here also under the Phoenix brand: those cheapo lenses will have high zoom ratios.
L
LRK
Feb 18, 2004
I think I’ve got it!!! The rain in Spain falls mainly on the plain… The better the lens the smaller the range.
C
Cindy
Feb 18, 2004
….sometimes 🙂
R
Ram
Feb 18, 2004
The better the lens the smaller the range.

Ceteris paribus, i. e., all other things being equal.
R
Ram
Feb 18, 2004
Linda,

Is there a reason you’re not considering the Digital Rebel (Canon EOS-300D)? It is well within your price range and it is a true digital SLR, with interchangeable lenses. Several of the reputable mail order stores (like B&H Photo) have an offer for the camera plus one lens for just under $1,000. Memory cards are a different matter, but you need those for any digital camera.

At least it’s a camera around which you can build a collection of lenses

Canon EOS-300D < http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Canon/canon_eos300d.as p>
C
Cindy
Feb 18, 2004
at last…Not to mention the fact the kit lens is a nice lightweight flexable lens you can use until you are ready to buy more lenses if ever.
R
Ram
Feb 18, 2004
Cindy,

you can use until you are ready to buy more lenses…

Absolutely!

Just think about it, Linda, every time you fix your printer you’ll be able to afford a couple of very fine lenses! If that sucker breaks down every six months or so, in less than a couple of years you’ll have a fine array of lenses.
C
Cindy
Feb 18, 2004
Thats what I did and couldnt be happier. I almost got the 10D but with that $500 I saved I was able to put that towards a lens. If a better camera comes out in a year or so I will have a few lenses to use.
R
Ram
Feb 18, 2004
Smart move, Cindy.
C
Cindy
Feb 18, 2004
I think Linda had her heart set on a Nikon.
L
LRK
Feb 18, 2004
Ramon: In response to the Canon EOS-300D question, I guess because it’s 6 mp’s. The others have 8 mp’s.

I was under the impression that the Nikon is expandable by way of lenses… but then again, I guess the lenses are not as good… hm… maybe I should wait for the next replacement for the EOS-300D?

I’m getting dizzy with this circular motion… but I think it’s getting better.

Never knew my printer could prove to be such a good reason to spend money. 🙂

Cindy: Good rationalle… and I must say your camera is serving you well. You should post a link to your new web site. It’s impressive!
L
LRK
Feb 18, 2004
<< I think Linda had her heart set on a Nikon. >>

Actually it’s getting to be more of a toss up.
R
Ram
Feb 18, 2004
Linda,

I was under the impression that the Nikon is expandable by way of lenses…

Only by screwing adapters onto the filter thread of the non-interchangeable lens. Sort of like screwing in a magnifying glass instead of a filter (turning it into a pseudo telephoto) or a bubble lens to make it a fish-eye or wide-angle lens. Mickey Mouse comes to mind.
L
LRK
Feb 18, 2004
Ramon,

I see… So there are better ways to attaching lenses than having to screw them on. You can see how ignorant I am about this stuff.

Maybe if I wait just a little longer the Canon will come out with another higher res digital that is more like Cindy’s.
R
Ram
Feb 18, 2004
Linda,

So there are better ways to attaching lenses than having to screw them on.

What that particular Nikon camera wants you to do is to screw and adapter on top of the non-interchangeable lens in order to change its apparent focal length. In this situation you are not changing lenses at all, you’re just using the filter thread on the camera lens to attach a "magnifying glass" (for a telephoto effect) or a bubble lens (for a wide-angle or fish eye effect).

Therefore, it’s not a question of attaching a lens to the camera, but a Mickey Mouse gadget to the front of your one and only lens.

With a true SLR (digital or film) you actually change the lenses, take one off, put another one on your camera body. Most SLRs, if not all, nowadays have bayonet mounts, although you can use a bayonet-to-thread adapter to attach an M-42 ("Universal") mount to the Pentax D*ist digital SLR in fully manual mode.

After having seen the results folks are obtaining from the Digital Rebel (Canon EOS 300-D), if I were looking for a digital camera in this price range, I would not hesitate to buy one myself, without waiting for another model with a couple of more megapixels.
T
Todie
Feb 18, 2004
Take a look at Kyocera (Contax) for speed : )

< http://www.dpreview.com/news/0402/04021401kyoceranewmodels.a sp>
AW
Allen_Wicks
Feb 18, 2004
At US$1000, consider SLR. Currently the the Nikon D70 is the best SLR digicam at that price range with the Canon Rebel second. You should read the reviews.

SLR cameras are a huge step up from non-SLR cameras: bigger and heavier with bigger and heavier lenses, meaning designers made less compromises in materials and design to make things small and light. And of course interchangeable lenses.

Both Nikon and Canon make **excellent** lenses in a wide range of quality and price; the best of either brand is beyond most folks needs. One of those two brands is not "better" than the other, even though individual lens comparisons will vary. I do recommend that you stick with the brand of camera body you buy (Nikon lenses for Nikon, Canon for Canon; avoid third party unless you are a *very* competent lens/camera quality researcher).
R
Ram
Feb 18, 2004
Todie

Take a look at Kyocera (Contax) for speed

4 megapixels and a 10X zoom lens??? I don’t care how fast these suckers are, I wouldn’t touch them with a 10 foot pole either.
R
Ram
Feb 18, 2004
I agree with almost everything Allen writes, with the one exception of the D70 being in the same price range as the Rebel. The Nikon D70 is $1,600 at B&H v. $900 for the Canon Digital Rebel.
C
Cindy
Feb 18, 2004
I am reading the D70 has a few features missing from the Digital Rebel but the image quality is not as good. That is the bottom line. The "features" it is missing will not be missed by most. I believe it is FEC which can easily be fixed with a good external flash. Something you should have anyway.

The Digital Rebel has exactly the same sensor as the Canon D10.
L
LRK
Feb 18, 2004
I noticed that about the Kyocera too. 4 mps seems pretty low. I am almost tempted to hold out for a 10 megapixel model.
T
Todie
Feb 18, 2004
Ramón, If you put the new Kayocera on the end of a ten foot pole, you can take pictures of an eagle landing in it’s nest to feed the little ones.
(wings wide spread and all : )

The Kyocera is many times faster than all other digital cameras. (I can fit that in a special project.)

I’m not recommending it to Linda.

Oh,.. and another thing!
Contax makes the second best 35mm film cameras (after Rollei).
R
Ram
Feb 18, 2004
Linda,

I am almost tempted to hold out for a 10 megapixel model.

Then by all means go with the 11-megapixel Canon 1Ds, only $8,000. Nothing else can touch it.

If the price is a little steep, just repair your printer yourself every month and you can afford the 1Ds by October. 🙂
AW
Allen_Wicks
Feb 18, 2004
Shop around – as B&H has grown they have lost their low pricing in many instances. Actually the Nikon D70 body is available for US$999 as opposed to US$899 for the Canon Digital Rebel body. IMO the D70 looks to be more than US$100 better. However, the D70 is out just this month, so it makes sense to wait a month for prices to stabilize and for all the pro reviewers to get their $0.02 commentary made on production versions of the camera.

VERY IMPORTANT: always handle the camera you may buy. Different folks have different ergonomic preferences that can be HUGE.
R
Ram
Feb 18, 2004
Todie,

Thanks, but I’ll shoot those eaglets in their nest with my 1100mm Maksutov lens. 😀

I still have and use my Contax, Rollei and Leica cameras among others. The Rolleiflex is not 35mm though.
R
Ram
Feb 18, 2004
Allen,

VERY IMPORTANT: always handle the camera you may buy. Different folks have different ergonomic preferences that can be HUGE.

Agree 100%.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Feb 18, 2004
Linda- Regarding:

I am almost tempted to hold out for a 10 megapixel model.

If you do decide that you need medium-format equivalency like the 1Ds, wait until Nikon comes out with its competition to the Canon 1Ds (probably the D2x) later this year and then decide. Prices will be lower as alternatives in the genre exist.
R
Ram
Feb 18, 2004
Todie,

I meant my Rollei is a Rolleiflex and therefore not 35mm. I have had 35mm Rolleis in the recent past.
L
LRK
Feb 18, 2004
<< Then by all means go with the 11-megapixel Canon 1Ds, only $8,000. Nothing else can touch it. If the price is a little steep, just repair your printer yourself every month and you can afford the 1Ds by October. >> You’re funny Ramon! 🙂

I think Allen has the idea that I’m hoping for. 🙂
C
Cindy
Feb 18, 2004
I think Allen has the idea that I’m hoping for.

If you have your heart set on a Nikon, the D70 would be the one for you to get.

You have plenty to play with….
L
LRK
Feb 18, 2004
The D70 does look good Cindy.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Feb 18, 2004
At US$999 for the body you could buy a D70 now and have months of use before going the US$5000+ for medium format equivalency. By then you will be so enamored with SLR digicams you will want to keep the D70 as a backup…
JV
John_Vitollo
Feb 18, 2004
Linda>John V: Are you looking to buy a new camera? If you are, which one would you be inclined to go with?

Didn’t realize I was invited back to the party!

I’m looking for a "35mm" digital camera system for myself and searching for a point and shoot camera for one of my clients who doesn’t want to carry around his 35mm Nikon or Fuji S2 all the time. Right now he has a Canon G2 – a 4 meg camera. The quality is really nice for such a small camera but he prints images too large – 11×14 – and the images fall apart – unfortunately he doesn’t see the image degrade until I point it out to him. When I ask why he doesn’t use the Fuji S2 – at times it’s in the same camera bag – he says "I felt like shooting with the G2"…not a very clear answer but I have to be a psychologist with him at times. He is a fine art photographer represented by a very well known gallery in NYC and the gallery is reluctantly willing to sell digital prints. I’m trying to keep the image and print quality top notch as not to scare the gallery. He’s been selling traditional silver prints at the gallery but he would like to move to a total digital workflow.

Anyway regarding point and shoot cameras, both the Nikon and Canon 8 Meg cameras are available – Nikon Coolpix 8700 and Canon Pro1. For me and my client the bottom line will be image quality first and features and ergonomics a close second. I’m basically going to wait to see reviews for both cameras. But it seems from the mini reviews around the web both are comparable – handling wise at least. In general Canon has shown they have the better imaging chip but will keep an open mind about this general statement – who knows Nikon might surprise us. Both will be in the $1000. range. I have the Nikon 995 and it’s a real nice camera and was THE prosumer camera to get at one time but times change quickly. I have all the additional lenses from Fisheye to Tele and it’s a comprise to screw the lenses on and set camera to use the specific lenses and image quality suffers also. So basically going with a point and shoot camera even with screw-on lenses is not a setup that you can grow with over the long term and once again image quality is degraded with the screw-on lenses – even if the lenses are Nikon.

So Linda…since you fixed your laser printer and saved $1000. Which way should you go? If I only had a $1000. to spend on a camera system I’d go with the Canon 300 with the zoom to get started. Don’t worry about losing the extra two megs of image data with the new point shoot cameras as in a couple of years their will be 10+ meg cameras for $1000 and you’ll have interchangeable lens ready to place on the new camera. My Apple Store in NJ has the Canon 300 to play with. Yours might carry it also…play with it you’ll love the superfast and quite auto focus…also the camera is light. Also check out the NAPP price at PC/MacMall.

Nikon has the D70 so you could wait for the reviews. In general it seems Nikon’s flash system is better than Canon’s. As mentioned handling is important also so play once the camera is out. But I still feel the Canon 300 will have better image quality…just an educated guess!

I’ve been a Nikon user for 25 years but have no problem switching over to Canon as I’ve worked with both Nikon D100 and Canon 300/10D images and the Canon images are noise free and sharper when compared to the Nikon D100. Fuji’s S2 Images are very close in quality to the Canon 300/10D. I was hoping Fuji would surprise us with the S3 but was very underwhelmed with their announcement.

Also the following people use Canon: Chris Cox, Thomas Knoll (right there that should tell us something!) and if not…Andre Rodney, Bruce Fraser and Jeff Shewe also shoot with Canons.
C
Cindy
Feb 18, 2004
I’ve been a Nikon user for 25 years but have no problem switching over to Canon as I’ve worked with both Nikon D100 and Canon 300/10D images and the Canon images are noise free and sharper when compared to the Nikon D100.

That says it all..
C
Cindy
Feb 18, 2004
Here’s what you do. You buy a Flash card (you will use it later anyway) and a card reader (you can get them for $20). Walk into a camera store, ask the sales person if you could take some test shots. They generally will be more than happy to help you. If not, go to another camera store.

Plug in your flash in camera 1, go outside, take some shots. Plug in your flash to camera 2, take the same shots. Be sure you have the ISO and other settings as close to the same as you can get them.

Go home and look at your shots in Photoshop. Buy the one you like.

When making camera comparisons, compare the Rebel against the D70 and the Canon D10 against the Nikon D100.

The Rebel and the D10 take identical pictures. There are a few features missing in the Rebel and the construction is not quite as good but the D10 is heavy compared.
L
LRK
Feb 18, 2004
John:

What a wealth of information you added (I knew you would)… thanks very much! I am swinging toward the Canon. It looks like the Canon 300 has come down in price about $600… still I can’t help but think there will be a replacement soon.

Unless I really jump forward with photography and I start making enough money to warrant another upgrade, I will be hanging onto the same camera for a few years… so replacing it in a year or two might not work in my decision making process.

I have some pictures I downloaded a while back that were taken with a Canon Rebel. They were unbelievable! Maybe I can get a link or permission to post so I can show you.

***

Cindy:

Taking my own flash cards to a dealer is a wonderful idea! I have three flash cards for my Nikon 990. I assume they still work with the newer setups.

***

This is another one of those keeper threads. Very Exciting!
AW
Allen_Wicks
Feb 18, 2004
Cindy’s m.o. makes sense IF you also test some shots with the latest add-on strobes from Nikon/Canon on their respective digital bodies (shoot the Nikon with and without the flash softening hood on the strobe).

The difference in modern strobe/lens/camera combinations is HUGE, hard to believe unless you use the hardware. Nikon’s SB-800 (and presumably the even newer 600) strobe is much, much better than anything I have previously used, and previously I used just one generation back. My preconceptions regarding strobes and how they behave has changed with the SB-800 used on a modern Nikon.

Note that the modern digital camera/lens/strobe all work in synch to a degree that older setups can not do; these are very much strobe/camera/lens systems. If you will ever use the strobe (and you should use one often for fill) you should consider the modern strobe/lens/camera combination when you make purchase decisions.

Personally IMO the D100 is not really a good choice at this point. It is actually old technology to the D70.

Also check out the issue of wireless etc. images uploading choices, as well as wireless strobe synching. Nikon’s latest is pretty slick.
R
Ram
Feb 18, 2004
Personally IMO the D100 is not really a good choice at this point. It is actually old technology to the D70.

We should be seeing the D100 heavily discounted soon.
L
LRK
Feb 18, 2004
Thanks Allen. I know very little about strobes. I’m photographically quite ignorant… but learning from you all. A class in photography is on my To-Do List but not until after I upgrade.

It will be interesting to see where this thread takes us… and how many of us make a purchase based on it. I am slowing down and waiting to see what’s coming.
Z
Zeb
Feb 18, 2004
The last time I gave photo advice, after spending many many hours explaining every little detail, went and bought the first thing the sales clerk offered. I try not to proffer any advice after that.
L
LRK
Feb 18, 2004
Zeb:

I’ve appreciated all the advice you’ve offered here and other places… I plan to sort through this thread at some point, start a Word document, organize it, print it and go with the best choice that works for me. I usually shop this way.

If I’m not mistaken I believe you were part of the thread I started for my scanner two or three years ago. 🙂
Z
Zeb
Feb 18, 2004
It wasn’t directed at you, the person involved has long since passed away. It’s interesting how people choose what they buy especially when there is so much to choose from. Last week I had this discussion with someone else about choosing a new computer and he said always ask before you give advice whether the other person will take it. Four years ago, I thought I would never buy another Mac but then the Cube came out and I couldn’t resist.
L
LRK
Feb 18, 2004
I will be taking someone’s advice… just not sure whose at this point. The lines (of what is available) are so close and the competition is fierce. 🙂
AW
Allen_Wicks
Feb 18, 2004
Linda-

Some suggestions:

You may not want to waste time on a photo class unless it is taught as a digital SLR class. There are many things – even the teaching techniques themselves – that are way more modern with SLR digicams than with film. Most of the film-only teachers do NOT get the fact that it really is a new photo world. Instead, buy an SLR digicam and start taking photos – unlike with film, pix are free!

Buy a few photo texts and read about depth of field and the like, find a photog or two to discuss photography with, and… take lots of pix! THOUSANDS! FREE! Shoot, review in camera/laptop, reshoot, think outside the box, shoot-shoot-shoot. Fool with all the camera control alternatives, and shoot-shoot-shoot.

The ability to shoot thousands of images and review every one instantly is a totally new learning process. Go for it – don’t wait! Waiting three months equates to 5000 photos/learning you missed out on.
C
Cindy
Feb 18, 2004
I would go along with that suggestion. I think that shooting digital speeds up the learning process simply because of the amount of photos you can experiment with and delete if you want. The same rules apply.

I have taken close to 7000 photos since last October and I know those who have taken many more than that. I would be out more often if weather and time permitted. I just love it.
B
Buko
Feb 18, 2004
I must admit shooting digital is completely different than shooting film.
L
LRK
Feb 18, 2004
Thank you Allen! Sounds like good advice.
L
LRK
Feb 18, 2004
You can see some of the fun I’ve had with my Nikon 990 HERE <http://www.graphicspalmbeach.com/coffee/coffee1.html>. See first three links after Home.
L
LRK
Feb 18, 2004
L
LRK
Feb 19, 2004
I found the link with some cool photos taken by John Burnett with the Canon Digital Rebel using a Tamron 90mm f2.8 SP Macro lens.

<http://www.pbase.com/image/24687570>
JV
John_Vitollo
Feb 19, 2004
That’s what I see with 300D/10D images – Creamy Smooth and Sharp!

Also check out this series of waterfall shots with the 300D – beautiful:

<http://www.pbase.com/image/25211163>

What are you waiting for Linda?
C
Cindy
Feb 19, 2004
Yup! Other manufacturers are hard pressed to match the Canon SLR’s.
L
LRK
Feb 19, 2004
That’s awesome John!

What am I waiting for?

Well…

I’d like to finish a job and get paid…

and…

waiting to see if something else comes around and blows my socks off…

and…

I do have "some" self-control. 🙂
C
Cindy
Feb 19, 2004
waiting to see if something else comes around and blows my socks off… and…

snicker…
L
LRK
Feb 19, 2004
Well, it’s true. 🙂
R
Ram
Feb 19, 2004
The images on the link posted by LRK are astonishing.

As for long-exposure shots of waterfalls, thanks but no thanks. I know some people like to see water looking like cotton or milk, but I can’t stand it.
L
LRK
Feb 19, 2004
Ramon: That tomato shot did it for me a few weeks ago. That’s when I decided I was ready for a new camera.
C
Cindy
Feb 19, 2004
You need to remember that a lot of what makes a shot good or bad is a combination of the camera and the lens used.

…..and the shooter 🙂
L
LRK
Feb 19, 2004
Yes, I’m seeing this Cindy… the lens is just as important as the camera.
L
LRK
Feb 19, 2004
The shooter? Really? 🙂
C
Cindy
Feb 19, 2004
The shooter? Really?

Uh huh
L
LRK
Feb 19, 2004
I’m hooked on that Web site. Take a look at this one: <http://www.pbase.com/image/15973777>

I hope others are enjoying this thread as much as I am.
JV
John_Vitollo
Feb 19, 2004
Over at Rob Galbraith DPI Forums a member has examined D70 images and it’s no contest – Canon wins:

<http://tinyurl.com/37qpv>
JV
John_Vitollo
Feb 19, 2004
<http://www.pbase.com/image/15973777>

No fair…that’s shot with a Hassy!
C
Cindy
Feb 19, 2004
it’s no contest

Nope. And further, the 300 and the D10 produce the same image quality.
C
colorfulbird
Feb 19, 2004
I too am really enjoying this thread. But it is so painful…I have to wait 2-3 weeks to get my new camera and in the meantime have to make do with my old bomber. I was trying not to look TOO much at new cameras online, but Linda had to get this started! 🙂
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Feb 19, 2004
I just want to clear up some of the terminology for Linda (aka LRK) first of all the round thing is the lens!

I hope that helps! 8)
AW
Allen_Wicks
Feb 19, 2004
Do NOT believe the "it’s no contest" BS from some unknown individual in a chat room. Wait until you get multiple real reviews by competent reviewers of production versions; anything else is nonsense. And even then, touch it, work the camera. The small details one person finds offensive work great for someone else.

A small technical difference in image quality often is, in real world usage, way overshadowed by an ergonomic difference that lets that one individual photog "get the shot." If you don’t "get the shot," 97 megapixels and perfect color are MEANINGLESS. Otherwise one brand would own the space, which definitely is not the case, despite some of the comments on this thread.

Note too that prototype preproduction cameras normally test less well than production versions. Preproduction reviews are of interest regarding features and technology, but for image quality evaluation only cameras well into the production cycle are reviewable in any meaningful way. And of course the lenses used in testing are hugely relevant: is it X brand’s cheapest lens, or its best?

P.S. "Get the shot" refers to the fact that almost every photo environment is time based one way or another. Light changes, models sweat and change expression, subjects move, etc. Even totally static studio product photography requires time based production. The camera/lens/strobe that works best in *your* hands to facilitate releasing the shutter with good composition, proper exposure and minimal camera movement at the correct instant is the one to have.
AK
ashley_karyl
Feb 19, 2004
Linda, I really wouldn’t worry too much about which camera you get in the short term. It is an absolute certainty that both Nikon and Canon will come out with newer better cameras and it will be sooner rather than later in the current climate. The problem with procrastinating forever is that you will end up always waiting for a better camera just like I find myself doing with the computer as I continue to crawl along with my old G4.

At this stage, I would say its of greater importance to look at which system you feel happiest about investing in with a view to what it will do for you over the next ten years and then buy a camera from that range because you will then end up buying another one in just a year or two at most.

Within 3 years I think any practical differences between the Nikon and Canon range will be down to personal taste just like before the digital revolution began. With digital technology the lenses are much more important than they were with film, so go for the best lenses you can afford and concentrate on developing a good technique. For the first few months of shooting digital I think my film experience almost held me back, because there are real differences in the way of working and you have to put away ideas of better or worse and just work at learning how to get the best out of the digital medium.

Another point is not to go too crazy over the megapixel issue. Just because a camera has more megapixels does not mean it will produce better quality images. Its all about getting a balance between the number of pixels and the size of the sensor. If you cram 8MP onto a small sensor you get noisy images, whereas some of the old leaf digital backs which were only 6MP backs, but had a large sensor were capable of some pretty amazing results. Basically you should look at the way the files print and not the size of the files.

I would also be a little sceptical about manufacturers sample images since you have no idea of what tricks may have been used to create a particular effect. Many years ago I struggled to understand why my Pentax ME Super just wouldn’t give me results like the images in the brochure. A couple of years later I discovered the shots had been taken with a Hasselblad. When I was a photo assistant, the photographer I worked for shot some Fuji film advertising campaigns with Kodak film. Fuji complained so he shot it on both Fuji and Kodak film. When Fuji were presented with the two samples they published the Kodak results as their own. Try to get some samples that you know are reliable!
L
LRK
Feb 19, 2004
I just got through pasting the past two days of this thread into a Word document, reading it over again while highlighting the main points. You all are so helpful!!!

Responses to some of the threads since I last posted:

No fair…that’s shot with a Hassy!

You’re right John. I saw that too after I posted. Oh well… 🙂

***

Colorfulbird:

I was trying not to look TOO much at new cameras online, but Linda had to get this started!

Whoops, sorry! 🙂

***

Wade:

I just want to clear up some of the terminology for Linda (aka LRK) first of all the round thing is the lens!

Wade: I knew you were going to say something but expected much worse. I’m actually relieved. :\

***

Ashley:

Another point is not to go too crazy over the megapixel issue. Just because a camera has more megapixels does not mean it will produce better quality images. Its all about getting a balance between the number of pixels and the size of the sensor. If you cram 8MP onto a small sensor you get noisy images, whereas some of the old leaf digital backs which were only 6MP backs, but had a large sensor were capable of some pretty amazing results. Basically you should look at the way the files print and not the size of the files.

This is good. Thank you!
L
LRK
Feb 19, 2004
Now if I can just get the Word document to save. Ugh! Word is my worst nightmare these days.

It says…

Word cannot complete operation because too many files are open.
B
Buko
Feb 19, 2004
gosh I’ve never started a thread that lasted more than 6 posts this is pretty cool.
L
LRK
Feb 19, 2004
Buko: You know I was going to say thanks for starting this thread… and it slipped my mind. I’ll say it now… Thanks!!! 🙂
KN
Ken_Nielsen
Feb 19, 2004
Buko, we’re getting the Kodak PCS 14/N over the Fuji. Reason: the Kodak is full frame and the fuji is not. True 35mm not magnified. No warping.
R
Ram
Feb 19, 2004
Ashley’s post is excellent.

In particular, keep this in mind:

Another point is not to go too crazy over the megapixel issue.
R
Ram
Feb 19, 2004
Ken,

Do try the Kodak 14/N before you buy it. This camera is a prime example of how megapixels do not necessarily equal megaquality.
L
LRK
Feb 19, 2004
Hey, I’ll buy a used Leaf for $1,000.00? Anyone selling one?

Joking of course. <g>
Z
Zeb
Feb 19, 2004
Not a Kodak 14n anymore, it’s called a Kodak DCS Pro SLR/n now, major changes, beats a 1Ds in some respects.
<http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/SLRN/SLRNA.HTM>
R
Ram
Feb 19, 2004
Thanks, Zeb. I’ll have to try that one. I played around with the 14N for two days and found it woefully wanting.
L
LRK
Feb 19, 2004
Ramon:

About "Another point is not to go too crazy over the megapixel issue." — I’ll try.

Still wouldn’t mind having 8mps at least.

The Canon might be winning over the Nikon… but the race isn’t over yet. 🙂
C
colorfulbird
Feb 19, 2004
B & H Photo <http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?> has very useful specs on their camera equipment. I too get annoyed with the flash sites the manufacturers seem to be fond of. I just want da facts!

My drool < http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=NavBar&amp ;A=getItemDetail&Q=&sku=266188&is=REG&si=spe c#goto_itemInfo>
C
Cindy
Feb 19, 2004
Linda, if you are rooting so hard for Nikon how could you ever be happy with a Canon?
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Feb 19, 2004
Linda!

What?

8)

Have a nice day!

They will probably have something for you this year in the way of a replacement for your camera.

I don’t know it they have it in the libraries but there is a book put out by Lieca called appropriate enough the Lieca Manual or at least I know it as the Lieca Manual.

If you can get a hold of the book it will explain the history of the 35mm camera and many things about photography that still hold true even in this digital age. You migt want to read it. You get it when you buy a Lieca or at least you use to.

I wish Lieca would consider making a serious entry in the professional digital market, but I guess like me they have serious reservations about the technology as well and only have a amateur model.

Oh yes Linda Lieca invented the 35mm camera and make incredibly sharp lenses or at least the use to. Canon and Nikon lenses don’t come close.

Let’s see what they come up with!
R
Ram
Feb 19, 2004
Allen,

[Post #123] Shop around – as B&H has grown they have lost their low pricing in many instances.

I just thoroughly researched the price of the Canon Digital Rebel, and no one among the reputable sellers has a materially better price than B&H. Really sleazy outfits like Gazma Inc. and RoyalCamera.com do post a price that is $100 less, but they will more than make up for the difference with outrageous shipping and handling charges, mandatory accessories and gray-market merchandise.
Z
Zeb
Feb 19, 2004
Wade, If you must have a LEitz CAmera:
<http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1056662699.html>
R
Ram
Feb 19, 2004
Wade,

I’m still amazed at the quality of pictures I squeeze out of my Leica IIc rangefinder camera, which by now is something like 64 years old. I use it about three times a year, just to keep it in good working condition.

The Leica Manual is a classic. I have several of the original German editions (as I’m much more comfortable with German than with English) and one in English, but I’m afraid Linda would just be overwhelmed by them. Actually, Kodak puts out some excellent basic books along these lines. I got their latest edition of "35mm photography" as a stocking stuffer for one of my daughters last Xmas and I was very impressed by its quality. All my three children are independent adults by now and so far they haven’t been bitten by the photography bug as badly as I have since I was about nine. My two-year old grandson may be doomed, though; his other (maternal) grandfather is a pro. Between both our genes, the kid is prime material to get addicted to our vice.
L
LRK
Feb 19, 2004
CB:

Canon EOS-1Ds, 11.1 Megapixel, Interchangeable Lens, Professional, SLR, Digital Camera

Yes, that looks sweet for sure. The price tag is another story.

***

Cindy:
You are so bad, lol! 🙂

***

Wade:

I’ll look for the book. I remember trying to learn from a book when I bought my Nikon. I gave up for different reasons. I’ll check the library first and then Barnes & Noble.

I also have a journalist friend works out of the country. When she returns again I might see if she will help me learn more about cameras in general. I allow her to use my scanner when she’s here so I don’t think she would mind helping me a little with some photography.

Thanks!
L
LRK
Feb 19, 2004
Ramon,

I might be overwhelmed. I need some interaction training about the camera itself.

As for photography in general I’ve read several books and gleaned a lot of helpful information. It’s the technical stuff that bogs me down.
C
colorfulbird
Feb 19, 2004
The price tag is another story.

It sure is. One needs to get very busy shooting if that is the choice!
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Feb 19, 2004
Another important tip to remember whether shooting digital or film if you don’t see anything in the view/range finder or the LCD screen chances are the lens cap is still on the lens!

Yeah, like that’s not happen to any of you! Hey what"s going on here!

LOL!
L
LRK
Feb 19, 2004
It’s happened to me once or twice. 😉
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Feb 19, 2004
The Lieca is very interesting but it does limit the use of the PC lens which I don’t think they make any more. They use to have a 24mm but with a focal length factor of 1.37 that makes the lens a 33mm which is not acceptable if the make it full frame or better
then they really have something.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Feb 20, 2004
Ramon-

My dis of B&H was as regards your observation (post #118) of a US$1600 price for a D70, which is far above market price. I always check them when I buy things, but internet pricing and buyer ratings have now given them lots of quality competition in the mail order selling space. I still only buy film from B&H, however, because film is such a fragile/perishable product and B&H has proven for decades that they add minimal deterioration to that self-destructing product.

———————————————————— –

Linda-

Fortunately I buy very little film now that quality SLR digicams exist. Note that for the cost of film & processing of the 7000 shots Cindy has taken since October a person could buy THREE great quality SLR digicams like the Nikon D70!

Also note that my Nikon D100, one of the early ones, cost me more than US$3000 for the body only from B&H and I was (and still am) THRILLED – because it promptly paid for itself in two months. And it brought me into a new level of learning about photography now that I had instant feedback to what happens as each variable changes in SLR photography; way cool! I had 30 years of Nikon film SLRs and 4 generations of Nikon Coolpix digicams (900, 950, 990, 5000) prior to owning the D100, but the digicam SLR was a major new learning tool.

That’s why I appear to be such an SLR digicam evangelist. I love to see learning facilitated, whether it is in myself or someone else. I actually got hooked on digicams with the first (awful) webcam I bought before under US$10000 digicams existed. For the first time any newbie could see, in real time, the huge color changes to the digital image that resulted from small lighting variations. I was hooked.
R
Ram
Feb 20, 2004
Allen:

My dis of B&H was as regards your observation (post #118) of a US$1600 price for a D70,

Fair enough; that was my mistake. The $1,600 price is what B&H quotes for a Nikon D70 with a 18-70MM DX Nikkor zoom lens and a 1GB flash card. B&H price for the D70 is indeed "under" &1,000.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Feb 20, 2004
Actually evaluating the fully equipped price makes sense. That lens & the GB card are very appropriate, but I would prefer one or better still two cheaper 512 MB CF cards if the package price would allow it. I use two 512 MB cards and it works just fine. One card can be uploading to the computer while you keep shooting with the other. Of course if someone can afford the fastest and largest capacity CF cards they could always buy multiple 4 GB cards…
AK
ashley_karyl
Feb 20, 2004
I always use the 512MB CF cards because that way you can fit the entire contents from a series of Raw files onto 1 CD without having to split the contents as you would with a 1 gig card. As soon as the files have been copied to the computer, I make a CD back up which can be done while I am shooting and then I feel safe to wipe the contents from the CF card so that it can be used again.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Feb 20, 2004
Smart!
L
LRK
Feb 20, 2004
Allen:

Your enthusiasm is contagious. I can hardly wait to take the next step. It’s nice to be surrounded by such positive and knowledgeable people. I’m taking it all in.

SLR digicam — Something I need to research more fully.

Thank you!
Linda
R
Ram
Feb 20, 2004
Linda,

Depending on what kind of a relationship you have with your favorite local camera store, you may be able to get them to lend or rent you different demo models to try one after the other before you buy. This will be a lot more fun and productive than researching stuff on the net and/or magazines and books.
B
Buko
Feb 20, 2004
You can fit 5 1Gig cards on a DVD
AW
Allen_Wicks
Feb 20, 2004
In case anyone is unfamiliar with the jargon, digicam is just jargon for any digital camera. SLR means Single Lens Reflex, basically like all those full size 35 mm cameras you have always seen. A modern SLR has [A] readily and fully interchangeable true lenses (not just screw on additions to some built-in standard lens) and [B] a through-the-lens viewfinder, meaning that you see exactly what the film or digital sensor sees.

The engineering to effect SLR functionality makes for heavier and larger sized cameras than almost all non-SLR cameras. However, they are much, much more technologically capable of "getting the shot" (see post #168). Many extremely useful technical features typically only exist in SLRs, partially because the size and weight of an SLR allows such features to be engineered in at reasonable cost.

The sellers of cameras have moved the high end of non-SLR cameras (often called "point-and-shoot") up to where pricewise and megapixel wise they overlap with SLRs. However, they are NOT similar. SLRs intrinsically are 3x as competent (if I can use that word to describe cameras) as point-and-shoot cameras. Note that I said more competent, I did not say better. A lighter, smaller Nikon Coolpix 5700 could well be "better" for some folks’ purposes than a full size Nikon D70 or Canon 10d.
R
Ram
Feb 20, 2004
SLR means Single Lens Reflex, basically like all those full size 35 mm cameras you have always seen.

Not quite all those full size 35 mm cameras you have always seen. There are plenty of full size 35mm rangefinder cameras.

For me the most important factor is interchangeable lenses, if for no other reason that I will go to my grave detesting zoom lenses.
C
Cindy
Feb 20, 2004
My main lens just took a dump….It takes about 5 weeks at Canon for a complete turn around… I’m sooooooooo depressed.
AK
ashley_karyl
Feb 20, 2004
"You can fit 5 1Gig cards on a DVD"

That’s true, but 5 gigs is far too much data to lose if you have a system crash or your hard disk dies. At least while I am on a shoot, I would prefer to cut that risk into smaller amounts and be backing up more often. Then at a later date the total data can be burned to a DVD and the CD’s can be trashed if you like. All of this is only relevant to work obviously and if your just out taking pictures for fun at the weekend I guess you can do as you like.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Feb 21, 2004
Ramon-

Modern Nikon/Canon zoom lenses allow optimizing compositon and image data, and can produce very good image quality. The 18-70 mm Nikon digicam wide angle to telephoto lens you referenced in post #194, for instance, is ideal for the new owner of an SLR digicam.

Fixed focus lenses today are best for fairly specialized usage, meaning those times when you have time to be changing lenses and/or you have the luxury of knowing what the precise shot will be well ahead of time (e.g. a landscape). And of course when one can afford the luxury of multiple lenses.

Wide angle 20 mm and 60 mm macro lenses are my favorites, but 24-85 zoom is what lives on the camera and gets most of the work. Of course since I am mostly shooting digitally now, 24-85 is 36-127.
R
Ram
Feb 21, 2004
Allen,

I’ve heard and read that many times. No one will ever convince me, though. I insist, I will go to my grave detesting zoom lenses.
B
Buko
Feb 21, 2004
I love zoom lenses
T
Todie
Feb 21, 2004
Angenieux
R
Ram
Feb 21, 2004
Just to elaborate a little, I got my early start with box view cameras and TLRs, those with the upside down image in the viewfinder. That taught me about patience, about making every shot count and about visualizing composition ahead of time. The add-on turret viewfinder slipped into the accessory shoe of the Leica and the Contax was also a fantastic teacher.

Sure, I carry a bunch of gear around, but then I adhere to the school that believes that if it’s not within 300 feet of the car, it ain’t photogenic :), so I don’t mind. Yes, I’ve accumulated a bunch of lenses over the decades. Lenses are the least burdensome of my gear; my favorite tripod is a Manfrotto/Bogen 3258 that weighs well over 17 lbs without a head. What difference can a couple of extra lenses possibly make?

I suppose if I was photographing team sports I would most likely appreciate having a zoom lens, but I’ve only been inside a baseball stadium once (when I went to see the inside of the Houston Astrodome in the 1960’s), once inside a basketball arena (to see a rodeo at the ARCO arena, actually) and never in a football stadium. Last time I was in a soccer stadium was in the 1950’s. Sports photography means zilch to me.

I’ll take a prime (fixed-focus) lens any day.
R
Ram
Feb 21, 2004
Todie,

Angenieux

Hey, those zooms weigh even more than my tripod.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Feb 21, 2004
Regarding

"…box view cameras and TLRs, those with the upside down image in the viewfinder. That taught me about patience, about making every shot count…"

Digicam photography is exactly the opposite! Instead of patience, it is shoot ’em all, try not to miss any opportunity: shoot review reshoot review reshoot, all in real time. No need to make every shot count, instead just experiment, think outside the box. But most of all, shoot!

Obviously it is still necessary to be there for the best light, the best expression, etc., but now you shoot while you wait, tweaking exposure, composition, etc. And shooting many (free!) shots as the light/expression changes, then picking the best later.

P.S. In wildlife photography patience is still most essential. I do a lot of underwater photography (film, because u/w housings are camera-specific and quite expensive) and I believe that even using a digicam patience would be of the utmost importance.

P.P.S. To me the really cool thing about upside-down images is how quickly our brains adapt.
R
Ram
Feb 21, 2004
those zooms weigh even more than my tripod

By which I mean that I could carry a whole slew of fixed-focal-length lenses instead and still come out ahead
R
Ram
Feb 21, 2004
Allen,

Digicam photography is … try not to miss any opportunity: shoot review reshoot review reshoot, all in real time.

Oooh, I’m way too old to change my ways that radically.
T
Todie
Feb 21, 2004
Ramón, Relax! Change doesn’t have to be painful.
I don’t care much about the work of the Impressionists, but love Turner’s paintings. Compare that to the work of the photo-realists and you’ll get the idea : )
R
Ram
Feb 21, 2004
Todie,

I’m very relaxed; that I’m very good at. 😀

Change doesn’t have to be painful

Change doesn’t have to happen either.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Feb 21, 2004
Really? Sounds boring…
R
Ram
Feb 21, 2004
Allen,

Change for the sake of change itself is not thrilling, necessary or wise. A great deal of excitement, pleasure and enrichment can be had by growing instead of changing.

I’ve been doing a lot of experimenting with digital with a variety of very good and even excellent digital cameras lately, actually since the Nikon D100 first came out. Most likely, I will continue to do so; but even working digitally I don’t see myself mindlessly shooting picture after picture just because it’s possible.

As I said, I’m to old to change the way I do things because, right or wrong, this is what I perceive to be the best of what I’ve distilled after over half a century of making photographs just the way I want them. I have no particular talent, nor do I make a living off photography (I’d certainly starve to death), but at least I get away from the things I don’t care for, like oversaturated colors (Velvia look), running water that looks like milk or cotton candy (long exposure shots of waterfalls and brooks), orange-skinned people (film or digital), radish-skinned people (very common with a lot of uncorrected digital images).
L
LRK
Feb 21, 2004
Allen:

I was gone most of the day yesterday and last night. When I finally began reading this thread I couldn’t post a response… So during the few short minutes I have this morning I’ll try to squeeze in a quick review of what I’m learning.

First of all thank you for explaining more fully about the SLR, Single Lens Reflex. I understand better now that they are 1) Like a 35mm, 2) Have fully interchangeable lens, & 3) You see what you get while shooting. They are also usually bigger and heavier because of the mechanical engineering but worth it because of the trade off. Oh, I think you also said they are faster.

I also appreciated your comments on the zoom lens and the what you prefer to use most of the time. I’ll go back and review your specs again when I have more time.

Thanks for all this education (everyone)… and in a way that even I can understand. 🙂

Linda
JV
John_Vitollo
Feb 21, 2004
Remember this link? I posted this awhile ago – the photographer used the Canon 10D:

< http://www.vothphoto.com/recent/africa2003/africa2003_main.h tm>

As you can see Linda I trying to push you towards the Canon EOS Digital Rebel (a.k.a. 300D)
T
Todie
Feb 21, 2004
Ramón, I tend to agree with most photo principles you seem to have, but lately I’m having fun with digital color infrared.
R
Ram
Feb 21, 2004
Todie,

Maybe we got sidetracked here. I am actively experimenting with digital. My rants, if you can call them such, were against zoom lenses (on film or digital cameras) in general, and against the notion that I would change the way I’ve been approaching my shots for over half a century and turn into a mindless one-after-the-other, delete, delete, shoot, shoot type of digital photographer.
L
LRK
Feb 21, 2004
John: Oh yes, do I ever remember that link and love those shots. I’m so glad you posted it again as I had misplaced it. It’s enough to make me want to go to Africa.
R
Ram
Feb 21, 2004
Oh, and I believe infrared is fine for military surveillance, aerial photography over haze covered terrain, and other scientific endeavors.
L
LRK
Feb 21, 2004
I can’t help but think there will be a replacement for the Canon EOS-10D pretty soon. The review <http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos10d/> by Phil Askey was back in March 2003.
JV
John_Vitollo
Feb 21, 2004
Oh…I thought you were on a budget and didn’t want to spend more than $1000. That’s why I recommended the 300D. Actually I’m waiting for the 10D’s replacement – I’m guessing an 8 meg camera. I’m still shooting film mostly and can borrow a Fuji S2 when needed – so I can wait a little longer. I just got an email from Calumet that mentioned they are getting in a truck load of 10D cameras and order soon as the cameras go quickly. My guess is that it either means Canon is still producing them or this is the last of the 10Ds!
L
LRK
Feb 21, 2004
After interacting with you all I realize how important this purchase is to me. I want something I will be happy with for the next 3-5 years at least. It would be nice to learn enough about photography to take it to another level. I might be willing to spend a little more. 🙂

It will be interesting to see what comes next.
R
Ram
Feb 21, 2004
I might be willing to spend a little more.

You’re doomed, Linda. It usually starts this way.
L
LRK
Feb 21, 2004
I never really cared about photography until I bought my Nikon 990. If and when I buy a new digicam I might have to make friends with others who enjoy photography, lest I drive my current friends crazy. Also it would be nice to spend the summer out doors taking pictures instead of sitting behind a monitor so much. What I’d really like to do is plan all day outings with my bicycle and camera.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Feb 22, 2004
Ramon-

My recommendation to "shoot review reshoot review reshoot, all in real time" does not entail "mindless" as you state. Rather I meant to suggest learning as you go, but in seconds instead of days like with film.

Whether your image is focused on to film or on to a digital sensor, you make all the same decisions, same settings, same thought processes to set up a shot. The digicam difference is that you can take more pix and get immediate feedback. There is nothing intrinsically good about a photo workflow that requires days of time to elapse before you see the results of your pic setup choices; quite the contrary.

And "…excitement, pleasure and enrichment can be had by growing instead of changing" does not make sense to me, because IMO growth is change, by definition. I suspect we are thinking similarly, separated only by semantics (an expertise of yours, I believe 🙂 ).
R
Ram
Feb 22, 2004
Allen,

It so happens that I also believe we’re on the same page. The misunderstanding may stem from two misinterpretations:
1) your construing my remarks to be anti digital, when in truth and in fact I was only expressing a very strong dislike for zoom lenses in general, regardless of whether they are used on film or digital cameras.

In the past I had commented in a reply to a post of yours in another thread that I also see a huge advantage in the immediate feedback you get when shooting digitally.

2) my misconstruing Todie’s remark to the effect that "change doesn’t have to be painful" as suggesting that I would find it easy to abandon my way of making pictures in favor of a shoot-delete-shoot-delete technique. When I wrote that "Change doesn’t have to happen either" and you retorted by saying that sounds boring we were clearly talking past each other.

I continue to experiment with digital cameras, including a project to shoot a series of digital images in all-manual mode by using a dozen or so prime lenses on the Pentax *ist-D, which can accommodate all my Universal (M-42) lenses albeit by foregoing all metering and auto focusing capabilities. Strictly for the fun of it.
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Feb 22, 2004
A client of mine just bought a new SONY and he really likes it a great deal. It has a 8 megapixel capture and he can outfit it I think he said with a 1 or 2 GB storage capacity.

Linda keep in mind that photography is expensive and time consuming. There is no way out of it.
R
Ram
Feb 22, 2004
keep in mind that photography is expensive and time consuming. There is no way out of it.

Very true. It’s also highly addictive.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Feb 22, 2004
Even though they are a major digicam manufacturer at the consumer level, Sony is not on my personal list of recommended brands of digital still camera. Nikon, Canon, Fuji, Olympus, and others are all IMO preferable.
T
Todie
Feb 22, 2004
Sony makes the backs for many prosumer bodies and the research on ERGB is valuable.

I have the 707 and will not buy another point-and-shoot for a long time.
L
LRK
Feb 22, 2004
Wade:

That’s true, but not nearly as expensive as it used to be… or still is for you. 🙂

Unless something happens to change my mind, it’s just a matter of time now… I can hardly wait.

Last year I turned most of my income over to my husband to help us get caught up. This year I get to use some of it for some of the things I would like to invest in.
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Feb 22, 2004
Allen I understand that the SONY uses a four color sensor and not a three color CCD and though it is not what one considers a camera company the company that makes the lenses is considered tops, that is Carl Ziess.

Just keep in mind that Canon and Nikon and Fuji and Olympus make fine lenses they are not Carl Ziess quality.

Hey lots of people including myself would never use a Minolta as they are expressly designed for the amateur market but they use Lietz technology to create and manufacturer their lenses and they are sharper than the pro lenses of Canon and Nikon and Fuji and Olympus like it or not.

This is what I find wrong with these discussions, it is filled with prejudices and reaction rather than real objective discussions and it makes it difficult for someone like Linda to make a rational decision as to what to buy.

You should know Linda that although I am not recommending you buy a SONY and you like the Nikon brand, I do myself, that SONY is the leader in Digital Capture Technology although it is in the field of Video and Digital Cinema. SONY is the company developing the cameras, unless this has changed, for George Lucas.

So if I were you I would not go by what is written in these threads by anyone, including myself, as to what you should buy you should read enter other forums talk to several camera dealers and of course the most important factor of all is to hold the model in your hand to see how it feels.

If it does not feel right to you then all this discussion it won’t mean a thing.
L
LRK
Feb 22, 2004
Thanks Wade. I will do everything I can (within reason & budget) to make a wise purchase. I have already learned a lot from this thread and I’m very grateful for all who’ve taken the time to share their knowledge.
L
LRK
Feb 22, 2004

P.S. to Wade: I meant to say also that I will be sure to check out Sony. Glad to know about their lenses.

Thanks!
R
Ram
Feb 22, 2004
Zeiss. 🙂
AW
Allen_Wicks
Feb 23, 2004
Wade I do not agree (surprise) with the statement "Canon and Nikon and Fuji and Olympus make fine lenses they are not Carl Ziess [sic] quality." This is 2004, and Zeiss and other firms each produce lenses in a range of quality. To suggest that all Zeiss glass is better than all Nikon glass does not make sense.

Even if Zeiss is the world’s premier lens maker, a relatively inexpensive consumer grade Sony point-and-shoot with Zeiss’s cheapest lens on it is still just that: an inexpensive point-and-shoot. Many of the lenses Nikon (or Canon, or whomever) makes costs more than the whole Sony camera, with lens!

Also in my experience directing a buyer to "talk to several camera dealers" rather than peruse threads like this one is bad advice. Camera dealers are very often motivated to "make a sale" rather than necessarily to provide the best advice. If they make more markup on brand z or get better support from the brand z rep they are likely to lead you there rather than to brand x. Professionals on this forum, yourself included, are giving freely of their experience with no financial motive. Linda can choose the commentary that makes sense.
L
LRK
Feb 23, 2004
I love this thread!
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Feb 23, 2004
Allan are you sure of that you could I guess say that about Minolta but their lenses are consistent the same for Lietz. I haven’t used a SONY still camera myself but as I understand it the optics will rival anything market professional or otherwise.

This is from amateur and professionals alike who have compared. Now you may in fact be correct in this case as I have not tried either. But if I go by the way you have come to conclusions about things and they way these individuals have told me of their experience and also from some results that I have seen I would have to go with their opinions and observations before I could trust what you say!

For instance your observation above is based on an assumptions that could or could not have meaning. I based what I wrote on what I know about the company and it’s history and my experience using their lenses with professional and amateur cameras.

They have been supplying lenses for both professional and amateur cameras since day one and have always been consistent I have not heard anything different to date have you?
T
Todie
Feb 23, 2004
Zeiss designed the lens for Sonny, didn’t build it, so it’s not Zeiss glass (but it’s not bad).
R
Ram
Feb 23, 2004
Leitz. 🙂
L
LRK
Feb 23, 2004
For my needs and price range, I still lean toward the Canon or the Nikon. I think half the fun is planning and getting excited about my next purchase.
C
Cindy
Feb 23, 2004
I think Linda has enough to choose from.
H
halscheyer
Feb 23, 2004
Linda, way back in the early part of this thread I told you I had a Sony F828 and i love it. Now both Nikon and Canon have come out with 8 MP Prosumer cameras and i will bet both of them are fantastic. The F828 is my 6th digicam. I prefer the prosumer models over the SLRs because they are light and handy and you do not need to buy or carry a lot of extra equipment and lenses. Ramon is right about zoom lenses, but they are not really all that bad, unless you are a pro and need to enlarge to poster sizes. I have been taking pictures since 1947; started with a TLR, went to SLR, but am enjoying my digicams immensely. With a good computer, a good printer, and PS you have control of the picture from start to finish and you will surprise yourself with some of the wondrous pix you will take and process to your and others satisfaction. All of these new good cameras are $1000 or less and with the prosumer models you do not have to buy extra lenses, just filters and an auxiliary flash unit, which you will need anyway.
L
LRK
Feb 23, 2004
Halscheyer,

I prefer the prosumer models over the SLRs because they are light and handy and you do not need to buy or carry a lot of extra equipment and lenses.

The light and handy part does appeal to me, especially since I like to take outings to pretty places on my bike.

Ramon is right about zoom lenses, but they are not really all that bad, unless you are a pro and need to enlarge to poster sizes.

Good point. One client’s wife has often mentioned to me that she would like to see me use my photos to create posters to sell through their Web site. This was a year ago though and not sure she still feels that way. If so it points me back to the SLR.

All of these new good cameras are $1000 or less and with the prosumer models you do not have to buy extra lenses, just filters and an auxiliary flash unit, which you will need anyway.

More good points.

Thank you!

Linda
L
LRK
Feb 23, 2004
BTW, I did research some Sony’s over the weekend and the model I was looking at did not get the highest ratings from all users. Many complained of a purple halo in the shadows as well as noise… if I remember right. Not sure where I found that review but I think this is the model I was looking at.

<http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydscf828/>
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Feb 23, 2004
Don’t do it Linda…DON"T… don’t go over to the darkside…film is the true art form of photography…don’t go to the Darkside…I beg you stay…well actually what do I care…go ahead buy another digital camera…the SLR might professional might be more fun!
L
LRK
Feb 23, 2004
LOL! Now it’s my turn Wade… A lot has changed in the past five years… you need to come out of your cave and smell the roses. 🙂

What do you think people? Will this be the year that Wade goes digital? 😉
Z
Zeb
Feb 23, 2004
I’ve just tried the Nikon D70 and was pretty good for the price. It handled better than the Kodak Pro SLR/n which is incidently priced much lower than the model it replaced.
There was a show deal with over £1000 ($1800) off the Canon 1Ds, (still £4450 ~ouch!) so I wonder if that is getting updated soon.
T
Todie
Feb 23, 2004
Wade should stay with film. Digital SLRs aren’t great for wide-angle shooting. (he’s developing at the lab I work for, and it’s fun to say "hi!" when I see him there: )

Linda, Most likely you’ll buy an SLR and a zoom lens : )
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Feb 23, 2004
If you want sharp pictures you need to be able to focus accurately.

You can’t do that on a preview screen — an SLR is essential for that reason above all others.

And, to my mind, interchangeable lenses lenses are vital if you really want to progress as a photographer.
L
LRK
Feb 23, 2004
Todie: You’re probably right… on both counts. 🙂
T
Todie
Feb 23, 2004
Manual focusing is easy on the Sony.
When in doubt, shoot a bit wide, at a lower f-stop 🙂
C
Cindy
Feb 23, 2004
And, to my mind, interchangeable lenses lenses are vital if you really want to progress as a photographer.

I will vouch for that. I just bought a macro lens and have learned soooo much. It is a whole other world.
R
Ram
Feb 23, 2004
When in doubt, shoot a bit wide, at a lower f-stop

Hope Linda doesn’t misconstrue that. Smaller aperture (and the resulting greater depth of field) is not to be confused with a lower f-stop number, which would mean a larger aperture and less depth of field.

As for wide, Todie probably means at a shorter focal length (zoom out rather than in if using a zoom lens).
L
LRK
Feb 23, 2004
Some of this makes sense, some of it will make more sense when I have a new SLR camera in my hands.

Not sure how much I could practice in manual mode with my Nikon 990… but I loaned it out so I can’t check it right now.
T
Todie
Feb 23, 2004
Thanks, Ramón!
L
LRK
Feb 23, 2004
Whoops. I meant to say… Thanks Todie… and Ramon! 🙂
AW
Allen_Wicks
Feb 23, 2004
Linda-

The Nikon CP 990 is a fine point and shoot and macro digicam for up to 5×7 prints. The 990’s major limitations are speed of operation, maximum image size and the tiny little built-in lens. An SLR digicam as the next step is particularly logical for you, because you can continue to use the 990 for those times when an SLR is too large to carry. I use the CP5000 for that purpose.
R
Ram
Feb 23, 2004
You’re welcome, Todie and Linda.

Linda, you’re brave. I can’t imagine loaning out one of my cameras. I’m pretty easy with most other stuff, but I’d just die of anxiety if I lent out any camera equipment, horses or my children and grandson.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Feb 23, 2004
The 990 is a tough little digicam, plus today its value is pretty low. I used mine all the time with kids learning camera skills, minimally supervised. Then sold it to a friend for her (very responsible) kids, and it is still working fine.
B
Buko
Feb 23, 2004
I’d loan out my children before I’d loan out my camera.

But then I don’t have any children.
L
LRK
Feb 23, 2004
Ramon: You’re right, it was brave of me. This is the first time I’ve loaned it to anyone other than my own husband… even then I asked him to treat it with TLC. I was supposed to get it back the day after I loaned it… but it obviously didn’t happen. I guess I’m a little more daring since I have my sights on a new one. I bought one of the first 990s to come out and paid around $850 I think. Things have changed a lot since then.
L
LRK
Feb 23, 2004
Allen: It is a durable little camera. I think that’s one reason why I was orignally leaning toward Nikon again.

Buko: You’re funny! 🙂
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Feb 23, 2004
I can see it now…Linda, affectionately nickname "The Lens" pedaling along on her supped up Lindamobile fully stocked and equipped with digital cameras of all sizes and descriptions memory sticks with mind boggling capacities motorized tripods with
micro adjustments and remote capabilities built-in dashboard console controls for satellite transmission sun angle calculation color depth controls remote firing and focus satellite dish and of course a min ipod.

Oh my goodness we’re creating a monster!

8)
L
LRK
Feb 23, 2004
LOL… That’s funny Wade… and sounds a little like me… I probably would if I could! 🙂

You should see my new bike. I’ve already installed a flexible mirror, compass, bell, and speedometer on the handlebars. Attached to the seat is a pouch that holds my Nikon 990, but I guess I’ll need something bigger for the new one.
R
Ram
Feb 23, 2004
The most important piece of photographic equipment is about 60 to 75mm behind the viewfinder.
T
Todie
Feb 23, 2004
…. and the best lens is a… tripod : )
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Feb 23, 2004
Hey we should start a contest to design the Lindamobile and a of course a digitally equip helmet.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Feb 23, 2004
What Todie said.
R
Ram
Feb 23, 2004
and the best lens is a… tripod

Well, I do think of the tripod as the most valuable piece of external hardware (external to the eye and the brain, that is), but photography with just a pinhole camera would be pretty confining, especially at my age.
L
LRK
Feb 23, 2004
The most important piece of equipment will be interesting to follow.

Next question: How do you attach a tripod to a bicycle?

🙂

May I go OT for a minute and show off my new bike? Like this only mine is silver and black.

< http://www.fisherbikes.com/bikes/large_image.asp?series=city path&bike=Zebrano>
R
Ram
Feb 23, 2004
Linda,

I’m afraid I won’t be able to be of any assistance there. I’ve never owned or ridden a bicycle in my entire life.
L
LRK
Feb 23, 2004
Really Ramon? That’s okay. You’ve been busy taking beautiful pictures.

I must say, I have truly enjoyed the Nikon 990 and it was worth the money ten times over, even though I used it primarily as a point and shoot. I hope to make a great deal of progress with my next setup though.
JM
Jelle_Mellema
Feb 23, 2004
The best way to learn photography is to buy an old twin lens Rolleiflex or Yashica and a separate light meter. You will understand the craft better and most important you will learn to see.
The flimsy view finders in most digital cameras are not sufficient to make a good composition, they are designed for snap shots!
C
Cindy
Feb 23, 2004
They make camera back packs to carry all of your equipment including a tripod <http://www.tamrac.com/welcome.htm>
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Feb 23, 2004
Interesting that you should mention the Yashica.

I bought one for each of our kids as "Starters" when they were small. And they both produced some excellent shots straight off the bat.

The only problem was that our son, in particular, felt that he should fire off film at the same rate that I did.
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Feb 23, 2004
The new Lindamobile is perfectly designed for tripod transportation. That’s what the cross-bar is for of course.
I am just a little surprised that the necessary Velcro straps were omitted from the package when you bought the bike.
R
Ram
Feb 23, 2004
I still run a couple of rolls of film through my Yashicamat TLR once a month. Sometimes more. Great for dog shows and conformation horse shows.
B
Buko
Feb 23, 2004
I had a Yashicamat TLR once it lasted about 3 months before it got stolen. I got my F2 after that and it never left my side.
R
Ram
Feb 23, 2004
You gave up on the Yashicamat because it got stolen, Buko?
B
Buko
Feb 23, 2004
I always wanted a Nikon and they just came out with the F2. I had to have one. Built in light meter and all. I bought the Yashica used, the F2 was new. my first new camera. and none of the parallax problems.
JM
Jelle_Mellema
Feb 24, 2004
My first was a Yashica, brilliant pictures, my dad gave it to me. The MInolta XM<-u><-a> was the first professional camera I bought, you could use that one as a hammer to bang a nail in the wall. < http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/mino ltaxk/htmls/index1.htm>
JM
Jelle_Mellema
Feb 24, 2004
Wanted to make a nice link, don’t get it to work…….@:^(
B
Buko
Feb 24, 2004
you could use that one as a hammer to bang a nail in the wall.

that brings back memories.

I wasn’t pounding nails in walls but while in the mosh pit trying to photograph I have used my F3 and F4 to clobber idoits in the back of the head. The Fuji S2 just doesn’t have the bulk of the Nikon F series. To clobber Idiots with the S2 you need to have a pointy tripod mount attached to the camera.
R
Ram
Feb 24, 2004
To clobber Idiots with the S2 you need to have a pointy tripod mount attached to the camera.

My favorite tripod doesn’t need any pointyness. It weighs over 17lbs by itself, without a head. On the other hand they wouldn’t let me in to the mosh pit wit it, I suppose.
D
Dan-o
Feb 24, 2004
Fun thread.

My plan is to get a D70 and shoot with it for a while until such time as I can save up for an SLR/n (or the vapor-camera known as D2X, should it ever materialize).

Regarding the "MP isn’t everything" comments Ramon was making, I agree in principle, but the SLR/n is really a different breed of camera from other DSLRs. For starters it’s full frame, for another no interpolation is required to reach 13.5 MP images, and most importantly, this camera is really designed around the RAW workflow. It’s not designed (like other DSLRs) to "massage" the images by default. So comparing SLR/n images "right out of the camera" to other DSLRs is sort of missing the point (unless you plan to enforce a "zero photoshop retouching" policy to your workflows.

You will have to make sure to run SLR/n shots through ACR to correct for moire (since it has no anti-alias filter like all the other DSLRs) and you may have to watch for noise on the 13MP shots but with a little bit of effort I don’t think it’s very difficult to produce images that definitely stand apart from most other DSLRs. From what I can see it is clearly a better camera than the 14/n. The Dynamic Range is superb….

🙂

Also, someone was talking about the Sony 828… I cannot speak first-hand but it has received quite a lot of negative commentary from users and testers regarding color casts and the like. The Nikon 8700 also uses the 828 sensor if I am not mistaken. I might consider the 5700 if I were in the market for an all-in-one, especially if the prices might drop a bit. I seriously doubt any PAS zoom lens will have enough resolving power to make good on a true 8MP sensor anyway.
R
Ram
Feb 24, 2004
Most (probably all) digital SLRs can shoot in RAW. That was not invented by Kodak nor is it a Kodak exclusive.
T
Todie
Feb 24, 2004
The color scientists at Kodak can… beat-up the ones at Canon : )
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Feb 24, 2004
This just in from Calumet: The Camera for Linda

The Polaroid Holga

Breaking the Rules Has Never Been So Much Fun!

Holga 1205 Camera with Polaroid Back

Thanks to Polaroid’s back, you can now instantly enjoy the serendipity of…oh. hell to the chase…It is the Holga’s inherent "problems," its lack of sharp focus, lens distortion and light leaks that make it such a unique camera. …there are two aperture settings…One for full sun, f11, and another for over overcast cloudy situations. F8.…with built in flash.

And all for $109.00 shipping and tax not included.

Hurry up the offer is good through April 4, 2004.
D
Dan-o
Feb 24, 2004
Ramon:

All DSLRs can shoot in RAW, but what I’m saying is, the RAW output from an SLR/n is going to be of a higher quality in many cases than that from existing cameras (again, save the 1Ds Mk II maybe). This has both to do with the dynamic range and lack of anti-aliasing filtration on the sensor, and the fact that you do not have to "invent" color data in order to achieve very large print sizes.

Not saying the SLR/n is perfect or for everyone, just that until something unseats it, it appears to have taken the lead in the DLSR performance category (that’s not just "great specs" but "great output"). I agree MP for MP’s sake is kind of silly if you don’t have the other necessary performance components of a professional camera.
L
LRK
Feb 24, 2004
Cindy: Thanks for the link

Wade: You’re too much! 🙂

Work is picking up again so I will have to store up some of this info to study in my spare moments. I’m learning… and my thinking keeps changing. My latest mindset is to stick with the $1K range, or maybe a little more… but go with something expandable, learn as much as I can and see where it takes me. If it goes somewhere and I feel the need, I can then upgrade again.
R
Ram
Feb 24, 2004
Dan-o,

OK, I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt. The predecessor to Kodak’s slr/n, the 14n, was a dismal failure. I’ll have to see more of the Kodak slur/n before I decide.
C
colorfulbird
Feb 24, 2004
Ramon, can you elaborate? The Kodak 14n is a failure because of sales/quality, both?

I read a review of the 14n on Luminous Landscape last night and will look more closesly at the specs tonight. Just curious.

Still leaning towards the Canon 1Ds.
D
Dan-o
Feb 24, 2004
Ramon: yes, there were definitely some issues with the 14n’s sensor and subsequently its output quality in certain shooting conditions. Hence the upgrade program where you can send your 14n in, and for $1500, have the sensor and firmware replaced, effectively bringing you up to SLR/n standards. This is another thing Kodak has done right that other manufacturers are loathe to do… give people a true upgrade path without having to buy a new camera.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Feb 24, 2004
It is not IMO particularly appropriate to compare last generation high end digicams against newer versions unless you are actually considering purchase of the old version for some reason. Kodak was on the bleeding edge of technology with the 14n, and they no doubt learned a LOT developing that camera. Today’s cameras are what get purchased and those new today cameras are what buyers should specifically evaluate. Firms like Kodak, Nikon, and Canon get extra points for having "been there" in the development process.
B
Buko
Feb 24, 2004
This is another thing Kodak has done right that other manufacturers are loathe to do..

for the price of the 14n Kodak should have done it for free.
R
Ram
Feb 24, 2004
there were definitely some issues with the 14n’s sensor and subsequently its output quality in certain shooting conditions.

That’s the understatement of the week.

I was given free use of the 14n for a week. After three days it was replaced by a new specimen, which was just as bad. I would rate the image quality as either miserable or lousy; taking into account its price, I’d say it fell into the unconscionable category.
R
Ram
Feb 24, 2004
Allen,

Just as a criminal gets punished for the first offense he committed and not for his prior exemplary conduct, a camera doesn’t get evaluated because of its manufacturer’s pioneering role in bringing it to market. The Kodak 14n, in my estimation, was an unmitigated piece of garbage because of its performance and because of its price/value ratio. It wasn’t that long ago that it came out either, at a time when there were already some pretty decent digital cameras out there.

When a company, even a former giant in the history of photography, makes a blunder like this, it is inevitable that its subsequent products in the same line are going to be viewed with a healthy and large dose of skepticism and subjected to greater scrutiny.

As I said, I’ll give it the benefit of the doubt for the time being, but I’m not about to waste my time with the new model until I hear a loot of nice things being said about it by people whose judgment I can trust implicitly.
R
Ram
Feb 24, 2004
Dan-o,

Don’t get me started on "upgrades". The sensor fix, as Buko points out, should be absolutely free, maybe with a free flash card thrown in as a way of apology and compensation for the inconvenience. I’m fortunate to have a good relationship with a retail photographic equipment store that rents or lends me cameras for brief periods of time. I would have been mighty upset if I had paid good money for the Kodak 14n. There’s no doubt in my mind that under the doctrine of implied merchantability I would have been entitled to a full refund if I had bought it.
H
halscheyer
Feb 24, 2004
Have had my Sony F828 since Jan 2nd and have taken approx 300 pix with it. No problems with chromatic aberrations (purple fringe) even though some of my sunrise shots had flares in them. I take quite a few bird pix, so it is important to have enough resolution so that the original can be cropped – a golden crowned sparrow is not very big in the original, no matter how close you got! A tripod or a monopod is ESSENTIAL and if i take my camera I take my tripod or monopod and i take my camera almost everywhere I go. That is why I have the prosumer model digicam – it is a lot less cumbersome than the SLR. The main thing is: HAVE FUN!!!!
T
Todie
Feb 24, 2004
I take it that Ramón doesn’t use Illustrator 7 : )
(mistakes are sometimes forgotten too)
R
Ram
Feb 24, 2004
I take it that Ramón doesn’t use Illustrator 7

As a matter of fact, I never did. I went from AI 5 to AI 8 and don’t use it that much either.
D
Dan-o
Feb 24, 2004
I won’t start the "sensor for free" argument. Suffice it to say, Kodak’s marketing department made some pretty stupid comments when the 14n was released, but in general they should in no way feel compelled to give away brand new sensors (and the labor required to install them) for free. If you want to start a class action law suit claiming "false advertising", then those people upset should do that… they might even win (much stranger things have happend). But to say "it should be free" is ridiculous IMO.

Like people saying every new version of OS X "should be free". Because Kodak and Apple are charities I guess.

😀

$1500 is NOT cheap (I don’t know what the unit cost of the sensors and labor is, but that’s what they should charge IMO). Either way it’s MUCH better than spending $5000 on a new SLR/n, right? At least the option is there. Nikon, Canon, Fuji and Sigma give no options.

😉
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Feb 24, 2004
Wait…STOP THE PRESSES!…Holga goes digital…can it be true?

Stay tuned!
R
Ram
Feb 25, 2004
Dan-o,

The point is that the Kodak 14n is bad enough to warrant a free replacement or full refund, not just an "upgrade".
D
Dan-o
Feb 25, 2004
I don’t think that’s true strictly speaking. There are plenty of people who shoot the 14n and who will continue to do so based on my readings. It’s not the most popular camera out there, but it’s not "totally defective" by any means either. It’s just not very flexible / has a limited range of shooting scenarios where it performs well.
R
Ram
Feb 25, 2004
Dan-o,

I don’t think that’s true strictly speaking. There are plenty of people who shoot the 14n and who will continue to do so based on my readings.

My opinion is based on my own experience only.
D
Dan-o
Feb 25, 2004
Switching gears I will be interested to see the quality of the S3’s 12 MP images, despite some pessimistic commentary in this thread earlier on. Their means of interpolating these images is clearly not the same as with other cameras and in this case, even less similar because now you have two 6MP data streams of real color and luminosity data to work with… I will be curious to see how large non-macro / non-close-ups can be printed with this puppy.

Professional quality prints I’m talking, not "pretty nice". Something that could hang on an art store wall or museum wall. 20×24 maybe?
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Feb 25, 2004
You see this is an excellent thread with real honest opinions from real world users of the equipment such Ashley, Buko, Ramón, Dan-0, Allen (all though he doesn’t know his elbow from his elbow) Wicks, Todie, Linda, Cindy and Jelle execleent discussion.

This is probably one of the most informative and helpful threads on this subject that has ever appeared on the Photoshop forum.

Without all of that corruption and ego nonsense.

Good to know your experiences and your feelings, oh my even Allen’s!
D
Dan-o
Feb 25, 2004
Maybe they should rename this the "New Gear Thread: Warm and Fuzzy Edition".

😀
R
Ram
Feb 25, 2004
Maybe they should rename this the "New Gear Thread: Warm and Fuzzy Edition"

Well, the fuzzy part goes with the 14n.

Couldn’t resist, sorry. 😀
B
Buko
Feb 25, 2004
I’ve made some blowups with the S2 that just blow my mind and when you enlage the image using the photoshops Camera RAW the results are just astounding.
The fact that S3 holds the highlight detail is really fantastic. When I shoot Rock’n Roll, if the exposure is not perfect, with all those bright lights the first thing to go is the highlights. So I’m really excited about this. I spoke to my camera store guy the other day about the S3 and it won’t be in the stores till at least August, maybe longer.
P
PShock
Feb 25, 2004
Want a Canon 1Ds for cheap(er)? Just received a Calumet flyer with a pretty good offer. Buy a Phase One H20 back and get an EOS 1Ds for FREE! ‘Course, the H20 is $19,990 but selling it for $17 to $18k shouldn’t be much of a problem.

Or, maybe Linda would want to use the H20 and sell the Canon? 😉

-phil
D
Dan-o
Feb 25, 2004
Wow. That IS kind of tempting, and I’m a Nikon junky. Just the same, I won’t do it.

🙂
L
LRK
Feb 25, 2004
Whoa Phil! There must be a deal to be made somewhere. 🙂
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Feb 25, 2004
According to the flyer that is a $6,000 savings. Either both are being discontinued or they are not selling enough of them.

Or both.

That is what I like about this thread here are professional happy with their technology but still see room for a lot of improvement that threads in the past only saw deliverance.

Finally glad to see such an exchange of good ideas. Hope you guys keep everyone informed of the good and the bad so they can make intelligent decisions.
L
LRK
Feb 26, 2004
I’ve been busy with several small jobs. Now I need to remember where I was and what it was I was leaning towards. Still wondering what’s around the corner with Canon. Nikon is still a consideration but Canon seems to be tipping the scales a little more for me. I guess if there was anything new we’d see it here first…

<http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/>

Right?
Z
Zeb
Feb 26, 2004
The main index page has the latest news, but the forums have the very latest news and rumors.
L
LRK
Feb 26, 2004
Thanks Zeb. I’ll bookmark the forums next.
C
Cindy
Feb 26, 2004
If you are undecided about the SLR cameras here is an active thread regarding the Canon Rebel and the new PowerShot Pro1.
< http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1031&me ssage=7783057>

dpreview.com is a great place to hang out for decision making and help with your photos. Something for everyone including Mac Tools
<http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1017> Pro Digital Talk
<http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1014>

Another good place is <http://www.fredmiranda.com/>
L
LRK
Feb 26, 2004
Thanks Cindy!
D
Dan-o
Feb 26, 2004
Linda,

Just to warn you: DPReview Forums are not the greatest place in the world for getting "good information" on new cameras IMO.

For every good "upcoming product tip", there are literally dozens of bad ones (that means blatantly inaccurate / misleading). Most people in there are spec-junkies. They just sit around and argue about what they want / what should be available vs. what is available, while having absolutely no knowledge of operations at companies like Nikon or Canon.

In general, the forums there are a lot more "noise" than "signal". Far worse than this forum on its worst day… mostly because they are unmoderated (for all intents and purposes).

The DP Review News Page and Reviews though, are very useful. Bookmark those instead.
Z
Zeb
Feb 26, 2004
It’s all part of the fun, guessing what might be true and what isn’t. It’s even better when you add your own ‘rumors’.

If you wait for the actual product review you’ll probably be able to buy it anyway, NDA’s and all that.
L
LRK
Feb 26, 2004
Dan: I appreciate the heads up. I have been keeping up with DP Review Reviews since Buko started this thread. I’ll keep watching and waiting.

Thanks!
L
LRK
Feb 26, 2004
One thing that helped me by reading those forums is I realized that if I wait until they actually start selling the units and users actually start using them, not only will there be more accurate reports, but the price is expected to drop to around $750 or so.
AK
ashley_karyl
Feb 26, 2004
One word of caution Linda. The reviews are fine (though not scientific) however, the forums at DPR can be horribly addictive for their shear weirdness at times. I’d liken it to a bad car accident where you know you shouldn’t stare, but somehow you can’t help it.

The problem is that for every one useful bit of information there are 50 totally absurd statements made by self proclaimed experts with absolute certainty and yet the highlight of their photographic experience was once successfully photographing a focussed image of their cat in the garden. While you are still learning, so much conflicting information may be counterproductive. To be fair, the Fuji forum is quite civilised and the Nikon ones are not bad, but if you find yourself reading the 10D threads you may soon lose your faith in humanity just reading all the insults being thrown at each other plus the banality of so many posts.

Although its slower, the Rob Galbraith forum tends to be a little more serious and attract more knowledgeable people who could help you more.
L
LRK
Feb 26, 2004
Good to know. Thanks Ashley!
T
Todie
Feb 27, 2004
Although its slower, the Rob Galbraith forum tends to be a little more serious and attract more knowledgeable people who could help you more.

…. except for Rob himself, who is quite irresponsible.
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Feb 27, 2004
You’re in for it now Linda I can read the headlines now:

LINDA GOES TO AFRICA AND SHOOTS ENDANGERED SPECIES!

Oh, the shame of it all!
L
LRK
Feb 27, 2004
LOL! That’s clever Wade. Very good! 🙂
D
Dan-o
Feb 27, 2004
"One word of caution Linda. The reviews are fine (though not scientific) however, the forums at DPR can be horribly addictive for their shear weirdness at times. I’d liken it to a bad car accident where you know you shouldn’t stare, but somehow you can’t help it."

LOL! Best Description of DR Review Forums I have *ever* heard.

😀
C
Cindy
Feb 27, 2004
They on the other hand *can* be helpful. You have to know how to separate it and not take the idiots too seriously. And don’t get addicted! They have a saying "take what you can use and leave the rest".

Same can be said for any forum. The bickering around here is just on a different level but it is still bickering…or, it can be helpful. I’ve seen it get pretty silly.

Post a picture there and you will get hundreds of viewers. Out of that you might get some pretty decent feedback. It has helped me with exposure issues, lens issues etc. Questions I would be reluctant to post here.
AK
ashley_karyl
Feb 27, 2004
The 10D forum is seriously bad and the 1Ds forum is getting even worse because its the same people but with more money. There are threads from people asking if they should buy a spare 10D or a pistol? Then there are those sad individuals who just feel compelled to post anything no matter how ridiculous. One guy was recently banned for continually trashing Canon and he had posted an average of 167 messages per week totalling almost 30,000 in the end.

From what I saw the 300D forum wasn’t quite so bad, but I’d suggest that you’ll actually get more general knowledge out of the Fuji forum. Very few web forums are actually useful once you get to a certain level but this one always seems to attract a good number of skilled Photoshop users who are willing to help out.
Z
Zeb
Feb 27, 2004
I wonder if there should be a limit to the number of postings here per week in these forums? Did you go to Focus Ashley?, there were some good bargains this year.
AK
ashley_karyl
Feb 27, 2004
Wasn’t focus the PMA one in Las Vegas? I am in the UK, but I never seem to go to any of these events. A friend who just went to a show held in Birmingham (UK) said the 1Ds was on sale with a £1000 discount.
Z
Zeb
Feb 27, 2004
PMA was in Las Vegas, Focus on Imaging was in Brum, that’s the one I meant and yes Jessops had some 1Ds’s for £4450 inc VAT. Makes me wonder if a replacement is coming.
There was also an Adobe demo changing a yellow car white, I’ve seen that before somewhere, anybody know a link?
AK
ashley_karyl
Feb 27, 2004
I am pretty sure that Canon either has the replacement for the 1Ds ready or 90% there and is just waiting for Nikon to announce an update to the 1DX. One thing that amazes me is the way Canon can just drop £1000 in price on their cameras at the drop of a hat and that’s why I never believe those sob stories about how they aren’t making any money on digital cameras because of the expensive sensors.

A few months back I spoke to somebody pretty high up at Canon in Europe and he wouldn’t give me any details about future development but he seemed absolutely certain that no other manufacturer had the technology available to compete with Canon at the higher end with DSLR cameras today. I had been expecting Fuji to come out with something with more MP at a low price and Nikon to announce a 1Ds beating camera at PMA, but neither happened and I think that Canon knew this all along. That’s why the prices are still relatively high.
Z
Zeb
Feb 27, 2004
The Kodak SLR replacement for the 14 is a £1k cheaper anyway. (£3k not £4k).
AK
ashley_karyl
Feb 27, 2004
The 14n has to be cheap to gain interest because the old one had such a bad reputation. The new one seems to have solved the noise issues but skin tones still look rubbery and of course the body is not that great. With those issues placed on one side though many people would see great merit in being able to spend a couple of thousand pounds less on the 14n compared to the 1Ds and gain in resolution at the same time. The new 14n finally looks like the camera it always should have been.

I think we will soon see £4500 become the new standard price on the 1Ds. Nikon will eventually come in with something good at a similar or lower price and Canon will launch the new all conquering 1Ds replacement but as usual market demand will decide the final price. I have no reliable predictions to make there. I am certain though that we will continue to pay much more in the UK than in the States.
D
Dan-o
Feb 27, 2004
ashley: The 1Ds’ replacement is already announced right… the 1D Mk II? Or are they calling the 1Ds a "different line" than the 1D? I don’t follow Canon that closely but if this is the case, they need to get some new people in their marketing department. Someone forgot what product differentiation and product branding are, apparently. Not that Nikon or Kodak’s labels are "ultra-intuitive"….

🙂

<http://web.canon.jp/Imaging/eos1dm2/html/menu.html>
AK
ashley_karyl
Feb 27, 2004
They are two very different machines, but I agree this whole use of the "D" everywhere does make life confusing especially with Nikon doing the same trick.

The old 1D was the original professional bodied digital camera. It was fast but produced small files that were only of use to a limited number of photographers. Then they produced the 1Ds which has much higher resolution and can be seriously considered as an alternative to medium format film for many applications.

The new 1D II takes everything that was best about the old 1D such as its speed and improves it while adding to the MP resolution considerably, so that many more people would find it acceptable to be used instead of film. Depending on your wallet and quality needs will determine which is the best camera for you. In the future, I think we may see one professional camera that is capable of doing it all.
D
Dan-o
Feb 27, 2004
I still don’t see much differentiation. What will be different about the 1D Mk II and the 1Ds Mk II? Different target markets? If so, which? Seems to me that the 1Ds Mk II is certainly competition for just about any good DSLR out there… whether you need MP, FPS or whatever. These cameras are starting to be like midsize cars from the same manufacturer. Slightly different look, same internals for the most part, but marketed as "something different".
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Feb 27, 2004
Ashley it is the crazy import tax and the VAT and both are craziness to no end.

The idea that the import tax is protecting the UK’s photographic industry is ridiculous.

It is only hurting the British professionals and consumers.

Remember everyone if you travel to the UK bring your film with you it is like 250% of the cost that it is here.

All tax! The processing isn’t any cheaper and as Ashley has pointed out that digital makes real sense in the UK you almost have no choice.

Even if you have to tell the client to design shorter buildings!
AK
ashley_karyl
Feb 27, 2004
A lot of photographers feel that the new 1D II is the first ever no compromises camera and I think it may well steal some market share from the 1Ds because it costs a lot less and does many things better, while its 8MP will be deemed good enough for many purposes. This is probably a sign that the 1Ds is on the way out fairly soon and that whatever replaces it will have to be something very special indeed.

Wade is right about the VAT, but there is no import duty in the UK on digital cameras. I know this because I seriously considered getting a camera shipped over from B&H. What we do have are exceptionally greedy dealers who are used to marking up prices to an excessively high degree and even after reclaiming the VAT as a business, our cameras are still typically around 40-50% more than in the US. At current exchange rates a 1Ds is over $10,000 at the cheapest places in the UK and no matter how much stronger the pound becomes which should in theory make our imports cheaper, the price never goes down.

As for the labs here, they’ve lived well for years and I think they were quite shocked at how enthusiastic pro photographers were to jump over to digital when they saw how big the savings could be. The price of scanning has come tumbling down but its not really changing the overall situation that much. BTW Wade a magazine for digital photographers in the UK is running a story on my work soon. Should I give them your number?
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Feb 27, 2004
Certainly. I would love to get a copy.

Well if what you say is so that is truly outrageous, I can get a sheet of film processed here for £1 at the current rate of exchange.

I think as I remember it was something like £3 per sheet but the exchange rate was more favorable to the us at that time.

I love to see the magazine.
AK
ashley_karyl
Feb 27, 2004
I just checked a few labs and the shocking thing was that some are no longer even processing E6. Metro are charging £3.35 + VAT for processing one sheet of 5×4. That’s about $7.50. If you look at some of their other prices that actually starts to look cheap.

I figured I could give that mag your number so you could express some opinions on digital photography 😎
L
LRK
Feb 27, 2004
<< you could express some opinions on digital photography >>

You taking to Wade? Oy! 🙂
AK
ashley_karyl
Feb 27, 2004
Linda here is an article you might enjoy about when to buy a digital camera

<http://luminous-landscape.com/essays/waiting.shtml>
L
LRK
Feb 27, 2004
Thank you Ashley. I’m enjoying the article. Helps bring a little more perspective. If the prices had dropped a little more on the Canon EOS-300D I might be interested now, but not enough so far for the trade off of seeing what’s next. Also it looks like I still would have to buy a lens right off the bat, since it doesn’t come with one.
R
Ram
Feb 27, 2004
Linda,

The Canon EOS-300D is available with a Canon lens for $999.95.
L
LRK
Feb 27, 2004
I guess I need to put all this dreaming out of my mind for another month or so. It’s hard. The temperature is rising. 🙂
L
LRK
Feb 27, 2004
Thank you Ramon. I guess I was looking in the wrong place… or misunderstood.

So do you think this is a really good price? Do you think it will come down?
R
Ram
Feb 27, 2004
LRK,

If I had a crystal ball I wouldn’t have my day job. 🙂

Canon seems to have the best deal now, that much is clear.
L
LRK
Feb 27, 2004
I’ve been reading up on the good stuff at the Canon site. Does the Canon EOS Rebel have the L lens? Is the EF lens the same or different? I’m sure this is a stupid question. Sorry.

<http://www.canoneos.com/digitalrebel/total/feature1.html>
R
Ram
Feb 27, 2004
Linda,

The Canon EOS-300D is sold without a lens (body only) or as a kit (body + lens + (sometimes) other goodies like flash cards, tripod, etc). Check every kit to see if it includes the lens you want. Some dealers (Ritz, for instance) will offer it with their own brand of lens (Quantaray in the case of Ritz). Stay away from the latter.
L
LRK
Feb 27, 2004
I appreciate that Ramon. So much to learn.
R
Ram
Feb 27, 2004
The EF-S lens in your link happens to be the one in the kit offered by B&H in the link I posted earlier.
Z
Zeb
Feb 27, 2004
Very soon you’ll get backache carrying all those extra lenses around.
R
Ram
Feb 27, 2004
Linda,

Zeb reminds me of a tip I’m glad to pass on to you: buy the heaviest tripod and as many lenses as your mate can carry. 🙂

[EDIT]–>

I should have typed –> buy the heaviest tripod and as many lenses as your mate is willing to carry. 🙂
L
LRK
Feb 27, 2004
LOL! Zeb is right. My mate stays at home with most of my outings… so it’s as many as I’m willing to carry. 🙂

I do have a couple of tripods that seem to be good enough so I’m okay there.
Z
Zeb
Feb 27, 2004
Under the new gear theme; quad G5’s?
<http://www.macdailynews.com/comments.php?id=P2240_0_1_0>
L
LRK
Feb 27, 2004
interesting…
D
Dan-o
Feb 28, 2004
Getting back to the camera talk…

🙂
L
LRK
Feb 28, 2004
I just got some very good advice here <http://www.adobeforums.com/cgi-bin/webx?14@@.2cd01a8e/84> from John Burnett… the man who shot that wonderful tomato <http://www.pbase.com/image/24687570>.

I think I need to stick with something simple but good for the price. If all goes well I will be ordering the Canon PowerShot Pro1 in a few weeks. 🙂
R
Ram
Feb 28, 2004
Do you realize that he shot the tomato with the Digital Rebel?
JV
John_Vitollo
Feb 28, 2004
PCMall/MacMall with NAPP discount:

Canon 300D w/lens: $947.82

w/o lens $850.78

Canon PowerShot Pro1: $915.47

Linda,

The 300D is more versatile and a camera that you can grow with. It’s really not that complicated. But the choice is yours.

John V.
L
LRK
Feb 28, 2004
Ramon: Yes, I did. Thanks!

Thanks John! I hear that, but then I hear how much money people put into lenses and accessories. As much as I would love to learn and grow and get really good, I am aware of my limitations. Still, I do plan to try them both out at a local store if possible.
SH
Steve Hix
Feb 28, 2004
In article , wrote:

I’ve been reading up on the good stuff at the Canon site. Does the Canon EOS Rebel have the L lens?

You mount any of Canon’s L-series lenses on the camera, but it doesn’t ship with one.

Is the EF lens the same or different?

Yes. (Heh.)

EF refers to the lens mount; all Canon’s current autofocus lenses are EF-mount. Before that, Canon’s best were FD-mount, manual focus, open-aperture metering, introduced in 1971.

Before that (late ’60s and before) were FL-mount, stop-down metering, introduced in 1964, preceded by R-mount, manual stop down lenses introduced in 1959.

L-series lenses first appeared on the FD mount, and they were and are Canon’s top lenses. An L-series lens may have aspheric, UD (ultra-low dispersion) glass, fluorite or SLD (super low dispersion) lens elements, or combinations of any or all of them.

It’s all magic (spelled optical physics); they’re good, and not cheap.

The easiest way to tell if a lens is an L, is a thin red ring on the body of the lens.

I’m sure this is a stupid question. Sorry.

Not stupid. Everyone starts somewhere. :}
JV
John_Vitollo
Feb 28, 2004
What else would you need to buy for the 300D? The camera is ready to go and it’s a real SLR with a real viewfinder for better focus.

I am aware of my limitations.

<in_the_most_kindest_way>It’s time to challenge yourself…maybe someday you will photograph and play in real snow!</in_the_most_kindest_way>
L
LRK
Feb 28, 2004
<in_the_most_kindest_way>It’s time to challenge yourself…maybe someday you will photograph and play in real snow!</in_the_most_kindest_way>

That is inspiring John. I mean it… really…
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Feb 28, 2004
Ashley, this her colonist has an opinion or two I would like to share with citizens of the Motherland.

I’ll even rent a Canon 1D with a PC lens and I will they can call the item, "Like A Virgin For The Very First Time…"
R
Ram
Feb 28, 2004
Linda,

In the long run, your biggest limitation could turn out to be your camera.
L
LRK
Feb 28, 2004
Very cool encouragement here! Thanks Ramon!
AW
Allen_Wicks
Feb 29, 2004
Ashley-

Your statement "The old [Canon] 1D was the original professional bodied digital camera" is false. The Nikon D1 (approx. late 1999) came out approx. two years ahead of the Canon 1D (approx. late 2001). And I seem to recall that Kodak had a digital SLR using a Nikon camera body before that.

———————————————————– Linda-

If you do prefer a compact non-SLR digicam, also test handle the US$150 cheaper 8 megapixel Nikon Coolpix 8700. See how each camera FEELS operating in YOUR hands. Take some shots, and pay particular attention to how easily you can frame a shot, focus, and achieve shutter release. Most but not all non-SLR digicams are either clumsy and/or *slow*; a very few are not. Such slowness/clumsiness can be excruciating in practice.

Note that a few non-SLR cameras [including the Pro 1 and the Coolpix 8700] have "swivel" capability. Such swivel capability is a huge benefit for creative photography: candids, low angle (e.g. ground level flowers from below), high angle (e.g. in crowds), etc. Swivel lens or LCD capability is very useful in any situation where lining up a direct shot is difficult or impossible.

[Whoops – I guess you already know about the joys of swivel lenses from using the CP 990! IMO the swivel LCDs are even better.]
L
LRK
Feb 29, 2004
Hi Allen,

Yes I do enjoy the swivel part of the 990. Good points again about the problem of slowness with non SLR cameras though. I remember having to guess when to push the button so I could catch a horse just as he was at the top of the jump. It was hit or miss for sure.

I guess I’m back where I was again… waiting for the opportunity to try out what comes available next month. I just hope that I can get plugged into a local group that has as much patience as you all. 🙂
AW
Allen_Wicks
Feb 29, 2004
Linda-

The best of the non-SLR digicams are quite fast now; much, much better than the 990. Test shoot ’em.
L
LRK
Feb 29, 2004
Sounds good… I will test them Allen. Thanks!
AK
ashley_karyl
Feb 29, 2004
"Your statement "The old [Canon] 1D was the original professional bodied digital camera" is false. The Nikon D1 (approx. late 1999) came out approx. two years ahead of the Canon 1D (approx. late 2001). And I seem to recall that Kodak had a digital SLR using a Nikon camera body before that."

Allen, I meant that the (Canon) 1D was the original digital bodied camera from within the Canon range . Sorry if that wasn’t clear but I was talking about the Canon range only in that particular message.
L
LRK
Mar 2, 2004
Grant Dixon in another forum sent me this link. I enjoy this kind of photography.

<http://www.freemanpatterson.com/>
KN
Ken_Nielsen
Mar 2, 2004
We went down and picked up the Kodak DCS Pro SLR/n just a few minutes ago. 14 MP, ISO 6-1600, 4536×3024-pixel 12-bit CMOS covers rull 24 x 36mm, exposure up to 60 seconds, F-mount lens compatible. It’s a beauty. Will need some time to get it set up and see how it does in our work flow.

That’s a great link LRK, Thanks.
L
LRK
Mar 3, 2004
Hey, that sounds like fun Ken. 14 Mega pixels? I wonder how that will do with noise. You must let us know how you like it. I’ll even post some pictures for you if you want to show off a little.
L
LRK
Mar 3, 2004
I found a nice collection of samples and helpful information about Ken’s Kodak DCS Pro SLR/n here < http://www.desktopdarkroom.com/products/digitalcameras/profe ssional/dcs_proslrn.html>.
D
Dan-o
Mar 3, 2004
Linda, those are Kodak’s samples… apparently some are having trouble reproducing that quality with shipping units but who knows.

Ken, congrats. Let us know how it goes. I would be interested to hear how it performs with fast zoom lenses like the 17-35 AFS or 28-70 AFS, since there are many conflicting reports on this. Also I’ve heard claims of bad noise at 400 ISO and above, but I don’t necessarily believe it. I wonder though, if Kodak is having manufacturing QA issues where some batches are producing good results and others frankly pretty bad ones.
L
LRK
Mar 3, 2004
Ken,

I just noticed there is a memory upgrade for your camera to download here. < http://www.kodak.com/global/en/service/professional/tib/tib7 060.jhtml?id=0.1.18.18.5.16.34.16&lc=en> Your’s may already have the upgrade but you can check just in case.
D
Dan-o
Mar 3, 2004
That’s actually the old firmware I think. Kodak is supposedly working on some CA problems with certain lenses among other things, so I think "the new version" of the SLR/n firmware is a ways off yet. Although Kodak is also writing new versions of Photodesk and the other software components too. Might be worth inquiring about / keeping you eye out for, Ken.
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Mar 3, 2004
You see when ever you want up to the minute info "Just Ask Linda" that’s what I always say!
L
LRK
Mar 3, 2004
Oy… why do I feel noivoice? 😉
L
LRK
Mar 4, 2004
Ken must be busy taking pictures.

Be sure to let us know how you like the new Kodak Pro SLR/n Ken. I also want to see a nice closeup of the puppy.
R
Ram
Apr 1, 2004
For pros, this will be more a curiosity than anything else, but it could signal a breakthrough for some enthusiasts: an entry-level digital SLR for under $300 including one lens.

<http://dp-now.com/archives/000691.html>

🙂
R
Ram
Apr 1, 2004
😉
T
Todie
Apr 2, 2004
Zenit …was founded in 1905 by the venerable German optical house Carl Zeiss-Jena.

I don’t know what the Germans think about it now.
R
Ram
Apr 2, 2004
Todie,

Guess you missed today’s date… 😉
L
LRK
Apr 2, 2004
John:

Just got through reading up on the D70 again, this time a little more thoroughly. On the one hand it sounds very nice, but on the other hand might be a little complex and confusing to set up… along with the view finder negatives. Lately I feel more dorky than usual when it comes to having to learn something too complex. I will probably keep waiting around for an easy to use, high quality, hopefully 8 mp camera… that will produce shots nice enough to use for my clients… but with a relatively small learning curve.

What do you think?
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Apr 2, 2004
Linda:

Photography offers Characteristic Curves but, unfortunately, no short learning ones.

:~(
T
Todie
Apr 2, 2004
Ramón, I’m glad you seem to be feeling better : )
L
LRK
Apr 2, 2004
Ann: Oy!
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Apr 2, 2004
:~)
L
LRK
Apr 2, 2004
An interesting article < http://www.creativepro.com/story/feature/21059.html?cprose=5 -13> with some tips for digital photographers making images look like film shots.

Be sure to download the PDF file link.
SG
Sylvain_Gingras
Apr 2, 2004
I got serious "goose bump" with the first stare at that girl in the window.
R
Ram
Apr 2, 2004
Yes, Todie, I am. Thanks. 😀
D
Dan-o
Apr 2, 2004
Anyone ever see The Ring?

Eeeeesh!
R
Ram
Apr 2, 2004
The Ring of the Niebelung? Sure, lots of times. Even in Bayreuth.

Obviously, I’m missing the reference here.
L
LRK
Apr 2, 2004
I too am glad to know you are doing better Ramon. Hope your health improves continually.
SG
Sylvain_Gingras
Apr 2, 2004
The girl at the window is from the link of Linda (post #736).
JV
John_Vitollo
Apr 2, 2004
Linda>Just got through reading up on the D70 again, this time a little more thoroughly. On the one hand it sounds very nice, but on the other hand might be a little complex and confusing to set up… along with the view finder negatives. Lately I feel more dorky than usual when it comes to having to learn something too complex. I will probably keep waiting around for an easy to use, high quality, hopefully 8 mp camera… that will produce shots nice enough to use for my clients… but with a relatively small learning curve.

What! I don’t understand…you are one smart cookie and once you figure it out it will be smooth sailing.

Also using a point and shoot or a 35mm digital you can make it as easy or as complex as you like.
D
Dan-o
Apr 2, 2004
The Ring was a horror movie that came out a couple years ago. The main "villain" was a little girl who, although she didn’t have the same general features as the girl pictured here, did have "the same look" with the piercing / haunted eyes, pale skin, standing behind the window, B&W, etc. Not a big horror movie fan but that one was the kind that creeps you out with the story (not gore). The picture reminded me of the movie, obviously.
R
Ram
Apr 2, 2004
Thanks, Dan-o. For all practical purposes, I stopped watching films with any regularity in the very early 1960s. Call me clueless.
L
LRK
Apr 2, 2004
John: I think I’ll keep you around. You are good for the moralle… Seriously. 🙂
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 2, 2004
Linda-

I strongly recommend that you don’t let any particular detail from any particular review drive you to inaction. Reviewers look to report as much detail as possible for a HUGE range of users. IMPORTANT: most users will find a very large portion of every review irrelevant in practice. Touch one, do some test shots yourself.

E.g. regarding "…might be a little complex and confusing to set up… along with the view finder negatives."

[1] You can pick such a camera up, set it to "P," push the shutter release and get great 10×12 or larger quality pix immediately. It is NOT initially substantially harder to use than your CP990. With a well designed (evolved a generation from the D100) camera like a D70 advanced features are something you grow into, not prerequsites for basic use.

[2] Like I said earlier, a pro photog comparison of a low priced digicam SLR’a viewfinder against Nikon’s best SLR viewfinders may mean nothing to you. When YOU look through the D70 viewfinder you are most likely to think "wow this is cool" rather than think "oh darn my US$4000 D2h viewfinder is better."
L
LRK
Apr 2, 2004
Thanks Allen. Yes, those articles are very wordy… and half of it goes right past me.

Looks like I just got more work to do tonight… but I’ll keep an eye out for more conversation on this topic.

I must say, I’m leaning toward the Canon more and more. The main reason being the images I’ve seen from the Rebel and other Canons seem to evoke something deeper inside of me than those from other cameras. After all it was a photo from the Canon Rebel that gave me this new fever. 🙂

Somehow the images are creamier and the colors more vibrant with the others I’ve seen.
L
LRK
Apr 2, 2004
Zeb:

That’s a tempting price. The Pro1 is the one without fully interchangeable lenses though… something I’m beginning to see the value of more and more.

However, the 8mp is tempting… but what’s the latest on noise with this one?
T
Todie
Apr 2, 2004
If you want an interactive manual,.. here : )
< http://www.dpreview.com/news/0403/04033102inovasonyebookv2.a sp>
L
LRK
Apr 2, 2004
Hi Todie… Nice tutorial… for Sony users.
T
Todie
Apr 2, 2004
: )
D
Dan-o
Apr 2, 2004
Ramon,

For the most part, I would consider the act of "not going to the movies" a wise thing these days. Each year, for every movie that is worth seeing twice [great acting, good cinematography, good storyline, etc.], there are a dozen that are horrible. Hollywood needs better QA methods.

🙂
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 2, 2004
Linda-

Regarding:

"I must say, I’m leaning toward the Canon more and more. The main reason being the images I’ve seen from the Rebel and other Canons seem to evoke something deeper inside of me than those from other cameras."

Does that mean that you have actually shot and printed some identically comparable pix on multiple cameras? Anything else is pretty meaningless.

From an earlier post:
———————
Learn features (e.g., in camera sharpening, etc.) before you test shoot so that you know to take test shots both with and without such features enabled. Otherwise you may be comparing one camera’s pic with [default] sharpening on against another camera’s pic with [default] sharpening off. The same applies to many other features like white balance, etc. Cameras being compared should have the same shot taken many different ways with identical lighting to allow righteous comparison.
L
LRK
Apr 2, 2004
Allen: No, I admit it’s not from pictures that I have taken or printed. It’s all from pictures I’ve seen on the monitor, mainly from people I know from the forums. The first picture was this one by John Burnett <http://www.pbase.com/image/24687570>. Actually I did download this image and printed it on my Phaser 790. It looked pretty good, even with plain old regular paper stock.

Now I do understand that John used a special lens for this shot, which is something I might have to consider as well.

I am also impressed with some of Cindy’s images taken with the Canon. Cindy also mentioned the creaminess of the Canon shots.

There have been several other images I’ve seen but don’t have time to find them right now.

By the way, please pardon my unprofessional demeanor when discussing photography… but the fact is, I am still taking baby steps with this stuff. Not sure when and where I will graduate to Kindergarten but I’m working on it. 🙂
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 2, 2004
Linda-

Just be aware that when you look at photos in that way you are *NOT* comparing the ability of individual cameras to facilitate the creation of the photos you like. You are simply liking someone’s work that was coincidentally shot on a particular camera.
T
Todie
Apr 2, 2004
Linda, One thing about Sony (I’m not just advocating for the company to annoy Allen:) is that they have a good initiative about color. It’s called RGBE (with E standing for "emerald green"). It’s a long shot still, but I see some good things in the future.
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Apr 2, 2004
As Allen is wisely pointing pout you are not going to achieve what John Burnett did in the image you posted as one that was done in a studio type environment as the lighting appears to be strobe lighting which would certainly take a bit of a curve to learn, And a season professional has developed techniques of optics and photography which is often independent of the equipment for achieving a certain results.

The best thing is to rent a camera or two that you think you would like or at the very least put one in your hands to see how it feels.

That particular image which is the high res image needs a lot to be desired though excellently captured.
L
LRK
Apr 2, 2004
Allen: That is true… but with my knowledge I’m not sure I could make the perfect decision at this point. I may be developing a different mentality about this purchase than at first. This purchase may indeed end up being just a stepping stone. If I go with a reasonably priced Canon ($1,000) and start with one or two good lenses, I can practice and learn to my heart’s content… then if there is reason to move up as new models come out, I can… then use my lenses for the next model.

Todie: That’s cool about the extra channel. I assume Photoshop would see this channel? … or at least there would be a plug-in for it?

Wade: Renting a camera would not be practical for someone like me, especially with my recent workload. Not much spare time and have yet to plug into some local support.
R
Ram
Apr 2, 2004
One thing about Sony … they have a good initiative about color. It’s called RGBE

Yeah, right. Unfortunately, as good as Sony ideas might be, and they sometimes are, they just as often fade. Think Betamax.
T
Todie
Apr 2, 2004
Ramón, Betamax served professionals for a looong time.
Purists (like you and Allen : ) wouldn’t have touched another format for about 20 years (methinks).
R
Ram
Apr 2, 2004
Todie,

You miss the point. Sony’s impact is perennially overrated.
R
Ram
Apr 2, 2004
And an awful lot of Sony products are garbage.
T
Todie
Apr 2, 2004
So,.. maybe I miss the bad points and you the good?!? : )

What do you think about the Artisan, and Sony’s contribution to the CD and DVD?

I know that they bought a license form the Bell lab and made a fortune bastardizing the Royal pocket radio : )
R
Ram
Apr 2, 2004
Todie,

I use the Artisan. I’ve acknowledged the excellence of Sony’s monitors and CCD sensors.

Sony’s contribution to the CD is an abominable example of marketing hype. I was working for Philips in The Netherlands at the time, the 1960’s and early 70’s (I started out my productive life as a chemist). Sony’s involvement came very late in the game, when the CD was practically finished and ripe. All Sony contributed other than financial encouragement was minor work on the software error correction, all of which was later superseded by more advanced development. In my eyes, anyone who tries to say otherwise is either a shameless liar or badly misinformed by the marketing hype from Japan. Don’t get me started on this, this subject almost makes me want to get rid of my Artisan.
B
Buko
Apr 2, 2004
Sony made those Digicams George Lucus used to shoot Episode two.

They were also used in the "once upon a time in Mexico" with Antonio Banderas & Jonny Depp
T
Todie
Apr 2, 2004
Buko, I thought that Lucas uses Panasonic.

Ramón, I know you’re right!
(that’s why I said "contribution" not "invention" and Philips could’ve declined the association)
R
Ram
Apr 3, 2004
Todie,

You’re absolutely right about one thing: I do hate Sony with a passion.
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Apr 3, 2004
Todie I think it is SONY that Lucas uses as I recall his deal was with Sony to develop the cameras. Do professionals use Panasonic?
T
Todie
Apr 3, 2004
Producer/director Lucas recounted, "We tested the camera in pre-production, and in a previous standard def show, and loved the look of it. HD allows us to keep costs under control and maintain high standards, and 24p only increases those options. And what we can get with the Panasonic Varicam camera is increased mobility and off-speed shooting."

< http://www.panasonic.com/PBDS/subcat/newsinfo/press_04/04_11 .html>

You tell me! : )
B
Buko
Apr 3, 2004
On the starwars DVD Lucas talks about Getting Sony to make a 24 frame camera just for the movie. hmmmm….
T
Todie
Apr 3, 2004
I don’t know what Lucas used for Starwars.
(It may have been a Sony)

…. but this is not your grandfather’s Panasonic : )
< http://www.urbanfox.tv/articles/cameras/c11ibc2001cameras.ht m#panasonic>
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Apr 3, 2004
That might have been a statement he made but I believe Buko is correct. and as that sight says the quality is according to what Panasonic says!

I have no doubt that it is s good camera but I still am under the impression that most professionals use SONY but I will take another look. Perhaps things have changed.
L
LRK
Apr 3, 2004
Here’s a LINK <http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/84559> passed on to me by Cindy with some pictures taken with the new Pro 1
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 3, 2004
They look very sharp, but I don’t like the look of that noise in the shadows at 200 ISO. Frankly its not that difficult to create sharp looking digital files with close ups, so I should look at some images done much further back to get a better indication of the real quality.
R
Ram
Apr 3, 2004
I agree with Ashley. I wouldn’t base any decision on those images. There are some awfully blown highlights on some of them, so it’s not entirely clear whether that’s operator error (lighting, exposure) or a camera problem.

By all means try the camera first yourself, Linda.
T
Todie
Apr 3, 2004
I think it was the Nikon Coolpix who started the avalanche of uncool pictures.
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 3, 2004
Wasn’t it just Nikon in general?
R
Ram
Apr 3, 2004
Ooh! 8)
T
Todie
Apr 3, 2004
Wasn’t it just Nikon in general?

Not an avalanche : )
L
LRK
Apr 3, 2004
Here’s another one I found by googling. It’s farther away. Mind you, these are probably not taken by professionals but I find them kind of nice. This one does have a little halo effect but may be caued by jpg.

<http://www.pbase.com/image/27430150>

<http://www.pbase.com/image/27430350>
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 3, 2004
The insects aren’t really visible in these pictures. I think you need a Canon 1Ds for the extra resolution.
R
Ram
Apr 3, 2004
a little halo effect but may be caued by jpg

And a liberal amount of USM.
R
Ram
Apr 3, 2004
Maybe even just the Sharpen filter.
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Apr 3, 2004
Well I have just bought another camera body ……… for FILM……

<< ….>>>>>> RUNNING VERY FAST & DUCKING >>>>>>>>

[It’s nice to have several of the same kind with different focal-length lenses mounted on them.]
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 3, 2004
A film camera? do they still make those?
R
Ram
Apr 3, 2004
Good for you, Ann!

Whenever I do something like that, I need to sneak it past my wife. She’d never notice one or two new camera bodies being added to the arsenal, but I wouldn’t have the nerve to announce it publicly until a few months have gone by.
L
LRK
Apr 3, 2004
That’s great Ann… but somehow I have a feeling that a digital is still somewhere on your horizon. 🙂
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Apr 3, 2004
I know the feeling, Ramón!

My Nikon scanner must have been lurking in the shadows besides my monitor for about six months before it was noticed.

"That? Oh it’s just a scanner. Had it for ages. Hadn’t you noticed it before?"

[I’m on the prowl for a certain new lens too but HE doesn’t know about that either!]
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 3, 2004
The use of irrelevant images for camera evaluation is not a professional approach.
L
LRK
Apr 3, 2004
Sorry… I didn’t mean to bugger up this thread. Maybe I need to plug into a less pro forum until I am a little farther along.
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Apr 3, 2004
Linda: You are not upsetting this thread in any way.

By sharing information and ideas, we all learn — and benefit each other.

Looking at other people’s images encourages experimentation and discovery. If you see an image that impresses you, try to see if you can do better — and test different equipment to see how it works and feels in your hands.

The images that you admire MAY owe their quality to the camera which was used to capture them — but it is much more likely that they result from the competence of the photographer who was driving it.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 3, 2004
Good point. Any image does show a minimum competence of which a given camera is capable. I did not mean to belittle, but rather to encourage folks to handle cameras and shoot their own shots. Just like cars, not every camera is right for every individual. It is mandatory to test drive and go beyond simply trying to interpret what everyone else says.
R
Ram
Apr 3, 2004
Linda,

I would like to simultaneously echo Ann’s and Allen’s sentiments here. You are by no means disturbing or upsetting anyone or anything, quite the contrary.

I believe that what Allen and I are trying to say is that one can’t use someone else’s pictures to base a decision over another camera.

To illustrate this, allow me to point you to a site with some astonishing images of celestial bodies taken with a Pentax *ist-D. If I someone were to look just at those images, without reading the text and without the benefit of perspective, they may very well conclude this is the best camera in the world, for sure.

However, how likely are you personally to spend hours taking pictures of the night sky? Sure, images like the one of the Andromeda Galaxy or the Flame Nebula/Horsehead Nebula will knock your socks off.

More importantly, once you read the text and realize the tremendous amount of postprocessing performed here in terms of putting together a composite of a dozen or so 90sec exposures, you’ll realize that the skills of the person doing the postprocessing of any images are of extreme significance. The grasshoppers didn’t need as much work, I’m sure, but I’m pretty certain the jpeg you saw on the web site is but a faint reflection of all the data that would have been contained in a RAW image.

By all means keep contributing here, please.

<http://www.deep-sky.co.uk/dslr/dslr.htm> [Scroll down to the pics.]
L
LRK
Apr 3, 2004
Ann, Allen and Ramon:

Thanks for the encouragement and reassurance that I’m okay here. 🙂

I don’t know whether to wish for more time at the risk of less work or continuing work at the risk of less time, but the way things are going my only research is through the Web… and that’s been pretty weak. At least by previewing the different photos people post, it keeps my interest peaked.
R
Ram
Apr 4, 2004
Linda,

Here’s a link you might enjoy. It contains a bunch of photographs taken by the same photographer with a variety of digital cameras, some of which you have been considering lately. Each series of images are presented separately, by camera, with some brief pros and cons the photographer found in each camera.

It’s still no substitute for handling the cameras yourself and making your own test shots, but at least there’s the consistency of having all photographs taken by the same photographer, so the level of skill remains constant.

<http://www.terrylane.net/>
L
LRK
Apr 4, 2004
Hi Ramon,

Thanks for the link. This kind of stuff keeps me pumped on photography. I have a strange learning style with some of this stuff. It seems I read and read and read… and feel like I’m not getting certain things… but persevere over time… then one day it’s like I wake up and bingo, I’ve got it… at least whatever part I’m trying to get. There’s always more of course. 🙂

Articles and examples and interaction all keep me moving toward my goals. I consider myself blessed to be able to interact with each one of you. Each person here seems to have something unique and significant to contribute, whether a seasoned professional or an enthusiastic hobbiest. Each one adds to this thead.

Buko: This thread just keeps getting better and better. You done good! 🙂
B
Buko
Apr 4, 2004
Just like cars, not every camera is right for every individual. It is mandatory to test drive and go beyond simply trying to interpret what everyone else says.

This is so true. and you probably wont find all the limitations and quirks of any camera until you’ve used it for a few months under many different circumstances.
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 4, 2004
And above all dealt with their tech support…
L
LRK
Apr 4, 2004
Ramon,

I’ve started going through the site you linked me to previously, <http://www.terrylane.net/> and I want to say thank you for leading me there. This is a wonderful place to get a simple breakdown of each camera and I’m enjoying the samples. I would kind of like to comment on some of them but don’t want to push this topic in the wrong direction. I wonder if another new thread would be better.
R
Ram
Apr 4, 2004
Glad you enjoyed the link, Linda. Drop Terry a line to ask him if he has further plans.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 5, 2004
Regarding:

" And above all dealt with their tech support… "

You mean camera manufacturers have tech support? Since when? I certainly have never found any decent camera tech support except for the occasional retailer with an in-house guru.

[Edit] Actually that is not true. A few years ago Nikon recalled their SB-103 underwater strobes (mine had hundreds of dives on it with no problems) and replaced them with the more powerful SB-105 at no charge. The process was very smooth.
B
Buko
Apr 5, 2004
I had to call tech support at Fuji in NY about the software that did not work. they were very helpful and told me when it would be released. so there is tech support for cameras at Fuji.
M
macmanx
Apr 5, 2004
Linda, I sympathize with you… I’m in almost the same boat you’re in.

Unlike you, however, I already know which brand I’m after… Canon. That way I can swap lenses with my 35mm.

Over the years I’ve owned about a dozen 35mm film cameras, and the 3 Canon’s I used were my favorite. My beloved (EOS 650) is still going strong after 20 years and still looks as good as it did the day I bought it. Not one single problem with it… the only costs associated with it were film and batteries. Also, by far the best camera I’ve owned in relation to battery consumption.

To be fair, I never used Nikons, so can’t comment on them. I’m sure that they’re just as good, otherwise Pro’s wouldn’t use or recommend them.

My nephew bought the D60 about two years ago, and I’m blown away by the images from that camera. I borrowed it on a couple of occasions to test it out and was really, really impressed. The pictures were simply gorgeous. Far better then I ever envisioned digital prints capable of achieving. I was hard-pressed to tell the difference from the printed shots of it then from commercial ones. And, that wasn’t even done on a high-end printer.

Right now, I’m debating whether to go with the EOS Rebel (300D) or the 10D. Either one would be a giant step up from my current Sony DCS S85. Although, I can’t really complain about the quality of the pics I’ve taken with the Sony over the last two years. It’s performed admirably—no real issues to date. Its just the fact that I sincerely miss the lens interchangeability I’ve come accustomed to over the years. Sure, its got a Zeiss 3X Zoom, but its nowhere near as nice as my workhorse 35-105 Canon zoom. Not even close! Once you experience the convenience of interchangeable lenses, believe me, you never want to be w/o that option ever again. The pluses far outweigh the minuses.

Ideally, a person should have both: a compact digital you can stick in your pocket or purse, and a DSLR for more serious work. Even if I spring for a DSLR, I’m planning to keep the compact around…the best of both worlds!

So, I’m still waiting around in the shadows like you… watching, deliberating, daydreaming, and waiting for prices to stabilize and come down more. And, prudently buying lottery tickets…one never knows when his/her ship might sail into port… 😉
R
Ram
Apr 5, 2004
Macman,

You’ll find the D10 surpasses the D60, and the 300D (digital Rebel) takes just as good pictures as the D10, just in a cheaper plastic body and some functions that were intentionally left out by Canon in order ti differentiate it (a bit) from the D10.

If you have Canon lenses, by all means stick to Canon.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 5, 2004
I believe Ramon means the Canon 10D. A friend bought one last week and I had a chance to use it a bit. It is a fine camera, IMO *much* better than the 300D. But then again the 300D is the cheapest SLR digicam made, so maybe we should expect it to feel like the cheapest SLR digicam made.
L
LRK
Apr 5, 2004
Hi Macman,

Glad you shared your experience and possible plans for your next move. Although I trust the quality of the Nikon and previously thought for sure I would buy another Nikon, now I’m pretty sure my next purchase will be a Canon… although I think I should at least try out a Nikon and personally compare it to the Canon first.

If I were forced to make a purchase tomorrow, it would probably be the 300D… but since I’m not in any hurry and actually don’t have that much spare time right now, I will wait a little longer… and just keep following the reviews and forums.

Not sure how everybody else feels… but while I’m waiting I am enjoying the ride. I find the anticipation and learning process enjoyable. When I take breaks from my time sheet I love to see what the pros, amateurs and enthusiasts are saying… and even finding more samples to look at… until I can get out and try the equipment myself.

I hope I have as much fun after I buy the camera as I am in anticipation for it. 🙂
L
LRK
Apr 5, 2004

[edit] Just found the answer to my question.
M
macmanx
Apr 5, 2004
I hope I have as much fun after I buy the camera as I am in anticipation for it.

Yes, Linda, you’d better catch up on all your work now, cause once you get that brand-spankin-new toy in your hands, NOBODY will be able to find you…:)

I can see the headlines already… Missing In Action — possibly roaming the hills in search of a Black Cat.
R
Ram
Apr 5, 2004
Allen,

I believe Ramon means the Canon 10D.

Yes, I got my designations backwards on both the 10D and the 60D, though I got the 300D right. Thanks for correcting me.

It gets a little confusing with all these "D" camera names, it takes a really outlandish name like "*ist-D" to remember it correctly. Maybe that’s why Pentax chose it and, in that case, it’s not as dumb as I first thought. ("CS" is not cool, though. :))
M
macmanx
Apr 5, 2004
You’ll find the D10 surpasses the D60, and the 300D (digital Rebel) takes just as good pictures as the D10, just in a cheaper plastic body and some functions that were intentionally left out by Canon in order to differentiate it (a bit) from the D10.

Ramon,

Yeah, that’s what I’ve gathered, so far. The only problem I encountered with the D60 is with the autofocus… it seemed a bit slow and lethargic in certain situations—unduly hunting around for the ultimate setting. Other then that, I found it to be a great camera. In fact, I found it very similar, in both feel and handling to my EOS 650. Striking resemblance.

The 10D (which replaces it) I’m told, resolved the focusing problem. From all the accounts I’ve read, its extremely fast in that regard.
L
LRK
Apr 5, 2004
MacMan: Re #811 – I hope so… BTW, you’re funny! 🙂
M
macmanx
Apr 5, 2004
That’s what my girlfriend once told me when I switched around some labels on her hair coloring.

Come to think of it, it may have been more like: What the @#%* happened to my h-hairrrrrrr….???
L
LRK
Apr 5, 2004
Now that’s unpardonable! You never mess with a woman’s hair color. 🙂
M
macmanx
Apr 5, 2004
Hey, I’d always heard rumors that Blondes have more fun.

How’s a poor guy to know otherwise unless he takes the initiative?… 🙂
L
LRK
Apr 5, 2004
Oi! 🙂
Z
Zeb
Apr 5, 2004
D70 review now at dpreview Linda, interesting.
L
LRK
Apr 5, 2004
Thanks Zeb. Got to finish a job tonight and then I’ll check it out. Looking foward to it.
BC
Bill_Craig
Apr 5, 2004
Hi,
Sorry if breaking in on this thread. 🙂
I recently bought a Canon 10d and while I love it I thought I’d share some things I encountered along the way.
One thing to keep in mind with the new Canon’s (specifically the 10d and Digital rebel) is that they aren’t compatable with some of the older Canon lenses. Also, some lenses (such as my Sigma 170-500) require you to send in for (in this case free – except for shipping) upgrade. If you aren’t invested in lenses and are going to be buying mostly new this may not be much of a concern. Also, compatable off brand flashes are hard to come by.. the Speedlites are kinda expensive considering I hardly use a flash. I’m used to picking up a cheap Sunpac or something, but not in this case.
That being said, I love the 10d.. we have a Nikon D100 and Canon 1DS at work and I take my 10d out more than either. The new Nikon (D70?) DOES look very nice though. Hmm… 🙂
C
Cindy
Apr 5, 2004
The dPreview review of the D70 leaves out the fact that there is no ISO 100 for the D70. They tested the D70 against the Rebel with the Rebel set at ISO 200. I consider this fact huge when evaluating the two. If you want the best that each camera can produce the Rebel should have been set up at ISO 100 to be fair.

As far as flashes go, the Sigma EF-500 DG Super works perfectly with the Canons and has FEC like the Canon 500EX flash. It can be had for $189 from B&H.

The Rebel and the 10D use identical sensors and produce identical picture quality. The Rebel has a few crippled features the D10 has but so far it hasnt been something I miss.
D
Dan-o
Apr 5, 2004
Good review overall, but I find that either Phil has inconsistent methods for testing noise or his conclusions don’t follow the actual samples he produces. I thought the noise from the D70 looked clearly more acceptable than the Rebel in a couple of instances, and at least as good as the D100 in every instance, yet he claims the three are about the same and actually charts the D70s as worse on the graph. Weird. Just goes to show even his reviews (the best on the web generally) are not without flaws.
CC
Chris_Cox
Apr 5, 2004
Also, take a look at the controls and menus on the D70 — I think they’re going a little TOO consumer on the design…
C
Cindy
Apr 5, 2004
yet he claims the three are about the same and actually charts the D70s as worse on the graph.

Again, had the Rebel been set at ISO 100 I am sure the differences in picture quality would have been even more drastic.
C
Cindy
Apr 5, 2004
Also, if you would like the see the moire the D70 produces, here is a good example: < http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1031&me ssage=8290402>
B
Buko
Apr 6, 2004
Bill Craig

Sorry if breaking in on this thread

Don’t be silly. information is what this thread is about.

Now get those lenses refitted for a Nikon mount. B)
M
macmanx
Apr 6, 2004
Cindy,

From your posts I surmise that you own, and/or use a Digital Rebel. Would you mind sharing your experiences (good/bad) with it so far?… Handling, Feel, Stability, Body Structure, etc.

I dunno; I’ve always been wary of second-class imitations… the timeless slogan of: you get what you pay for, keeps harping at me every time I feel the urge to make a move on the Rebel. However, in this case, I believe that I could make an exception. DSLR’s are still in infancy—new models are sprouting up like wildflowers every week, it seems. Still, how many snazzy features does a guy/gal really need to get a good, printable product? Ofttimes, less is conspicuously better. My EOS 650 has all the bells and whistles—which, while nice to know, also makes selecting certain functions unduly cumbersome. Heck, there are some that I seldom (if ever) even use.

As long as I have my selectable shutter/aperture/focus/ev settings, that’s really all I need. Twenty years ago I would never dream of buying a camera w/o a double exposure feature. I used it incessantly—Grads, Weddings, Family Port, etc. I loved experimenting, and it provided an outlet for my imagination. Also, impressed the heck out of all my friends/foes and associates. Nowadays, with Photoshop, that feature, IMO, is completely useless. Anything I accomplished with DE then, I can now do ten times faster and decidedly more accurately using PS.

Here in Canada, the Rebel retails for $1399.00—not exactly chick feed. The 10D is well over two grand—a serious investment. While I have spent well over that limit (Bronica ETRS) for a camera, I also did a lot more freelancing then, so getting my investment back was no problem. I don’t really do that much commercial shooting now, so a Pro oriented outfit isn’t that significant anymore.

Any thoughts along that line?
C
Cindy
Apr 6, 2004
Hi macmanx,

Basically my choices were between the Canon 10D, the Rebel and the Nikon D100. With the research I did I decided to go with the Canon line due to the CMOS sensor and the excellent photos it produces. Now the choice came down to the 10D and the Rebel.

Since this was my first digital camera and I was starting from scratch I decided since the 10D was a good $500 more that did not include a lens I thought I might be better off getting my start with the Rebel with kit lens and invest that $500 in another lens when I had a clue what I was doing. I haven’t been sorry. The only thing I have heard that worries me is shutter problems on a few cameras. As more people have these cameras over the long haul more info will be available about how long they last. I know people who take around 5000 photos per month. So far I have had 0 problems. It feels sturdy enough to me and the 10D is quite a bit heavier.

I am not a professional photographer but I have heard quite a few pros say they love this camera and many more of them have it as a back up camera. Sometimes I wish I bought the 10D but then think that I will probably just upgrade when Canons next camera comes out. I am completely hooked! Waiting until then to begin my experience was not an option so for now I have the Rebel and absolutely love it.

If I were starting today I would probably do the same thing. I would give the D70 a serious look but the lack of ISO 100 kills that for me since I almost always shoot with that ISO.

I don’t know how helpful I am since I have not owned one of these other products and my experience is limited to the past few months. Perhaps you could go to a camera store and handle all of these cameras. Take a flash card with you and take a few pictures.

Can’t you order online? You can pick up the kit for under $1000 from B&H or Canoga Camera.

If you can’t bring yourself to order the Rebel for fear of low quality I would wait until the next general 10D since that camera is probably on its way out. I do not expect a next generation Rebel for a while. The D70 does have features (bells and whistles) that Canon has to answer.
M
macmanx
Apr 6, 2004
Thanks, Cindy… I appreciate your feedback. Looks like you are happy and contented with your Rebel. Your personal experiences seem to reflect the ones that I’ve come across in various forums over the last few months. So far, I’ve yet to hear anything negative about the camera. Your reference to shutter problems is the first one I’ve heard. Where did you read about that? Might be worth checking out!

Can’t you order online? You can pick up the kit for under $1000 from B&H or Canoga Camera.

$1000.00 US… which, (with current exchange rates) equates to about $1400.00 Cnd. The price of the Rebel is pretty much the same everywhere, give or take a buck or two. It’s probably one of the hottest items out there right now, so I can’t really see that changing for a while unless Canon decides to up the ante with a newer model.

I’m gonna wait for a month or so—don’t rightly have any spare time right now anyway. Maybe I’ll order it from the Shopping Channel here and check it out. That’ll give me 30 days to evaluate and play around with it. If I’m not impressed, it’ll just go back…
D
Dan-o
Apr 6, 2004
Cindy,

I understand the Rebel has ISO 100 (which should produce even less noise than ISO 200 on either camera), but you kind of missed my point. I’m saying the DPR samples (for those ISO settings each camera has) don’t bear out the D70 as being more noisy, even though Phil implies otherwise and actually graphs the D70 as being more noisy across the whole spectrum of ISOs.

To my (hopefully still 20/20) eyes, the D70 samples actually look quite a bit *less* noisy at ISO 200 and 400 than the Rebel, and certainly no worse than the D100 at either setting. One thing Phil did note that I agree with is that the D70’s noise — where it appears — seems much more granular compared to the competition, which is more "splotchy" in certain color channels.

Anyway, not a knock on the Rebel — cameras are just tools — but more a bit of ding against Phil in terms of the consistency of his review approach. In this particular case, anyway.
C
Cindy
Apr 6, 2004
macmanx,

I think the shutter problem is mostly rumor. There were a few people who had to have the shutter replaced due to Err 99 around 5000 photos. Of coarse that is way too low to be doing that. Then I know those who has thousands of photos with no problems.

When you consider how many Rebels have been sold I would think if there were a real problem it would be all over the place. I am waiting to see if more of this comes in when the Rebel is close to a year in production but I truely think everything is probably ok.

I know it sure is easy to take lots of photos with a digital camera 🙂 I am slowing down now and thinking much more about composition and exposure than I did in the beginning.
C
Cindy
Apr 6, 2004
Dan-o,

I guess viewing those pictures is subjective. I have heard just the opposite. Maybe people see what they want to see. I’m not meaning specifically you but perhaps everyone does that to some extent.

I’m sure they are both good cameras.
L
LRK
Apr 6, 2004
Hi Zeb, Finally able to take a short breather. Checking out the recommended article now.
L
LRK
Apr 6, 2004
Up until the Outdoor Scene Comparison Page, I was getting very excited about the D70… with a bit of little concern about the RGB color tag mentioned earlier in the article. Then I saw the Outdoor Scene images and the Canon again seemed to win over the Nikon.

"Can’t match the EOS 300D’s silky smooth ISO 100 (low noise)" is what I think I keep seeing.

Then I read the…

Overall conclusion

Nikon have achieved three major improvements with the D70 (compared to the competition / the D100): (1) They have improved the performance of the camera, with its instant on availability, very fast shutter release, superb continuous shooting and image processing speed and smart use of its buffer. (2) They have maintained build quality while still delivering a smaller and lighter camera, the D70 doesn’t feel much less well built than the D100 but is lighter, it certainly feels much more like $1000 worth of camera than the EOS 300D could. (3) They have improved image sharpness and detail, while we could niggle about moiré the compromise between artifacts and sharpness is worth it, in many instances the D70 delivering more detail than our previous benchmark, the EOS 300D / EOS 10D CMOS sensor.

…. and I have no idea which way I will go. 🙂

Now I have to get back to work…
Z
Zeb
Apr 6, 2004
Can we do ‘polls’ on this forum, guessing which one Linda will eventually choose?
C
Cindy
Apr 6, 2004
I will bet she doesn’t get either one. Maybe the next generation…
T
Todie
Apr 6, 2004
…. as she should : )
D
Dan-o
Apr 6, 2004
Cindy,

Yep. Everyone does see what they want/read to some degree, however I’m referring not to actual photo samples but Phil’s "grey screen" noise tests. The one with side-by-side comparisons of a grey card (I think) that was shot by both cameras, one for each ISO. Then he splits them into three channels so you can see where the noise comes from….

🙂
C
Cindy
Apr 6, 2004
Dan-o,

Do you happen to have the specific link to that? I must have missed it.
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 6, 2004
Those reviews at Dpreview are fairly worthless in my opinion. He shoots images in totally different lighting conditions and then concludes that one camera is better than another. With the resolution charts he’ll shoot one chart with a camera using a prime macro lens & another camera with a cheap zoom and then state that one camera shows more detail when in fact its only really showing that the lens is better.
C
Cindy
Apr 6, 2004
…..ahhh, relief. Thanks ashley.
C
Cindy
Apr 6, 2004
Dan-o,

Actually, my whole point is this: the 10D and the Rebel are noise free at ISO 100. That should have been part of the test. The Rebel was tested at ISO 200. Who cares?
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 6, 2004
Regarding the comment about the Rebel 300D: "So far, I’ve yet to hear anything negative about the camera" you must not have read very many reviews, or touched one. No way any competent reviewer is going to rate that camera high in the "expected durability" category, unless they don’t evaluate that parameter, in which case IMO it is not a complete review. Of course, low on "expected durability" does not mean it is not an appropriate choice for some folks (those that baby an SLR, don’t use it a lot or hard).

Regarding ISO 100 being a big issue: NOT. These SLR digicams are NOT FILM. They do NOT perform like film. If noise is very low at 200 (which it is) there is little downside to not having ISO 100 available, except to slow down the camera in bright sun while maintaining wide aperture on fast lenses. Most photogs seldom need that, and when they do, inexpensive neutral density filters work very well. Far more important is how does the camera do with noise at higher ISO settings.

As I have stated before, I do not in 2004 recommend the Nikon D100 as a choice; it is older technology. The use of evolved modern technology is very important in digital cameras – just like computers (the D100 is now a G4 in a G5 world). Today in digital Nikon SLRs folks should be comparing to the D2h and the D70, and hopefully soon to a D2x.
C
Cindy
Apr 7, 2004
You don’t like Nikon do you?
R
Ram
Apr 7, 2004
I fully agree with Ashley re the relevance of the "test" and "conclusion" parts of the reviews at dpreview. The descriptions are a great help though.

Just by the sheer number of reviews posted, you need to take each one of them with a grain of salt. Think of them as nothing more than a good starting point, not as the final word.
L
LRK
Apr 7, 2004
What is it that makes the Canon produce images that seem to have an extra punch of color? Do you think the Canon beefs up it’s images with a shot of saturation? But then, it’s not just the intensity of the color, it’s the creamy dreamy feel of the color.
R
Ram
Apr 7, 2004
Linda,

It appears to be a combination of the quality of the sensor and the degree of manipulation (or lack thereof) in the camera. They seem to have found a very happy medium of sharpening and texture.
C
Cindy
Apr 7, 2004
Hi Ramon. Out of curiosity what camera are you using?
R
Ram
Apr 7, 2004
Cindy,

I’m shooting a bunch of cameras, about 70% film and 30% digital; everything from the trusty old rangefinder Leica and Contax through Nikons and others in various film formats.

Digitally, I’ve been using loaner Nikon D100’s and many others. The only digital one one I have bought out of my own pocket is the Pentax *ist-D, which uses the same sensor as the Nikon D100 but has other features I like much better (much brighter viewfinder, smaller but sturdier build with metal frame, no in camera sharpening unless you intentionally apply it, and other features that make it feel more like a film camera than a digital, such as more control through knobs and physical switches, no LCD for composing, etc) and allows me to use over two dozen prime lenses I’ve accumulated over the years, including an 1100mm telephoto lens (1650mm effective angle of view on the digital camera).

I also had a Canon 1D on loan, excellent images. The digital Rebel didn’t appeal because it just didn’t feel right, and the only previous Canon camera I have ever owned was a 35mm Rebel that was about the most unfortunate purchase I ever made.

I’ll probably buy the next generation Nikon because I do have some Nikon lenses.

For the time being I am really thrilled with the *ist-D. As soon as I’m able to get around a little bit more I’ll be taking it out again.
L
LRK
Apr 7, 2004
Thanks for the explanation Ramon. I want those kind of images. I think Cindy and Todie have it right. I need to wait for the next generation, if I can wait that long. Let’s hope it will be sooner than later.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 7, 2004
Regarding: "Digital cameras change so fast that I will shoot pictures till my Rebel breaks and buy the next generation camera."

That makes perfect sense if it is not for daily professional use.

Regarding "I need to wait for the next generation…"

That makes no sense at all, except of course as regards cash flow matters. 🙂

The current US$1000-7000 digital SLRs (and also the top end of the Canon and Nikon point-and-shoots) all are spectacular devices at their respective price points, including the Rebel 300D. You can shoot 10×12 magazine covers all day long with any of the digital SLR cameras. And, they are all hugely cost-effective when compared to shooting film. There is certainly no technical reason for anyone to postpone entering the learn-photography-quickly digicam world right now.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 7, 2004
Cindy-

I like many Nikons, many Canons, and some Fujis. By far my greatest experience is with Nikons, often used under the most rigorous conditions on the planet. My Pentax experience was 20 years ago, and the hardware (admittedly not Pentax’s very best at the time) did not stand up to my hard usage.

Ramon-

What do you know about coping with internal dust issues with the D100? Any tricks or other advice?
M
macmanx
Apr 7, 2004
Regarding the comment about the Rebel 300D: "So far, I’ve yet to hear anything negative about the camera" you must not have read very many reviews, or touched one.

You’re right… I’ve never touched one; nor have I been anywhere near one, yet. If I had, I’m sure my decision would certainly be less taxed then it is at this time. All I’m going on right now is word of mouth, and what I’ve seen on paper and monitors.

The negative comment was indirectly aimed at various user forums across the net where different members freely exchanged data about their Rebel purchases. I just came across another one this morning—the fellow is happier then a lark reciting its latest rendition of ‘The Tennessee Bird Walk’… 😉
R
Ram
Apr 7, 2004
Allen,

During the various times I used the D100, I never encountered any particular dust issues, though I read somewhere that may be a problem. I did switch lenses a number of times, and just used the dust blower bulb a couple of times. Nothing out of the ordinary.
C
Cindy
Apr 7, 2004
Allen,

There are a lot of people who are not professional photographers but are in the design field in one form or another for whom the entry level of SLR’s are perfect. I am one of those.

While I would love to have a high end SLR it is probably not an investment I will make unless for some reason I start making a lot of money selling photos. If I were to make enough money on photography I would natually buy the best camera that my business could justify. Until then the Rebel is a great camera that serves me well. For me the Canon 10D and the Rebel shoot photos that are the best my money can buy in my price range.

I was able to buy myself another lens with the money I saved buying the Rebel instead of the 10D. With the way digital cameras are changing I think that was a sound decision.

I think the Nikon D70 is a contender but for me I have purchased into the Canon line which I do not regret and when the Rebel breaks I will buy another under $2000 Canon unless my situation has changed.

From what I can see of the samples from the D70 compared with the Rebel I still think the Rebel produces better looking pictures. The D70 is a more solidly built camera or it appears to be. We have yet to see how well it holds together. Build quality is not all there is to it although it is something I will pay close attention to on my next purchase.
R
Ram
Apr 7, 2004
Cindy,

I was able to buy myself another lens with the money I saved buying the Rebel instead of the 10D.

That’s a very sensible and most commendable approach.
C
Cindy
Apr 7, 2004
Thanks for your encouragement Ramon. Sometimes I feel a little sorry I didn’t get the 10D but I should’t. I think what is going to happen is that I am going to learn a lot and buy the next camera up when it comes out or when my Rebel quits on me. Who knows, maybe by then I will buy "L" glass but so far since I shoot RAW, Photoshop RAW has been able to correct any CA that I have.

The only reason Linda hesitates (in my opinion) is because like me she is afraid of making a mistake especially where business is concerned. Perhaps I am out of line for making this assumption but I believe that sometimes we just have to start (Linda if that offended you my apologies).

I wouldn’t miss this last year for anything. But then by the time Linda buys a camera I will be able to help her out 🙂
T
Todie
Apr 7, 2004
It makes sense for Linda to wait for a less expensive, better SLR, because she has a digital camera and knows how to use it for her actual needs (while learning more about the ways of the professional photographers).

<http://www.graphicspalmbeach.com/airshow/misc1.html>
C
Cindy
Apr 7, 2004
An SLR is a whole different world than a point and shoot. Perhaps she should wait.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 7, 2004
Wait? Why? Certainly Linda does not need a "better SLR" than the low end digicam SLRs like the Rebel 300D and the Nikon D70, which both are very good digicams. Suggesting that someone miss out on a year of digital SLR photography to wait for something better than exists now is IMO very bad advice. Life is too short.

Every modern SLR digicam already is capable of producing images equal or better than 35 mm film scans for most pix. Only folks needing to equal medium format film scans should even remotely consider waiting.

Cindy-

Note that in post #852 I specifically included the Rebel 300D as a viable choice. Not for me the camera-beater, but certainly for many other folks. I am thrilled that Canon hit the US$1000 price point; I am sure it motivates all the other manufacturers.
T
Todie
Apr 7, 2004
Allen, How much better would Linda’s shot of the airplane be with an SLR?
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 7, 2004
For those bright sunlight shots – and especially on the web at 72 ppi – an SLR digicam would provide small benefit. However with an SLR Linda probably would have come back with good (10×12 prints no problem) pix of those same planes FLYING (assuming that they flew while she was there). A huge difference, probably the biggest difference between the under US$700 cameras and the over US$999 cameras is the ability to reliably capture pix of moving subjects. Also the ability to cope with less than ideal light, and the ability to capture good telephoto. And croppability [I just made that word up, so I decide how it is spelled 🙂 ]

[Edit] I did find some flying plane pix on Linda’s Air Show site. The limitations of lower end digicams like the CP990 are apparent. All in all though I think Linda has a good eye and takes nice pix! All she needs is an SLR…
T
Todie
Apr 7, 2004
She’ll like the word.
(but may not want to pay $1500 for it; life’s short enough : )
L
LRK
Apr 7, 2004
Cindy,

Not to worry about me being offended. I know you have my best interest at heart and I appreciate that very much.

It’s not hard to wait when you’re too busy to go out shopping. 🙂 I’m about ready to wrap up a couple of jobs. By that time I should be able to focus and take this more seriously, and if all goes well my budget will be a little larger than I expected, making it possible to buy needed accessories and maybe an extra lens.

Todie,

You made my day! I’m glad you like my airshow photos and thanks for sharing the link. 🙂 After going back to the Coffee Break myself, I saw where the links back to the Coffee are wrong. I don’t have them going to the main page <http://graphicspalmbeach.com/coffee/coffee1.html>, which has my Photoshop World < http://graphicspalmbeach.com/PhotoshopWorldGallery/index.htm l> pictures, and others.

Allen,

I don’t think I’m missing out on anything so far, mainly because I’ve been blessed with enough work to keep too busy to shop or shoot. I appreciate you saying that about having a good eye. I hope so. We shall see…

As for larger prints, I’m hoping to be able to incorporate them into oversized graphic design pieces that can be used for poster purposes… either as backgrounds or incorporated into artwork.

I just wonder how many mega pixels I would need for 18×24, 24×36, or even 36×48.

Oh, and since you made it up, croppability it is! 🙂
L
LRK
Apr 7, 2004
I am reminded of when I was going through a similar process trying to choose a color laser printer. The Phaser 780 was a big hit with graphic designers. Because it had been out for a while I decided to wait for the next one to replace it, thinking the next one would surely be even better. I did just that. I waited until the Xerox Phaser 790 came out. The reviews were great. I plunged right in and ordered one. It has since turned out to be the worst purchase I’ve ever made. It’s a lemon. People are still loving their 780 while I continue to pour money into the 790. It’s one thing after another. Yesterday it started printing messy. Today it’s jamming. It’s now telling me I need to order another print copy cartridge. I’m only on my third set of toners (some of them might still be the second) and I’m replacing the print copy cartidge for the second time.

I hope I don’t make the same mistake with my camera purchase. Perhaps I should go with the proven Canon Rebel and then later upgrade if needed… like some here have suggested.
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 7, 2004
Linda,
Regarding those print sizes, much will depend on the resolution that you need to print at and above all, the RIP doing the upsizing. I would normally be tempted to just say that you need a 1DS for those file sizes, but the truth is that much is subject dependent and will also be down to what you find acceptable.

A well known fashion photographer called Melvin Sokolsky once talked about obtaining superb prints from the old 1D which is a 4MP camera with prints up to 40×60 from the lightjet printer. A 10D is more than capable of producing billboards sized images because they are done at such low resolution however it might have difficulty with some subjects that need to show very high levels of detail in large prints and at close examination in which case you need 11MP and up.

Its impossible to say whether a camera will be able to produce images or not at a certain size without knowing the complete process. To get the best results though, shoot Raw, work with prime lenses and stay in 16 Bit while making tonal adjustments. I’ve found Sharpener from Pixel Genius very useful in getting extra details out of digital files.

Ashley
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Apr 7, 2004
I agree with the sentiment of working with prime (meaning non-zoom) lenses. My problem with most of the more moderately priced digicams is that they are supplied with non-interchangeable zoom lenses.

Also, I won’t touch Auto-anything — exposure or focussing.
C
Cindy
Apr 7, 2004
All of the SLR cameras have manual and auto modes as well as interchangeable lenses. That is one of the main differences between point and shoot cameras and SLR’s. The moderately priced Rebel and D70 can be shot in manual mode as well as a lot of in-between modes.
Z
Zeb
Apr 7, 2004
Perhaps I should go with the proven Canon Rebel…

Sharp intake of breath. Almost a definate maybe there.
L
LRK
Apr 7, 2004
Thanks Ashley! I might begin asking others who have this camera… Cindy for starters. 🙂

LOL Zeb! You all make this so much fun!
R
Ram
Apr 7, 2004
I agree with the sentiment of working with prime (meaning non-zoom) lenses.

My problem with most of the more moderately priced digicams is that they are supplied with non-interchangeable zoom lenses. Also, I won’t touch Auto-anything — exposure or focussing.

My sentiments exactly. 100%. No reservations.
R
Ram
Apr 7, 2004
Linda,

Perhaps I should go with the proven Canon Rebel and then later upgrade if needed.

I don’t think you’ll need to upgrade, save for the eventuality that the camera disintegrates on you, which I wouldn’t expect any time soon –unless you keep loaning your cameras out. The 300D digital Rebel takes wonderful pictures and the Canon line of lenses is excellent.
C
Cindy
Apr 7, 2004
Ramon, you do know this does not apply to SLR’s in any price range?
R
Ram
Apr 7, 2004
Cindy,

Sorry, I’m not sure what you are referencing here:

you do know this does not apply to SLR’s in any price range?

What is it that doesn’t apply?
L
LRK
Apr 7, 2004
Ramon: That’s encouraging. Remembering my printer experience was like an eye opener this morning. I’m getting excited!
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Apr 7, 2004
Cindy:
The "more moderately priced digicams" are not SLRs — they fall into the next bracket!

(And I can still shoot a tremendous amount of film with the equipment that i already have before the outlay on digital equipment of comparable quality would be justified!)
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 7, 2004
For a slight change in subject. I am just scanning some Kodachrome 25 images that I shot nearly 20 years ago with a Contax using the legendary 50mm Carl Zeiss lens. Wow, it makes all other film look really nasty by comparison and I think it says a lot for modern digital cameras that the noise levels are about the same as my 10D at 100 ISO.
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 7, 2004
hmm, does anybody know why old Ektachrome always seems to be covered in dust and Kodachrome seems perfect without a speck of dust?
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 7, 2004
Ann, that’s really not a fair comparison because you are discounting your existing investment as though it was free. Throw in the price of your scanner, clip tests, Polaroids and all the rest to see how it compares. Digital will pay for itself very quickly.
C
Cindy
Apr 7, 2004
Ann,
OK
You would probably have a ball with a digital camera however. Someday it will get you.

Ramon,
I mean you can shoot in manual mode and have interchangeable lenses in all SLR’s…but I’ll bet you know that 🙂
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Apr 7, 2004
It probably will Cindy.

But in the last few days I have bought another camera body (film) and another lens so my Purchasing Privileges are currently in dire danger of being peremptorily curtailed.
L
LRK
Apr 7, 2004
<< Purchasing Privileges are currently in dire danger of being peremptorily curtailed. >>

LOL!!! Are all men alike? 🙂
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Apr 7, 2004
The two that we are talking about are!
C
Cindy
Apr 7, 2004
Ann, what make of lenses do you buy?
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Apr 7, 2004
For 35mm (which is mostly just for personal use), I use the Olmpus OM system and stick with their own lenses.
For medium format: Mamiya — and their own ones.
For large format: Schneider.
R
Ram
Apr 7, 2004
Cindy,

I mean you can shoot in manual mode and have interchangeable lenses in all SLR’s

Yes, that’s how I’ve been using all the digital camera’s I’ve tried and the one I bought: interchangeable prime lenses, fully manual mode.
C
Cindy
Apr 7, 2004
Ann,

It does not look like you will be able to use the lenses you have when you do decide to play with digital…
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Apr 7, 2004
Exactly.
Isn’t it a good thing that I like film so much?
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 7, 2004
Once upon a time Ann you were resolutely in favour of OS 9 and now you are using OS X. My bet is that in 12 months time you will be telling us all how wonderful digital is. Wade may hang on a while longer…
R
Ram
Apr 7, 2004
I thought someone made a digital back for the Mamiya?
R
Ram
Apr 7, 2004
Ashley,

Hey, I still choose to boot into Mac OS 9.2.2 every time, though Panther is installed on one of the other drives.
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Apr 7, 2004
They do Ramón. But at quite a price!

That is actually the route that might eventually take me digital — if Purchasing Privileges are ever restored.
R
Ram
Apr 7, 2004
Linda,

Are all men alike?

Has nothing to do with gender. At home I’m the one who has to sneak purchases by my wife.
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 7, 2004
I really think that in the not too distant future digital backs for medium format are going to have a very hard time selling. Its not that they won’t be better than 35mm cameras, just that the difference will be largely academic in print and they will always lack the handling advantages of 35mm.

When the new 1DS comes out with a very likely 16MP sensor and super low noise like the 10D there will be no justification to shoot either film or medium format for most people. The only exception will be when very precise camera movements are needed with view cameras and that’s a small market.
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 7, 2004
Ramon, I agree that OSX isn’t perfect, but I get seriously annoyed if I try to do something in OS 9 these days. I don’t know how you manage.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 7, 2004
The D70 and the 300D are both good choices, each with its pros and cons. Both are far too new to qualify as "proven," however.

—————————————
Linda- You have received enough advice, done enough asking. Ask a D300 owner what he/she likes and the answer is obvious: he/she chose the D300. The same applies to D70 owners. The two cameras are of the same genre, both good value. The D70 is more camera but costs more.

You have to decide which is the better value for you, in your hands, for your planned shooting, so… you _must_ handle the cameras! The ergonomic differences as experienced _only_by_you_ are much, much more significant than the picky details as expressed in a plethora of reviews, and way more relevant than what I prefer, or Cindy prefers, or anyone else prefers.

Most importantly don’t let the camera store person sway you. Each store receives very different profit margins on different cameras. And **absolutely** stick with lenses of the same brand as the camera you select. **Never** accept that "special deal" offered to you with some third party lens (why could be a whole new thread topic); just don’t go there.

————————————–
Ann, when you recommend only prime lenses and no auto exposure, no auto focus, you are back in Luddite mode. True in the 1970s, but very bad advice today for someone newly moving up to either film or digital SLRs.

[1] Quality modern zoom lenses today are just that: quality. Prime lenses will always technically be inherently better because they are usually a bit faster, and in the very long term moving parts do wear on zooms. However, prime lenses s*ck for “getting the shot” in a changing environment.

The ability to – instantly, and without carrying multiple lenses – compose at varying focal lengths is a very, very significant boost to composition. Unless you wear a camera vest full of lenses and are really fast at changing lenses, by the time you can change a lens you have missed most shots in the real digicam world (where one of the photoflow [another word just coined] benefits is to shoot lots of _free_ shots and learn from each shot) because the subject or the light has changed.

For a beginning SLR person actually seeing the full range of compositional choices through the lens in real time is a huge learning benefit. Only with many years of experience can a photog glance at a scene and immediately know what focal length lens will be best. Even then, sometimes a scene begs to be shot at two focal lengths, like the plane with pilot as one pic and tight on the pilot as another; and you only have 4 seconds to get both shots. It is easy with a zoom lens, impossible with prime. Zoom lenses allow more precise composition in camera, meaning less cropping, which of course means better post process resolution.

[2] Not using auto-exposure on a modern SLR digicam is absurd. Auto-exposure (at least on the better Nikons to my knowledge) became very good in the 1980s and excellent in the 1990s. Today in 2004 it is nothing short of spectacular. In the 1970s and before I bracketed every exposure, meaning 12 images per US$20 roll of slide film; very important pix were double bracketed, meaning 7 images per US$20 roll of film. During the 80’s I started finding very good auto exposure almost all the time, and stopped bracketing anything but really critical shots.

Even if you ignored the above truisms, digital SLR cameras have a different photoflow. What you do is shoot the pic, look at the image, look at the histogram, look at the blowouts, adjust (all these cameras easily adjust exposure +/- 5 stops) and reshoot if necessary – faster than you can even pick up a light meter, let alone get a righteous reading!

[3] Autofocus has similarly improved over the decades to where on the most modern (meaning 1990s and later) better SLRs it can be the focus method of choice for many (but not all) shots. You can switch among, focus, recompose and photo three different critters in a herd in two seconds, for instance, and have the eyes in all 3 photos in perfect focus. To approach (but still not reach) that speed manually takes years of practice. Manual focus of course still is always available for those pix where it is necessary.
R
Ram
Apr 7, 2004
Ashley,

in OS 9 these days. I don’t know how you manage

Well, lets see … Photoshop 7.0.1 is definitely faster on the new machine in OS 9.2.2 than in Panther; no printing, scanning or third-party device incompatibilities; superb and trouble-free font management, including ATR; a bunch of applications that only run in native Mac OS 9.x and not in Classic; no need to learn much new stuff nor ever worry about system updates any more; minimal system maintenance, no need for Cocktail waitresses or Janitors; no fear of destroyed FireWire drives; vastly superior proofing tools in Russian, German, Dutch, French and Italian; no decent MS Office suite of applications in OS X; I could go on …

I don’t know how you guys can stand OS X. 😉
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Apr 7, 2004
All of that is undoubtedly true Allen, but when a whale only leaps once, "Manual" can still cut it.
<http://users.rcn.com/cameraart/Ann/Orca.jpg>
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 7, 2004
Like I said, manual is still sometimes preferable. Fast moving critters, particularly at a relatively _unchanging_ distance are one good example. E.g., in addition to your marine mammal, I shot a ski race this weekend and manual focus was much preferable. I could get 3 high speed shots of each racer in manual focus mode instead of just one shot in autofocus mode.
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 7, 2004
I have to agree with what you are saying Allen regarding auto-focus these days and my perspective on using fixed focal length lenses is because of the sort of work I do where zooming is just not necessary and I feel happy with fixed lens. If I was shooting street scenes I’d go for a zoom every time.

On the subject of light metering, yes I think that much has improved to the point where I’ll only use my hand held light meter in the studio or on really tricky subjects. Very curiously, I’ll often choose the centre weighted option rather than Matrix, because I think the Canons have a habit of going crazy over a small distant highlight and underexposing the scene in general if you aren’t careful.

For me the great thing about digital, is that I can think of an idea for an image, do it and look at the Raw processed result 5 minutes later on my screen while knowing in advance that I had everything right before putting the camera away. Recently with photo stock shooting, I have been able to shoot a series of images, process and upload them to the agencies in a couple of hours and it hasn’t cost me a penny. The quality of cameras like the 300D is now good enough for a large number of commercial applications and the convenience and productivity is astounding compared to film.
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 7, 2004
All fair points Ramon, although I get on very well with Office X and there are numerous wonderful applications out there for OSX that OS9 cannot even compete with. Anyway OSX is so colourful!!
T
Todie
Apr 7, 2004
ashley, Kodachrome was processed at Kodak (and very few good labs).
R
Ram
Apr 7, 2004
Ashley,

Anyway OSX is so colourful!!

That’s what I hate most about it.

there are numerous wonderful applications out there for OSX that OS9 cannot even compete with.

None that I would ever need or use.
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Apr 7, 2004
Ramón:
You can mute the colorfulness of OSX very easily by choosing Appearance: Graphite.

You could also make your own desktop background by taking any one of Apple’s; opening it in Photoshop; and desaturating it.
Then settle for tiny icons and a disappearing Dock and you will be safely back in the Calm Zone again.
R
Ram
Apr 7, 2004
But why???
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Apr 7, 2004
Because 10.3.3 (plus Classic) is a really efficient and pleasurable experience — once you set it up to suit your way of working.

Use it for a little longer and I think that you may well be converted……
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 7, 2004
Todie that says an awful lot about most pro labs. Actually the one thing that really pushed me towards digital was a sense of total despair with a lot of the shoddy work being turned out by the labs. It seemed like I was bending over backwards to do everything right and some underpaid lab technician would always mess everything up and I got fed up with paying for such sloppy work.

The labs may be complaining now, but they have been their own worst enemy in many cases.
T
Todie
Apr 7, 2004
My actual job is the first one in a photo lab.
It’s just as revealing as working in a restaurant : )
R
Ram
Apr 7, 2004
Ann,

Use it for a little longer and I think that you may well be converted

Wasn’t one of the definitions of insanity "trying the same things over and over again and expecting different results"?

I’ve tried Panther enough. Won’t try again until I absolutely have to.
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Apr 7, 2004
You expect "sanity"?

In THIS industry?
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 7, 2004
Yes Kodachrome 25 had its pluses IF you had enough lens speed and light to get the pic and liked the saturation and color shift. The problem was how many pix were missed because of that slow film speed; I preferred Kodachrome 64 back then. Note that AFAIK they stopped making Kodachrome 25, probably because of the similar competence of Velvia at ISO 50.
L
LRK
Apr 7, 2004
Ramon: I could never go back now that I’m used to Panther. When I first saw OSX I thought the same as you. Then I began using it. Now OS9 looks plain and sterile. Nor do I miss all the system crashes with OS9. Panther is the best ever!!! I work day after day, week after week, month after month… lol… no system crashes… well, maybe one when I allowed it to go to sleep without shutting down one night.

Allen: I think I’ve got it. You never know though. 😉
R
Ram
Apr 7, 2004
Linda,

I have used Panther. I experience no crashes in 9.2.2.

The notion that if you keep banging your head against the wall you’ll eventually learn to love it is not very appealing to me.

Sure, a human being can and will adapt to just about anything, but why adapt if there’s no reason to? I tried all kinds of tobacco products when I was young and hated every single one of them, so I’m a non smoker. No reason to make a special effort to get addicted to something you don’t need.

Why is it difficult to conceive that people have different tastes and needs? Personally I dislike champagne and I dislike caviar; give me a bottle of good German white wine or a Spanish or French red anytime. Why would I have to make an effort to like champagne or caviar?

Sorry, but the more I read you guys, the more convinced I get that you’re wrong. 🙂
L
LRK
Apr 7, 2004
LOL!!! Well at least we’re happy. Hope you’re not really mad. 🙂
R
Ram
Apr 7, 2004
Now OS9 looks plain and sterile.

Good!
L
LRK
Apr 7, 2004
Are you mad or are you just zealous? 😉
R
Ram
Apr 7, 2004
Mad insane or mad angry? I hope I’m neither. 😀
L
LRK
Apr 7, 2004
Good. That leaves one other option…
C
Cindy
Apr 7, 2004
What option is that?? I bit…
L
LRK
Apr 7, 2004
Maybe he’s just confused. 🙂

No… please I’m just being silly. It’s okay if Ramon likes 9.2.2… really! 🙂
R
Ram
Apr 7, 2004
I though that the other option was that you guys are insane or don’t know what you’re doing. 😀
L
LRK
Apr 7, 2004
Seriously, if you are not having trouble with 9.2.2 then I can see why you hold onto it for a while, especially if you have older software you want to keep using.

For me, Panther is a relief since I had nothing but trouble with 9.2.2. But then I push things to the limit sometimes.
R
Ram
Apr 7, 2004
On second thought, maybe you OS X fans are just responding to an overriding, primal need to rationalize all the money, effort and time you’ve put into the new system and the new applications. 🙂

And also suppressing a need to atone for your betrayal of the old Macintosh OS, against which OS X does as much violence as Windows does. …

No; neither of the above. It’s really much simpler: you guys like OS X and I don’t. There’s nothing else to it.
L
LRK
Apr 7, 2004
Hm…

Hey Buko: … #925 …
C
Cindy
Apr 7, 2004
OS X does as much violence as Windows does.

Never!
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Apr 8, 2004
Ramón, Ramón, Ramón…as I have said i the past to Ann (stubborn, stubborn Ann) Shelbourne…come to the darkside…and Ramón you have had crashes and loss of work in OS 9.2.2 even though it is pretty stable, but you have had them
R
Ram
Apr 8, 2004
Nope. no crashes in 9.2.2 so far. Maybe in 9.1, but it was quickly attributed to the extensions I got rid of since. Earlier than that, sure, many freezes and crashes.

Besides, in the last 30 months I lost hundreds of hours trying to troubleshoot OS X on my old Frankenmac. And OS X did crash on me, Kernel Panic and all. Not 9.2.2. (Knock on wood.) I read about folks losing files in Panther too, though it doesn’t crash. Sure, there’s always something to blame it not, never on the sacrosanct OS X though. Programs quit, but the OS X allegedly doesn’t. A difference without a distinction. I’ve lost work because the program crashed on me, which then led to a system crash in earlier, pre 9.2.2 systems.

My point is that by the time 9.2.2 came and stayed, I had it pretty much figured out. I knew what extensions to get rid of and other tricks like never ever let the first application you open be a MS one, purge and check the system often, save all work and quit if it’s starts ballooning in size (MS application at work, for sure), etc.

One thing I can assure you, combining all work I may have lost in twenty years of Mac usage, it doesn’t amount to one fourth of the time I wasted on OS X.

I know there will come and time when I will be forced to start using OS X; but, for the time being, I don’t have to, and that’s a very good thing.
M
macmanx
Apr 8, 2004
I tried all kinds of tobacco products when I was young and hated every single one of them, so I’m a non smoker.

Uh, oh… we might have a problem… Panther smokes OS9 slims — extensions-side up..!!!
R
Ram
Apr 8, 2004
Uh, oh… we might have a problem…

See, now you guys have a problem. 😉
M
macmanx
Apr 8, 2004
Nah, not since corralling and befriending the sleek Black Cat… 🙂
R
Ram
Apr 8, 2004
I wonder if my natural aversion to real cats has anything to do with this. %(
C
Cindy
Apr 8, 2004
I don’t like cats either. They stick the place up..And if they don’t stick the place up they bring around those who do…
M
macmanx
Apr 8, 2004
Could be, could be, Ramon…

Have you ever considered sidling down to the pet shop and acquainting yourself with a cute, cuddly kitten? Sneak it on home, then watch in wide-eyed amazement as it jumps up into your lap and purrrrrrrsss you into a conciliated little nap…. 🙂
M
macmanx
Apr 8, 2004
Re:

You have to decide which is the better value for you, in your hands, for your planned shooting, so… you _must_ handle the cameras!

This is not necessarily as Cut and Dried as its sometimes laid out to be… I just got my Kensington 5-button mouse replaced under warranty. I’d been using this rodent for about three years, and every nook and cranny of its structure had become so distinctly familiarized with my right hand that every action I performed with it was second nature. When it failed, I called Kensington, and they informed me that the model I had, had been discontinued, but that they’d send me the replacement model. When it arrived a couple weeks later, I almost threw a gasket… Instead of having the 3rd and 4th buttons on either side like before, they switched them both to the left side.

Holy Cripes….!!! For the next couple of days my mousing maneuvers were frustratingly rippled with repetitive errors… my finger kept reaching for that elusive, right-side button, only to find an empty void there. This was about three weeks ago. But, you know what? Once I got my finger reprogrammed, I found that Kensington actually made a smart move… Having those two buttons on the same side, now feels much smoother, more intuitive, and allows noticeable faster button selections. I can actually work considerably faster with that setup. I still make the odd mistake ever so often, but they’re getting rarer by the day. Another week, and the old setup will feel like OS 9 does to me now — stagnant and stale..!
B
Buko
Apr 8, 2004
When I used OS9 I pushed it to its limits. I kept a lean and mean system. I think I actually locked it up 2 or 3 times. mostly because I tried doing too many things at once. But as Ramón said 9.2.2 is rock solid (it has to be to run as classic under OSX). Although I have managed to crash Classic a few times.

the Fact that Ramón doesn’t prefer OSX at this time is not a bad thing. Poking him in the eye with your verbal sticks isn’t going to change his mind. If you follow Ramóns helpful posts he has a good grasp of OSX and is able to help those having trouble with it. Ramón, like Ann in the past, prefers OS9.

He will in time come to use OSX mostly because all the new software is only made for OSX and soon some app will come along that Ramón will feel he can’t do without forcing his hand. Similar to Ann having a G5.
B
Buko
Apr 8, 2004
macman you need a Wacom.
M
macmanx
Apr 8, 2004
I have one, but for the majority of my work I still prefer the lowly ole’ mouse. Call me blind, stupid or indifferent, that’s just the way it is!

Poking him in the eye with your verbal sticks isn’t going to change his mind.

Notice that I said: “the old setup will feel like OS 9 does to me now“

If Ramon and company still prefer working in OS 9, that’s more than fine with me… as long as they don’t try to cajole me back into it. I think Ramon also knows that we’re just trying to ruffle his feathers — we all enjoy his crafty comebacks, and OS9 seems to do the trick at this point… 🙂
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
Guess what? I might be actually needing a new camera sooner than I thought. A client whose print and Web jobs I wrapped up yesterday asked me if I’d like more Web work. He said he wants to refer me for another Web design job that will include going in and taking pictures of the office and equipment. Is it not interesting how circumstances and time prod us along at just the right time? I’m sure for Web work I can still use my little Nikon and then enhance photos in Photoshop but since I’m almost ready to upgrade I may as well make the purchase before I take on a job like that.
M
macmanx
Apr 8, 2004
CLAP CLAP CLAP CLAP…!!!

Way to go, Linda. Good Luck!
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
Many thanks for the applause and kudos! 🙂
C
Cindy
Apr 8, 2004
But folks, Linda wants to buy a point and shoot camera because its easier to use and I’ve gotta come up with an intellegent way to talk her out of that. I think a point and shoot is a mistake in the long haul but is it?

I’d like to hear what others think of that. I say that if Linda is in a big hurry for this particular job she should use the camera she has rather than buy the PowerShot Pro1. These cameras (her current camera) work just fine for web work.
Z
Zeb
Apr 8, 2004
I think… that if Linda really gets interested in photography then she will, like most photographers, end up with a collection of cameras and lenses for each particular subject matter. In the short term, i.e. the next couple of years, the Pro1 would be ideal.
C
Cindy
Apr 8, 2004
If she makes that decision now I would bet that she would not buy another one in a couple of years.
Z
Zeb
Apr 8, 2004
Once you get addicted to photography it’s difficult to stop.
R
Ram
Apr 8, 2004
Macman,

You probably don’t know what age bracket I’m in, so let me just tell you that I was born when Franklin Delano Roosevelt was president of the US and Adolf Hitler ruled Germany. That leaves a suitably ambiguous time span but gives you a rough idea. 🙂

The reason I bring this up is your remark about cats and petshops. I’m old enough to know what I like, what I dislike and what I have a genuine aversion to. Cats fall in that last category. I have been involved with horses all my life and with dogs since I was about four years old. I love both horses and dogs; I hate cats. It’s a genuine phobia. Who knows, it may even be in my genes, for my oldest daughter is deadly allergic to cats, and I do mean in a life-threatening manner.

Now, why in Hades would I go into a petshop to cuddle up with a cat? It doesn’t take an IQ much higher than that of a caterpillar’s to realize that isn’t going to change a thing.

One thing that amazes me is that you OS X fans seem not to have read my posts where I have set forth why OS 9 suits my needs at this time, otherwise you wouldn’t keep insisting that I make yet an umpteenth painful effort to bang my head against the wall with Panther until I adapt to it and in the meantime lose considerable speed in Photoshop, multilingual custom software keyboard layout functionality, and the use of highly specialized software, including a CATA system that cost more than the new car I bought late last year and will never be available for OS X. That would really be insane.

The reason I’m irritated this time is because it’s become increasingly clear that you presume to feel entitled to act condescendingly because you believe I’m actually resisting OS X out of sheer ignorance. Allow me to turn the tables on you for a change, for it is you who doesn’t have a clue as to what you’re talking about.

Now, about those new cameras …
C
Cindy
Apr 8, 2004
Zeb, that may be true but money is a consideration for some of us. Also I think the "feel" that comes with an SLR is part of the addiction. If she were going to get addicted from a point and shoot she would have that already. She already has a P&S.
R
Ram
Apr 8, 2004
Linda already has a point and shoot, and a good one too. She doesn’t need the Canon PowerShot Pro1. I’d say she either gets a digital SLR, or she waits.
C
Cindy
Apr 8, 2004
Thats what I think Ramone….
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
Cindy,

When did I say I wanted the PowerShot Pro1?

I asked you about the 300D Rebel, did I not? Isn’t that the one you have?

Maybe I’m mixed up but my email this morning mentioned I am leaning toward the 300D.

I only asked you how easy it is to use in case I run out of time.
R
Ram
Apr 8, 2004
Linda,

When did I say I wanted the PowerShot Pro1?

That would be post #369 in this thread. 🙂 You wrote you were just about to order it.
C
Cindy
Apr 8, 2004
Sigh….sorry Linda. You said you wanted really easy. The Rebel has a learning curve. So does the D70. I guess I assumed that when you said easy it meant Point and Shoot…..sorry
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
I wanted to know "how" easy the Rebel is to learn. I’m not interested in the D70. Post #369 was a long time ago.
C
Cindy
Apr 8, 2004
How did you find that post so fast Ramone?
R
Ram
Apr 8, 2004
Search engine. 🙂
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
Cindy,

I guess I can see how you might have read into my email, as follows…

Since I do not have a lot of free time, do you think I will find the 300D Rebel to be easy to use? One of my clients wants to refer me for another Web job that will include taking pictures of the office and equipment. I want to buy something that will be easy to use and give me great results.

I just wanted your take on the Rebel in this regard. 🙂
Z
Zeb
Apr 8, 2004
Can you afford both cameras Linda? 😉
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004

[edited]

🙂
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 8, 2004
Linda, regardless of which digital camera you get I would suggest that you test it out really extensively as soon as you get it and if its not 100% right don’t let anybody hoodwink you into accepting substandard performance.

When digital cameras are good, they can be a true pleasure to work with, however, in this day and age when too many products are rushed to market without being thoroughly tested, quality control is not what it should be and many bugs are never resolved during the life time of the product, which can be so annoying when you have spent thousands of dollars.

Apart from the little test reports, which mean very little when you remember that reviewers will never be too critical when they depend on the same manufacturers for advertising, look closely to see if there are constant user complaints and how the manufacturer deals with them. Also make sure that you purchase from a reliable vendor who has a good policy for returns.
C
Cindy
Apr 8, 2004
Let me put it this way Linda. Any time I take a picture now it is really easy and instinctive. It took me a little while to get to that point. I think that is something you have to commit to.

If you are going to take indoor shots you would be better off with an external flash. But that is the case with any camera. The Rebel tends to underexpose indoors with the built in flash but that can be helped by shooting RAW. I got an external flash that has built in FEC which solved that problem for me. I do know some tricks on how to use the internal flash successfully too.

I think if you got the Rebel with the kit lens you would be shooting great pictures in no time flat. It even has a "P" mode that does pretty good. The only thing that is hard to get used to is the exposure. I think P&S’s are easier there. Also, you will need to do some post processing which you probably do anyway.

If you do it I think you should shoot a lot of picts in jpeg till you get a feel for it then switch to RAW.

I would be willing to help you out any way I can in email too.
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Apr 8, 2004
Linda:

Go with the SLR because your skills will rapidly expand to fully use its capabilities.

You have no idea how greatly an SLR camera (whether digital or film-imaging) will develop your skills as a photographer — but it will. And very quickly too.

Life definitely looks very different through the lenses of an SLR.
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
Ashley: Thanks for your comments. This is why I’ve not been in a hurry… and I really don’t need to rush into a purchase for the job possibility. I feel pretty confident that my little Nikon will do whatever I need it to do for this kind of Web work. I’ve been somehow pulling off this sort of stuff for a while… and clients seem pretty happy with my work… thankfully.

Ann: I am leaning toward the 300D which is a SLR.

BTW, I don’t even like the looks of the Pro1… it looks unprofessional and requires special lenses which won’t work on the others. Not going there.
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
Ann, Here’s just one link < http://hardwarecentral.dealtime.com/xPR-Canon_Digital_Rebel_ EOS_300D~S-1> with some user comments on the 300D. I’d be interested in your comments.

[edited] — Changed link to reflect most recent comments first.
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
Cindy, I will probably invest in an external flash.

Thanks to all for your continuing comments from this morning.
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
Now I am tempted by the new Mark II and even called to get a price on it this morning. Ouch!!!
C
Cindy
Apr 8, 2004
Now THAT would be a great camera! Too rich for my blood. If you can afford it go for it. Have there been any reviews on it?
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 8, 2004
The new 1D II would be a great camera and more importantly will still be very usable in a few years time. I was tempted to get one but I am holding out for the 1Ds replacement.

Did anybody see that the 300D is now available in black?

<http://www.dpreview.com/news/0404/04040801eos300dblack.asp>
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
If I bought the Mark II, what kind of accessories would I need right away? I know I’d need a large Flash Memory Card, probably enough to fit a CD (thanks to recommendations earlier in this thread). But what else would I need to buy?
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
Thanks for the link Ashley. I’m glad to know it’s in black now.
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Apr 8, 2004
From those reviews, the Rebel would appear to be an excellent choice for you.

The reviews do all cite durability as a factor but this probably won’t worry you because you treat your equipment carefully. Just do NOT lend it to anyone else!

Regarding the built in flash: you can disregard those comments because you shouldn’t want to use it — except perhaps at 1/3 power to fill in shadows (if it lets you use it in that way) because you will almost certainly want to get an off-camera flash.

Try to give yourself a day off so that you can go to the nearest dealer and get a hands-on feel for it but beware that you probably won’t go home without it!

[ "That? That old thing? It’s just a camera. Had it for ages. Hadn’t you noticed it until now?……"]
C
Cindy
Apr 8, 2004
I dont think MarkII comes with a lens so you would need a good all around lens.
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 8, 2004
You’ll need at least one decent lens (probably a zoom) plus a flash card reader and spare battery to be safe. BTW Linda, I sent you an email about the 10D.
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
Ann, Cindy: Coming back down to earth. I almost zoomed into outer space with the Mark II temptation. Reason and sanity returning [for now at least]. I’m reminded to crawl before I stand, and stand before I walk… 🙂

Ashley: Thanks for the email… Enlightening and helpful.

Working through this process is great! Fixed on the 300D again.
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Apr 8, 2004
Trying to run before you can crawl may be challenging but it can you there faster — if you don’t mind falling flat on your face occasionally.
C
Cindy
Apr 8, 2004
You could get the Rebel, buy a good lens in a month or so as an addition to the kit lens and when the next camera upgrade comes out get that which will probably be better than the MarkII by then thus saving a bundle 🙂
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
That’s what I’m thinking Cindy. By this time next year a camera such as the Mark II or it’s replacement may come down enough in price to cover both purchases. It’s the 300D. I would order right this minute but I have work to do… so I’ll sit on it over the weekend.
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
Ann, I can handle falling flat on my face… occasionally… I think. Based on my history, everything I do requires getting back up umpteen times. 🙂

But I think sound reason becons me to be conservative for reasons stated above.
C
Cindy
Apr 8, 2004
Do you have a local camera store that carries the 300D? For the camera I prefer a local store in case there is anything wrong you can take it right back. Also, get an extended warranty. Just a good idea.

I wouldn’t buy any extra lenses yet.
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
Cindy: I’m thinking the same thing. I called MacMall and my discount isn’t that great this time. Matter of fact it’s not much of a discount at all, it’s quite a bit higher than other mail order sites I’ve seen.

It would be nice to get plugged into a local retailer, where they can get to know me and be there to help when I need it.

I’ll wait on the lenses then, and make sure I get the extended warranty. Thanks!
C
Cindy
Apr 8, 2004
A lot of the time a local retailer will teach you a lot. They took a few hours with me. Not so much because I wouldn’t let them go but because these camera folks love to talk camera so are very helpful.

I’m glad you are willing to wait on the lenses. There is a lot to say about that too which is premature.

Get back to work 🙂 and keep me posted.
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Apr 8, 2004
Why do I expect that some mileage will be added to a certain car before this weekend is over……???????
C
Cindy
Apr 8, 2004
Are you going to Florida Ann?
T
Todie
Apr 8, 2004
If you want to make cylindrical VR pictures for the Web, you may need one of these:

< http://www.kaidan.com/products/360_One-SLR-Bracket-samples.h tml>
Z
Zeb
Apr 8, 2004
Local retailers will sell you what they will make the most profit on.
C
Cindy
Apr 8, 2004
Since she knows what she is going to the local retailer for they can’t sell her anything she doesn’t want. I have had very good luck with mine. There are many advantages to using a local retailer as long as you do your research before you go in. If they are trying to scam her then she needs to go to the next one.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 8, 2004
Linda-

[1] A digital SLR is indeed what you want for the new work you just described. There is even the "image" issue with clients, which is not a small point. For the work described you might well accomplish the exact same pic with a CP8700 as with a D70, but with a full size SLR you look like a more professional photog to many clients. I am not personally espousing that image concept, but clearly it very substantially exists. And in a way it is true, because having a pro tool in one’s hands often helps lead one toward doing more professional work. Which cameras may look/feel more professional in your hands is up to you to decide: put some time in handling those two cameras!

[2] A very large competitive benefit that accrues to those of us PS-competent folks using SLR digicams is the ability to very quickly get a job done from concept to photo shoot to final web or print output. We do it in a few _hours_! Clients love the instant response – dinosaur film-based work flows cannot compete.

Lighting is of course what photography is all about, and “instant lighting” as needed for the fast workflow described above very often involves flash photography. If you evolve into doing more of the work you describe, at some point in the near (my advice would be on day 1) future you will want to add a righteous external flash to your digicam.

The key word above is righteous. Old style flash photography as still practiced by most pro and amateur photogs s*cks as an instant-lighting tool even though it works very, very well in the hands of a pro with years of experience and lots of setup/equipment time.

The very latest Nikon camera/strobe systems (e.g. the D70 or D2h with an SB-800 or SB-600 flash unit) are very much better than previous strobe systems, the last generation of which was pretty good. A relative newcomer to SLR strobe photography can now achieve generally pleasing “instant” flash assisted pix; a boon to those of us building quick-turnaround workflows.

Canon also has one modern strobe for the 300D, the 550 EX. IMO among modern SLR camera/strobe systems Nikon’s setup is very substantially the best, but if you do select Canon you should plan on that one specific Canon 550 EX strobe being likely in your future. The cost of such external strobes runs in the range of US$300-350.

P.S. Please, please spend some time handling the cameras in question. It sounds like you are evolving to your decision without what is by far the most important information.
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Apr 8, 2004
<< Are you going to Florida Ann? >>

Not this week — but a certain "Jetty" emits a powerful magnetic pull… :~)
Z
Zeb
Apr 8, 2004
Where are the details for the’work described?’
All I got was that was that Linda wanted to update her 990.
T
Todie
Apr 8, 2004
She may have to shoot a new customer’s office building.
(made me think of pictures like this: <http://www.fullscreenqtvr.com/san_rocco.html> )
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
Now I’m having trouble getting back to work. 🙂

Excellent feedback, people!

I’ve started a list:
• 300D
• Strobe 550 EX

I already have a Microtech Card Reader.

What brand of Compact Flash was recommended again?

Ann: We must go back to Jettys, if for no other reason than to use our new equipment and get some real pictures. 🙂
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 8, 2004
Post #939.
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
Wow Todie!!! That is wonderful!!! I wish!!!
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
Where’s Buko? We must leave #1000 for Buko.
Z
Zeb
Apr 8, 2004
I did a four pic stitch last week.
<http://www.phototalk.net/photos/showphoto.php?photo=30495>
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
C
Cindy
Apr 8, 2004
That is a great picture Zeb.

Linda,
Another flash that works well with the Canons is the Sigma EF-500 DG super. Its around $189 although the 550 is a better build and has a couple more features.

I sent you an email with links. Is your email working?
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
Thanks Cindy. Yes, I think it’s working… although I never received a response from my email this morning… which is okay… but if you sent one I never got it.
C
Cindy
Apr 8, 2004
I sent you a whole bunch so I started thinking you were mad at me. 🙂 Looks like I had a whole conversation with myself based on that.

Send me an email from another address so I can send you a few links.
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
Oh my gosh. I just changed my settings and have a whole bunch of email. Somethings wrong with it. Ever since our DSL went down my Mail has been giving me trouble. Glad you said something Cindy.

Buko ? ? ? YOU must get post #1000.
C
Cindy
Apr 8, 2004
Hah!! 1000!! Bukos not around… sorry!
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
LOL… you’re so bad. 🙂
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 8, 2004
Ann must be sleeping, or she would have poached #1000.

Linda-

You may want to review earlier strobe discussions in this thread before any strobe decisions: a strobe that "works with" a camera is not necessarily "state of the art" with that camera. It makes no sense not to take advantage of the very latest technology when it can greatly improve the quality of flash pix. If you buy a 300D there is only one right strobe choice. Or with the (IMO better flash system) Nikon D70 there are only two right strobe choices.
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
Thanks Allen!
C
Cindy
Apr 8, 2004
I sort of agree with you on this one Allen. When I bought the Sigma Flash it was when $ was really tight. It works well though I do think the 550EX would be better if she can afford it.
B
Buko
Apr 8, 2004
I was working.
C
Cindy
Apr 8, 2004
You are only late by 5 posts….
B
Buko
Apr 8, 2004
I’m not late for anything.

I got here exactly when I was supposed to.
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
Anyway, Congratulations Cindy! 🙂

I’m logging in and out of my time sheet every 5 to 10 minutes. Can’t stay away today. 🙂
C
Cindy
Apr 8, 2004
I wish I could go down the street to Florida. We would be at the camera store right now.
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
LOL! Now I have another decision to make… which camera store to use. We have several that have been around for a long time. One is quite large, the other very old… then there are several more. I plan to visit them and see how I like the people who work there… as well as check prices.
C
Cindy
Apr 8, 2004
The prices are going to be within a few dollars of each other because I think Canon sets the price. These stores do not make much commission on the cameras. They make it on lenses and accessories so be careful there.

I would go with the combination of who is most helpful as well as knowledgeable. We (me) can be pests. When I bought one lens at Canoga Camera I took 4 back until I was happy 🙂 I bought the camera at a different place that I actually like better but unfortunately their lenses are too much higher to justify.

Thats another thing. Don’t order lenses on line. When you are ready for that you go to the store that has the most lenses in stock.

Now as far as flash cards and batteries I got those after market and sometimes they are better that way. You do have to get a flash card right away though so you will probably get that at the camera store. 512k is a good size. I would rather have 2 512k than a 1 gig.
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
Okay, thanks!
C
Cindy
Apr 8, 2004
Funny, I can’t concentrate on work because of my camera. Apparantly I can’t concentrate on work because of your camera either LOL!
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
By the looks of this thread, neither can anyone else today. 😉
R
Ram
Apr 8, 2004
By the looks of this thread, neither can anyone else today

Well, I have an excuse, I’m on sick leave, kind of recuperating myself and taking care of my wife, who had surgery last week and has a steel nail protruding from her toe and going into her foot toward the heel. She has to keep her foot elevated above heart level, so she needs lots of help.
C
Cindy
Apr 8, 2004
Well, I can’t walk much right now because I hurt my foot but I don’t have a steel nail protruding from my toe. Hurts just to think about it.
R
Ram
Apr 8, 2004
Yes. The steel nail then bends upwards and has a rubber stopper at the end, which is what I imagine they’ll use to pull it out in three weeks.
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
Ramon: I’m sorry to hear about your wife’s foot. I hope it heals okay. Hope you also are doing better. Sounds like you’ve had your share of recent troubles.

Cindy: I need to get out and start walking again before my joints freeze up in the seated position.
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
Oh my, that sounds uncomfortable Ramon.
R
Ram
Apr 8, 2004
Thanks, Linda. BTW, I have a picture of the nail; while it’s nowhere as scary as the picture of Wade’s injured hand, it’s still at least mildly disturbing. 🙂
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
I was going to ask if we could see a picture but then thought that might not be in good taste. If you want to post it, I’d like to see it.
R
Ram
Apr 8, 2004
Sure, Linda . I’ll prepare a reduced size image and will post it in the next few minutes.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 8, 2004
I strongly believe in buying things in person at retail when possible. E.g. if I use a camera store to test shoot new cameras I feel ethically obliged to buy the camera there, even though it costs a bit more.

However, for many other things – like strobes, lenses, filters, film, cameras I don’t store test – many pros including me have successfully used B&H Photo out of NYC for decades.
<http://www.bhphotovideo.com/>
Unlike many other retail vendors, they are scrupulously honest and fair, and usually have among the lowest real (meaning without scams involved) prices. In addition to mail sales they have a retail store (that everyone should visit at least once, it is better than Disneyland) but taking your time and handling the hardware is NOT part of their sales ethic. The average sale is probably more than US$1000 and takes about 90 seconds – literally!

Note that much camera eqpt. comes in USA and (cheaper) non-USA versions. B&H identifies which is which, but many other sources do not. One trick is to always verify that a USA warranty is in the box.

[Edit] Actually 90 seconds for a transaction is probably an overestimate. It seems the push your multi-thousand-dollar transaction through in half that.
C
Cindy
Apr 8, 2004
I bought the camera where I tested and I bought most of the lenses where I tested. I like being able to test several lenses before I buy. I am down the street from Canoga Camera which is similar to B&H as far as stock.

I do not feel obliged to buy lenses where I buy the camera but I have tried to be fair if I do a lot of testing. Canoga actually sent me to their competitor when they were out of stock on something so I do try to have a good relationship. Spent good money at 3 different local camera stores.

Oh, and I ordered my flash from B&H.
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
Allen: I’m glad to know about the USA warranty. I too do not like to take advantage of a store if I don’t plan to use them, but in this case I would like to find out what the people are like as well as test the equipment.

The store I visited a few weeks ago in Wellington will probably not be my choice. The young guy was very nice. The older guy was so so. I knew more than they did about some of the features of the camera. There was no real enthusiasm about their products.
C
Cindy
Apr 8, 2004
Do try not to buy their demo camera. I bought my camera and after 5000 pictures I noticed that the s/n on the camera did not match the receipt. The store questioned it but I happened to have pictures taken inside their store and each photo has the camera s/n embedded in the EXIF. They exchanged it without any further question.

These cameras are made to where the amount of pictures taken get recorded inside the camera and cannot be changed. You can take your flash card and it can get certain numbers in the camera to change so format your flash with the camera. Actually, you would be better off to buy a new flash card to do your testing with because of the numbering. Hard to explain.

There is a setting that has continuous picture numbering but even if you dont select this it still has embedded the actual number.
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
Okay. Another good-to-know thing.
R
Ram
Apr 8, 2004
Linda,

Here is the link to the picture of the steel nail protruding from toe:

<http://home.surewest.net/zaldidun/Nail_toe.jpg>

CAUTION: It’s graphically disturbing.
C
Cindy
Apr 8, 2004
Ouch!! What was wrong with her foot??
R
Ram
Apr 8, 2004
Cindy,

She had fractures on both feet but kept walking on them for nearly two years. During that time they tried plastic boots (removable casts really), the device with electrodes that send electrical impulses 24/7, etc. All to no avail. Finally they had to do quite a bit of reconstruction of that particular toe and other parts of her foot.
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
Bless her heart, I feel so bad for her. Does this seem to be working now? How long do they project it will be before it will heal? Maybe a hug from us will help?
R
Ram
Apr 8, 2004
Well, the nail comes out on the 23rd, then two or three more weeks of rest, then a few months of limited activity without putting weight on it. The hugs are appreciated, thanks, 🙂
L
LRK
Apr 8, 2004
You’re welcome Ramon! Hang in there…
C
Cindy
Apr 8, 2004
Nah. I’m not hugging anyone but my dog today 🙂
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Apr 8, 2004
That still hurts to see Ramón.
R
Ram
Apr 8, 2004
Has your hand healed completely by now, Wade?
L
Larryr544
Apr 9, 2004
WOW Linda finally decides to buy a camera and this thread leaps by 110 posts. When do you all have this much time?
L
LRK
Apr 9, 2004
Busted! 🙂

I’m getting ready to really work now. Just invented a healthy energy cake…really I did. That with a couple cups of black coffee and I’m good to go. Let’s see how much I can get done in 2.5 hours.
L
LRK
Apr 9, 2004
Based on this article <http://www.dpreview.com/news/0404/04040801eos300dblack.asp> released today, the black version of the 300D is only being produced in Japan right now. So unless I’m willing to wait I will have to go with the original one… which is really okay. I like the black but not sure I want to keep waiting now that I’m pretty sure of what I want to do.

Canon Japan has today announced a new black bodied version of the ‘Kiss Digital’ as it is known in Japan (EOS 300D / Digital Rebel). At this stage it’s unclear whether Canon will make the new black body available in Europe (as the EOS 300D) or North America (as the Digital Rebel). Remember also that the Japanese market get the USM version of the EF-S 18-55 mm lens which is powered by a normal DC motor in the rest of the world. Personally I think the camera looks much better in black, the color Canon should have chosen right from the start.

Trying to remember who else might be ready to take the plunge? Was it Macmanx or Oz that said they were in the market? Just curious if and what others are planning to do.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 9, 2004
Hopefully what others are planning to do is handle some cameras before deciding 🙂
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Apr 9, 2004
I have a feeling that I know what the South Florida Easter Bunny will be delivering this weekend……?
L
LRK
Apr 9, 2004
Hi Ann,

Probably not this weekend. I am still quite busy and want to take my time with the final process of tring them out and finding a store that I like. Maybe this coming week though. I actually prefer to shop during the week to avoid the weekend crowds. That way I have a better chance of getting the attention I need.
C
Cindy
Apr 9, 2004
That way I have a better chance of getting the attention I need.

I can’t see a time when you won’t get the attention you need 🙂
L
LRK
Apr 9, 2004
Oi! Not sure I should have said it that way, lol.

Thanks for putting up with me. 🙂
D
Dan-o
Apr 9, 2004
Holy Crap. This thread is out of control… lol

I walk away for one day and there’s over 100 new posts when I come back. aCK!

🙂
C
Cindy
Apr 9, 2004
🙂
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Apr 9, 2004
Let’s see next week new thread, problems with uploading digital files from the Canon Rebel by LRK "Why are all the frames black"

I don’t want anyone telling her about the lens cap thing! So mums the word!
L
Larryr544
Apr 9, 2004
OK Linda I see the energy cake lasted 68 minutes! Smile That’s better than I did!

Hopefully the black frames will be from low batteries and nothing else.
T
Todie
Apr 9, 2004
If you turn the ASA to 1600, you can leave the cap on the lens : )
M
macmanx
Apr 9, 2004
Ramon,

I’ve been away all day, and just got back to read your last post addressed at me… I had to reread it a couple of times to make sure I wasn’t hallucinating—it literally left me speechless!

Let me begin by saying this: This conceived notion of yours about me having it in for anyone (especially you) still using OS9 is completely misconstrued. Why should/would it matter to me what any given person prefers as his operating system…? It’s an individualistic preference—plain and simple. I still exchange pleasantries and ideas with some net buddies who are still on 8.6, and swear on their mothers grave that its the ultimate system… 🙂 Who am I, to argue otherwise… if they’re happy, I’m happy!

I’ve been roaming and participating in user forums since the advent of the net. Never have any of my posts been as misinterpreted as the ones you’re referring to in this thread. I don’t know about you, but I sometimes get exasperated rereading the same problem topics day in and day out. When you’ve just finished answering a users question with a lengthy (possible) solution to their problem, and then come back an hour or so later to see another poster requesting answers to the exact same problem…well, lets just say I get a little vexed… especially, after a trying day. Possibly, even worse, is if you never hear back from them again. Now, did my solution work, or didn’t it? All too often we’re left in the dark as to the final outcome. One would think that the aided person would at least extend the courtesy of a simple reply or Thank-you! At least that’s the way I was raised and schooled.

So, what does all this rhetoric have in relation to the topic at hand? Years ago, after keenly watching other skilled wordsmiths at work, I found a possible solution to vent away some of my frustrations… Humor! Why not throw out some good-natured humor from time to time to lighten the mood? Seems plausible, right? So I give it a shot, and have successfully used it over the years to brighten my (and hopefully) someone else’s day. That is, until yesterday..!
I guess I just found out that some of you folks around here are not too keen on some of my raw humor. Either that, or I’m starting to lose it! So, for now, I guess I’ll have to start picking my spots more diligently… 🙂

The reason I bring this up is your remark about cats and pet shops. I’m old enough to know what I like, what I dislike and what I have a genuine aversion to. Cats fall in that last category. I have been involved with horses all my life and with dogs since I was about four years old. I love both horses and dogs; I hate cats. It’s a genuine phobia. Who knows, it may even be in my genes, for my oldest daughter is deadly allergic to cats, and I do mean in a life-threatening manner.

Now, why in Hades would I go into a pet shop to cuddle up with a cat?

You’ve avidly made your point, Ramon… Cats, for you, are definitely out… BTW…if I had known about this beforehand, I certainly wouldn’t even have raised the topic… My apologies.

It doesn’t take an IQ much higher than that of a caterpillar’s to realize that isn’t going to change a thing.

Fair is fair, Ramon…but if this is directed exclusively at me… it’s far more condescending than anything I may have inadvertently suggested in any of my posts.

One thing that amazes me is that you OS X fans seem not to have read my posts where I have set forth why OS 9 suits my needs at this time, otherwise you wouldn’t keep insisting that I make yet an umpteenth painful effort to bang my head against the wall with Panther

I don’t have time to read all the daily posts, Ramon… so you’ll have to pardon me on that count, also. I may simply have missed them.

The reason I’m irritated this time is because it’s become increasingly clear that you presume to feel entitled to act condescendingly because you believe I’m actually resisting OS X out of sheer ignorance.

Nothing, could be further from the truth, then this, Ramon. You are totally, 100% mistaken. Any person who frequents this forum would have to be totally blind to NOT see the valued contributions you make here on a daily basis. I personally command you for your exemplary efforts.

Allow me to turn the tables on you for a change, for it is you who doesn’t have a clue as to what you’re talking about.

Well, if you wanted revenge, I guess you got your wish… Again, my attentions were NEVER meant to cause hard feelings, much less to be construed as provocative or inflammatory. I’m sorry you took them as such. My motto in life has always been to try to make friends whenever possible—NOT enemies… unfortunately, we don’t always succeed with the latter part.
T
Todie
Apr 9, 2004
Thank you!
R
Ram
Apr 9, 2004
Macman,

It was the cat/petshop remark that irked me the most.

As for your latest post, I’ll refrain from analyzing or commenting on it for the sake of continued harmony.
T
Todie
Apr 9, 2004
I’ll (have to) drink to that!
T
Todie
Apr 9, 2004
My take on this fiasco (not the first I’ve been involved in) is that Ramón is a very passionate man (well,.. so am I; that’s not a negative) and he has a tendency to forget his civility (which under normal circumstances is more than adequate).
I find myself redrawing the line in the sand closer to my essentials. Hopefully Ramón’s redrawn line will leave out cats (I cannot care less about Sony but don’t touch Rollei : )

Drat! I was looking on dpreview for a new device to keep the topic alive but there’s nothing important to me.

Hmm… How’bout colorvision’s price reductions?
M
macmanx
Apr 9, 2004
Cindy,

Have you ever tried using the Canon 420 EZ flash unit with your Rebel? Would you happen to know if its compatible?

TIA…
R
Ram
Apr 9, 2004
Todie,

There’s a huge difference between "I don’t like cats" and "Cats are [insert your pejorative epithet of choice here]".

(I cannot care less about Sony but don’t touch Rollei : )

Don’t worry, I wouldn’t dare touch your cat. Ever. 🙂
SG
Sylvain_Gingras
Apr 9, 2004
When I want to read on screen some of dpreview and not getting the white on black, I click on "print page" in the bottom of each pages and then cancel. That way I get a readable review.

I’m lonely… 😉
C
Cindy
Apr 9, 2004
macmanx,

Don’t you mean Canon Speedlite 420 EX TTL Flash? It works but from what I hear is not really adequate. You need either the 550 EX or the Sigma EF 500 DG Super Flash EOS because both of these have FEC (Flash Exposure Control).

The Rebel does not have built in FEC which some people have considered a handicap. I personally have not had any problems. There is a hack out that enables it but I have not wanted to use it.
R
Ram
Apr 9, 2004
When I want to read on screen some of dpreview

Thanks, Sylvain. It’s a great workaround, especially in Mac OS 9.2.2.
M
macmanx
Apr 9, 2004
Don’t you mean Canon Speedlite 420 EX TTL Flash?

Yes, its the one I got back in 84 when I bought my EOS 650. If I remember correctly, it was the best flash unit Canon had to offer then. It cost me over 300 greenbacks back then, and I was hoping that it would suffice for a while if I got the Rebel.

What’s the 550 EX going for now? I can only imagine… If prier experiences are any indication, its probably half the price of the camera.
Z
Zeb
Apr 9, 2004
Try Control+Option+Command+8
C
Cindy
Apr 9, 2004
macmanx,

$330. The Sigma is $189 and works fine.
R
Ram
Apr 9, 2004
Try Control+Option+Command+8

Does absolutely nothing in Mac OS 9.2.2.
T
Todie
Apr 9, 2004
Turns night to day in OSX.
M
macmanx
Apr 9, 2004
Does absolutely nothing in Mac OS 9.2.2.

There used to be a key combo for 8/9 too, but can’t think of it right now. When I get a chance I’ll look through my OS manuals and see if I can find it.
R
Ram
Apr 9, 2004
Turns night to day in OS X.

I know it does, Todie; but not in 9.x. That’s why I think Sylvain’s workaround is great for 9.x users.
M
macmanx
Apr 9, 2004
Thanks, Cindy. I’ll wait and see what kind of results I get with 420EX combo before I decide on further action.

My only regret now is that I’ll have to invest in CF cards. Oh, well… I wanted a digital Canon, but the deal I got on the Sony was simply too good to be refused. Plus, its still a good little camera that’ll be handy to keep around for a while.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 9, 2004
I disagree strongly with Cindy regarding strobes.

You may want to review earlier strobe discussions (e.g. post 986) in this thread before any strobe purchase decisions: a strobe that "works with" a camera is not necessarily "state of the art" with that camera. It makes no sense not to take advantage of the very latest technology when it can greatly improve the quality of flash pix. If you buy a 300D there is only one right strobe choice. Or with the (IMO much better flash system) Nikon D70 there are only two right strobe choices.

Financially even the lowest end digital SLR (the Rebel 300) with cheapest external strobe is in the range of US$1500 total package. Spending 10% more to get the optimal strobe for the camera/lens combination is the smart way to go. If someone cannot afford the correct external strobe they should simply not purchase an external strobe.

In the 1970s and before, third party strobes were often better than those from camera manufacturers. Since the advent of computerization in camera/lens/strobe combinations in the 1980s, however, the performance of matched camera/lens/strobe combinations has typically FAR outperformed third party solutions. The 2003/2004 versions are the best yet, very much improving the quality of most flash pix – especially in the hands of less skilled photogs.

As a working tool for the kind of work Linda referenced, IMO having the very best, most modern strobe/camera/lens system is a hugely important characteristic.

Note 1: the above comments refer to on-camera external flash units for 2004 film/digital SLR cameras.

Note 2: not all lenses, even those by the same camera/strobe manufacturer, support optimum strobe operation (more prepurchase homework to do).
R
Ram
Apr 9, 2004
Allen makes a very good point.

the performance of matched camera/lens/strobe combinations has typically FAR outperformed third party solutions. The 2003/2004 versions are the best yet, very much improving the quality of most flash pix – especially in the hands of less skilled photogs.

Personally, I have never used an external flash directly on the camera, always on a bracket (or on a separate tripod, if shooting conditions allow it).

[EDITED TO ADD: Obviously, in a studio you would use studio lighting.]
C
Cindy
Apr 9, 2004
Allen,

I am not going to read over all the threads to find where I DID previously state that I thought getting the 550 EX was a better idea if you can afford but I did say it. But I also believe that if you are strapped for money the Sigma works fine. It is what I did and I don’t regret it.

You keep harping on the same thing when I have already agreed with you.

macmanx ask me about the 420 and my answer was relative to that as I don’t feel it is adequate if you are going to use an external flash because it isn’t strong enough and it does not have FEC.

As far as my camera choice I am completely happy with my choices for a number of reasons which I won’t go into…again. I reviewed it again today and came to the same conclusions.
R
Ram
Apr 9, 2004
There’s not a single "bad" digital SLR camera among the models currently out there.
M
macmanx
Apr 9, 2004
Depends on your definition of ‘bad’.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 9, 2004
I fully agree with Ramón that among the current crop of digital SLRs there are no bad ones, just different ones. There are, however, IMO only a very few appropriate strobe choices.
M
macmanx
Apr 10, 2004
I wonder why Linda is so quiet today? Could she be out shopping… [gasp].
JV
John_Vitollo
Apr 10, 2004
What? Linda is buying a camera? Is the sky falling?
L
LRK
Apr 10, 2004
I’m back… not shopping yet. 🙂 I plan to wait until after the holiday weekend to check out my local camera stores. Now that I know what I want, I don’t want to wait too long or some other cause will beg for my bank account. 🙂

Monday I have a job to finish. Tuesday one of my clients wants another Photoshop lesson before he goes north for the summer. So I might aim for Wednesday or Thursday. I am very excited about this.

Allen, I do plan to buy the 550 EX Strobe. Not sure if it will be at the same time as the camera. We shall see.

Hi John! I wondered where you were. I am going for the Canon 300D.
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Apr 10, 2004
Why are you fellows referring the flash units as strobes? A flash unit lamp and housing is very different in design, light emission and color temperature than a strobe unit.

It might sound professional and the camera manufacturers may be labeling these flash units as strobes but quite frankly there is no comparison even if they are technical considered a strobe. It’s like calling Welch’s grape jelly preserves. Just doesn’t spread the same way.

But don’t let me ruin your fun.
R
Ram
Apr 10, 2004
Depends on your definition of ‘bad’.

OK, macmanx, I’m trying hard to like you here. Please enlighten me as to which one of the currently available digital SLRs is bad according to your definition.
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 10, 2004
The only recent digital camera which springs to mind that I would actually call bad is the Kodak 14n. To be fair there is a brand new updated version that is probably a lot better but the original camera which was launched about a year ago suffered from terrible noise levels in shadow areas that required huge amounts of post production work and it was very limited in its ISO settings. Despite the incredible 14MP resolution I’d still call that a bad digital camera.

I have no axe to grind with Kodak, I just don’t think the noise levels shown on that camera in practically any situation except the studio were acceptable with a "pro" label on the camera.

On a slightly different subject, has anybody seen this:

<http://www.grafphoto.com/articles/printdogma.html>
L
LRK
Apr 10, 2004
Ashley: That is an interesting article. The Nikon D2-H is 4.1 Megapixels. I wonder what kind of results Mark would get with one of the newer cameras.
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 10, 2004
Linda, the D2h is actually a very new camera that was only released a few months ago. It is aimed at sports photographers primarily who need speed rather than high resolution and there have been a few reports that the quality is not as good as it should be.

Really that article just backed up what I said earlier that producing successful large format prints is very subject dependent and relies heavily on the method of interpolation chosen.

I always feel with digital that when you get everything right it can look fantastic, but small errors which would often not show with film can make you look bad as a photographer if you mess up. The capture medium may have changed but good technique is more essential than ever.
L
LRK
Apr 10, 2004
Sorry I was mistaken about the camera.

I’m getting nervous now. My printer needs more attention ($$$)… and my husband says he needs whatever money I can give him. Oi! Getting a headache. 😉
Z
Zeb
Apr 10, 2004
These images are not altered in any way different than my typical prep for web display. They are Fine JPEGs, straight from the D2H camera, ISO200, resized to 72 dpi, converted to sRGB colorspace, and one application of USM at 500%, R0.1, T0 simply to correct for digital capture.

What a bizarre way to set up a picture for printing.
C
colorfulbird
Apr 10, 2004
Why are you fellows referring the flash units as strobes?

I was wondering that myself and came across this site (scroll down to the Strobe and Flash section);

Flash terminology < http://www.photonotes.org/articles/eos-flash/index2.html#fla sh>
L
LRK
Apr 10, 2004
Hi CB. Thanks for sharing that link. Lot’s of information about flashes. I’m bookmarking it for reference.
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Apr 10, 2004
Ashley it should be pointed out that the lab probably used a very high end sharpening software and that they use such as software at a lab I use to use called Color wheel where I saw them take a low resolution scan made from a slide on a poor flat bed scanner that was fussy and pixelated at 4 x6 inches and re-interpolate the file to 11×14 and it looked as good as what you saw in that posting.

So yes if you have the software you are fie and quite frankly it doesn’t matter how you shoot it.

Heidleberg has such software a very interesting thing to see. I am sure there are others.
R
Ram
Apr 10, 2004
Ashley,

The only recent digital camera which springs to mind that I would actually call bad is the Kodak 14n.

You’re right of course, That camera was not only bad but terrible. I don’t think it qualifies as a current model any more, though. From my viewpoint, it represented a premature release motivated by sheer desperation on the part of Kodak.
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Apr 10, 2004
"…it represented a premature release motivated by sheer desperation"

That is my feeling about all digital cameras.
T
Todie
Apr 10, 2004
Wade, Wanna play with a Kodak DCS Pro Back?
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Apr 11, 2004
Sure why not you have one? Are we talking about the medium format or large format version? The medium format you know will no longer be made! That is because they think that it will not improve the quality over the newer 35mm size digital cameras and of course they aren’t selling a whole lot of them.

But I will be glad to play with it.
T
Todie
Apr 11, 2004
Medium format.
How’s 6:30 PM?
(you name the day)
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 11, 2004
Wade-

I have always used the term strobe rather than flash to apply to both. The dictionary definition is

strobe light: n. A flash lamp that produces high-intensity short-duration light pulses by electric discharge in a gas.

Anyway it sounds like just semantics to me.

Regarding technical differences between (using your preferred terminolgy) strobes and flashes, would you please elaborate? My understanding was that flash units like those used on Nikon & Canon SLRs are around 5000K temperature as are "daylight" studio strobes; the big difference being in power and recycle times. Of course studio strobes of other temps are also available.

Suggesting that all digital cameras are premature is pretty silly when the digital SLRs work so well and have so many benefits over scanned 35 mm film for many pix. Only when compared to scanned medium format film are SLR digicams still premature.
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Apr 11, 2004
The studio strobe or monolight or mono block units have a lamp that is mounted outside of the housing that is they send the light in all directs. they doe have a small reflective surface behind the lamp but they remain omnidirectional and are general shape in a circular con figuration although there are more specialized lamps as well, as opposed to a flash unit which has a lineal tube that is housed in a reflective housing and offers only directional lighting, part of the reason for red eye. The color temperature of the flash unit as opposed to a professional strobe unit I have never seen one that is actually 5000k even though all of them state that they are 5000k.

Because a strobe is omnidirectional if you bounce it of two or three adjoining surfaces you will obtain a true diffused light and a very natural look you will never be able to achieve this with a flash. It is true that light is light but it becomes an issue when you want to control it. You can use all sort of bounce apparatus with a flash and you will never achieve what you will with a simple operation and a strobe unit.

Also keep in mind the amount of power and light you will get from a strobe output is enormous by comparison to any flash unit 1000ws is something like a guide number of 600. The highest monolight comes in 1500ws I believe but there are power packs that yield 6000ws though you need several heads to take advantage of this.

A powerful flash might yield 100ws the Norman 200B is 200ws and is really a battery operated strobe as it requires a reflector to give it true directional light as do all strobe units.

Todie 6:30 would be fine where would one meet I guess at Color Edge how about tomorrow?
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Apr 11, 2004
Allen, it is true what you say about what the dictionary says as it is not defining the word in the professional context that a photographer might.

There are strobes that are not even photographic equipment. I am referring to the difference between camera flash and a bona-fide studio or location strobe or mono-light.
T
Todie
Apr 11, 2004
This Sunday’s no good, Wade.
Sorry!
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Apr 11, 2004
Sorry it is Easter. Happy Holiday!

I do not follow religious Holidays myself, I have no real calling for it. So I am never up to date, perhaps next week when the Holidays are over. They are over then? I know I have clients away until next Friday.

Is that when it all ends? I hope you are not offended by my ignorance in this matter.
T
Todie
Apr 11, 2004
No offence, Wade.
(I don’t care about Holidays myself, but my family and some friends do : )
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Apr 11, 2004
So how about next week?
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 11, 2004
Ramon, I am hearing some much more positive things about the new Kodak 14n and from a couple professionals that I trust. It seems like a lot of the old problems have been fixed and that this camera is now capable of some outstanding results.

The overall opinion I have heard is that it is a camera which needs to be treated with great care and that the 1Ds is more tolerant of exposure errors, however, if you get it right with the new incarnation of the 14n its honestly capable of outperforming the 1Ds from a quality standpoint with higher resolution and much better colours and zero noise that really takes sharpening very well.
T
Todie
Apr 11, 2004
Wade, You said you’re booked till Friday.
How’s Monday the 19th, 6:30PM on 29th Street?
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Apr 11, 2004
Fine, is that at the 29th Offices of Color Edge?
T
Todie
Apr 12, 2004
Wade, Send me an email, please!
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Apr 12, 2004
Larry I lost my e-mail dat base.

But here is mine e-mail:

M
macmanx
Apr 12, 2004
Please enlighten me as to which one of the currently available digital SLRs is bad according to your definition.

The only DSLR I’ve ever used or been associated with was with the Canon D60, which I enjoyed. My post was in reference to a recent incident… I ran into someone in a coffee shop who said he used a HP DSLR for a week. His exact words: A piece of sh*t.
D
Dan-o
Apr 12, 2004
That’s because HP is a printer company. I’m not even sure what would posess a person to buy an expensive camera from HP (or Epson for that matter). Would you buy a blender from Toyota or a bicycle from Panasonic?

🙂

Granted, they pitch themselves as a digital photo company, but there’s a difference between making a good consumer-grade PAS camera vs. a fully functional DSLR. Entirely different animals.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 12, 2004
AFAIK HP has never made a digital SLR.

….and would be wise not to try.
CC
Chris_Cox
Apr 12, 2004
Ashley – have you tried one of the Sigma digital cameras? Those are even worse than the 14n.
R
Ram
Apr 12, 2004
Macman,

I ran into someone in a coffee shop who said he used a HP DSLR for a week.

That "someone" gave you pure BS. There has never been a digital SLR manufactured by HP or marketed under the HP brand that I can find anywhere.
They might have been refering to the HP PhotoSmart cameras (an SLR-like camera.. not a true SLR…instead of having a mirror, there is a beam-splitting prism that directs part of the light to the viewfinder and part of the light to the CCD sensor)
R
Ram
Apr 13, 2004
HP PhotoSmart cameras (an SLR-like camera.. not a true SLR…instead of having a mirror, there is a beam-splitting prism

And they don’t have interchangeable lenses either. Not a "digital SLR" by a long shot.
B
Buko
Apr 13, 2004
Remeber the R stands for reflex which means the mirror moves.

no moving mirror no SLR.
B
Buko
Apr 13, 2004
Now thats cool i got #1111

Much cooler than #1000
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 13, 2004
Better fix the spelling for so momentous a post.
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 13, 2004
Chris – no I’ve never handled any of the 14n bodies whether Nikon or Sigma based.

I never thought for a moment that the handling would be as good as the Canon 1Ds but I have heard that if you edge towards overexposure with the 14n and use Camera Raw you can preserve the highlights and still maintain noise free shadows with great colours and resolution.

The photographers I know who are doing this are very satisfied with the results and say are preferable to the 1Ds which they have also used.
L
LRK
Apr 13, 2004
Whatever makes you happy Buko…lol! Congratulations on #1111.
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 13, 2004
Sorry Chris, with this bad cold I misunderstood your original question. This medicine is strong stuff!

No I haven’t ever played with the Sigma digital cameras, though I have received a few files to play with. The images looked very sharp, but the jagged edges in some parts were pretty horrible and the colour looked like it had come from some cheap no brand film and had been poorly processed.
M
macmanx
Apr 13, 2004
There has never been a digital SLR manufactured by HP or marketed under the HP brand that I can find anywhere.

Interesting! I never saw the camera in question… I just did a search at dpreview for ‘SLR’, and the HP Photosmart C912 shows up alongside the Canon 300D, 10D, Kodak’s, and others. Under format: SLR. However, looking at the picture and reading the specs, reveals otherwise. Looks like the poor guy fell for the marketing hype.

This seems to be a good case for: Don’t believe everything you hear…
D
Dan-o
Apr 13, 2004
Either way (I’ve never even bothered looking at HP cameras), whether it’s an SLR or an integrated "prosumer" camera (like the E-20), you’d be nuts to spend a lot of money on an HP camera. They make some OK Point and Shoot type deals I think (competing with Kodak and Fuji PAS), but that’s about it. Marketing hype indeed.
R
Ram
Apr 13, 2004
Macmanx,

The HP Photosmart C912, definitely not an SLR, is nothing other than the Pentax EI-2000 sold in Japan in Europe under the proper model and brand name of its manufacturer. It was made by Pentax with the HP name and logo stamped on it.

While not a digital SLR by any stretch of the imagination, that Pentax camera was actually an excellent performer within the limits of its class range (2.24 megapixels) at the time it came out. It was made to look more like an SLR, at the time when digital cameras in its class looked more like belt buckles or screwed up miniature TVs, but it had none of the functioning characteristics of a digital SLR.

So you got double BS from that person.
L
LRK
Apr 13, 2004
I’m almost afraid to tell you all this. Looks like the IRS is eating up my camera money… and then some.

Not all loss though… At least I can keep dreaming… and by the time I’m ready maybe the black version of the 300D will be available in the US.
T
Todie
Apr 13, 2004
"We got what it takes to take what you got"
R
Ram
Apr 13, 2004
Linda,

I make it a point to go through with my spring purchases before completing my tax return. I know what the IRS does to people’s plans. Fortunately, this year I owe them less than any time in the past 25 years, but I still have to mail them that check –on the 15th and not one day before.
L
LRK
Apr 13, 2004
That’s funny Ramon. My husband is filing early this year. 🙂 It’s too late for my camera purchase. It was my income that did it too. I made more than I thought I did.
Linda–

Spend the money by investing back into your business.
I always purchase equipment at the end of the year so that the tax bite is not so big.
L
LRK
Apr 13, 2004
Hi Bonnie,

That’s a good idea. Too late this time though. I also forgot to mention that my next big expense will probably be my inevitable printer repairs. Hey, anyone want to buy a lemon of a printer for $3,000.00. I paid around $6,500.00 for it and it retailed for $8,000.00 with the duplexer. Joking of course… no one is going to want my printer. 😉
KN
Ken_Nielsen
Apr 13, 2004
"I made more than I thought I did."

Congratulations. And, Uncle Sam thanks you.

PS, We are so busy here, not really set up with the new DCS Pro SLR/n Camera, thanks for the post about adding RAM. A beautiful camera, requiring that we upgrade the G4 we use in the photo studio.

Post 1126… sure is a lot of drooling going on around here.
IL
Ian_Lyons
Apr 13, 2004
Buko,

Remeber the R stands for reflex which means the mirror moves.

no moving mirror no SLR

You might wish to reconsider your definition of an SLR

< http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/1987-1991/data/198 9_eosrt.html>
R
Ram
Apr 13, 2004
Ian,

Maybe I’m missing it, but where does it say it has no mirror?

[EDIT] Ah! I see now, no "moving" mirror. That opens up a can of worms, though.
B
Buko
Apr 13, 2004
Hmmm…

thats interesting. but is it a true reflex?

I realize its called an SLR
R
Ram
Apr 13, 2004
The fixed pellicle mirror was introduced back then when the Canon Pellix came out, if I recall correctly. Yes, there were arguments pro and con as to whether it was a true reflex. The idea was that it wasn’t just a prism splitting the light, but if the mirror did reflect enough light through the viewfinder, then it wasn’t a plain mirror either. Just the same, not all the light entering the lens reached the focal plane, since part of it went to the eye of person taking the shot.
IL
Ian_Lyons
Apr 13, 2004
That opens up a can of worms, though.

Nope! Worms is for the garden, feeding the birds or fish bait.

Canon have been making fixed mirror cameras for just short of four decades. Somehow I think that had the definition of SLR been a moving mirror then they would have corrected their blunder by now 😉

< http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/1955-1969/data/196 5_prx.html>

< http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/1955-1969/data/196 6_prxql.html>

< http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/1992-1996/data/199 5_eos-1n-rs.html>
B
Buko
Apr 14, 2004
Note : no mention of the mirror having to move!

well ya learn something new every day
R
Ram
Apr 14, 2004
Ian,

Canon have been making fixed mirror cameras for just short of four decades.

I agree. The Canon Pellix I mentioned in my post # 1130 was the first one. Your link confirms it.

Still, the Pentax EI-2000/HP C912 had no mirror, but a prism that splits the light in two.

Even if you apply the definition of SLR very broadly to include a prism instead of a mirror in order to apply it to Pentax EI-2000/HP C912, which is a bit of stretch (in the German-speaking world, it was marketed as a "spiegelreflexartige Kamera", "SLR-like camera"), the fact is that it was not a "bad" camera in its class.
R
Ram
Apr 14, 2004
So, same camera, called an "SLR-like camera" in Europe and a "digital SLR" by HP in the USA. That says something about HP’s perception of their customer base.
T
Todie
Apr 14, 2004
It may be the law, Ramón.
R
Ram
Apr 14, 2004
What law?
T
Todie
Apr 14, 2004
Take your pick : )
<http://www.hg.org/advert.html>
R
Ram
Apr 14, 2004
Then you should have written "a law" rather than "the law", since you’re speculating and not referencing a specific law. Besides, advertising laws are rarely enforced and even more rarely complied with.
R
Ram
Apr 14, 2004
I do think it has to do with what a corporation perceives to be the strength or weakness of their intended market base. The usual hype we see in the US rarely goes well in Europe, in my observation. It’s more a question of approach rather than claims, I think.
T
Todie
Apr 14, 2004
Advertisers wish to get away with many tricks, both in Europe and the US, but some things, like (just an example) subliminal messages are prohibited by law.
R
Ram
Apr 14, 2004
Have you ever heard of anyone being sued or prosecuted over subliminal messages?
R
Ram
Apr 14, 2004
Do you think subliminal messages are not out there?
T
Todie
Apr 14, 2004
I have seen someone get a ticket for jay-walking : )

I think American professional photographers are not dumber then their European counterparts.
B
Buko
Apr 14, 2004
Do you think subliminal messages are not out there?

NO WAY

send me all your money

THAT SORT OF THING IS BAD

send me all your money

PEOPLE WHO STOOP TO THAT SORT OF THING ARE JUST AWFUL

send me all your money
T
Todie
Apr 14, 2004
Actual cases involving so-called "subliminal advertising" are, in actuality, few and far between. Nevertheless, one recent federal district court case did involve the allegation of subliminal advertising. (Rickel v. Mountain Valley Television Corporation, et al., No. C-96-1033 DLJ, United States District Court for the Northern District of California, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19961, November 27, 1996.)

<http://www.lawpublish.com/subliminal.html#subliminal>
R
Ram
Apr 14, 2004
I have seen someone get a ticket for jay-walking : )

Oh, I’ve seen a senior federal judge being ticketed for jay walking two blocks from the federal courthouse. That’s easy to accomplish. 🙂

Suing or prosecuting for advertising excesses is a horse of a different color.

I think American professional photographers are not dumber then their European counterparts.

I hardly think a professional photographer (anywhere in the world) would have considered buying the HP C912. The intended market base is a different one. And, yes, it’s easier to get a certain segment of the American consumer base to buy certain things like pet rocks or a pasta machine. Look at Ron Popeil.
R
Ram
Apr 14, 2004
Todie,

The case you cite got summarily thrown out, even in San Francisco. Read it.

So not only are those cases extremely rare, but even more rarely successful.
T
Todie
Apr 14, 2004
I bet that the jay-walking ticket you mentioned was dismissed too : )

The "subliminal" case was dismissed for lack of evidence (not law).
T
Todie
Apr 14, 2004
Anyway, I think that SLRs are targeting professionals.
Consumers couldn’t care less.
R
Ram
Apr 14, 2004
We had concluded that the HP C912 is not an SLR, not is it remotely aimed at professionals. (One non-removable 3x zoom lens + 2x digital zoom, 2 megapixel, etc.) The "digital SLR designation" was aimed at certain types of snobs in the market who know little about photography.

Nope, that ticket wasn’t dismissed. The judge sent a cheque forfeiting bail, i. e, paid the fine.
T
Todie
Apr 14, 2004
…. that ticket wasn’t dismissed. …

I’m glad!
R
Ram
Apr 14, 2004
Well, the gentleman was soon thereafter diagnosed with Alzheimers. If he hadn’t paid the fine, the ticket would have been dismissed. He’s passed away since.
T
Todie
Apr 14, 2004
sorry to hear that
M
macmanx
Apr 14, 2004
While not a digital SLR by any stretch of the imagination, that Pentax camera was actually an excellent performer within the limits of its class range (2.24 megapixels) at the time it came out.

If this is the same model the person I talked to used, then he certainly didn’t share your glowing reviews. Quite the opposite, in fact… three flaws he harped on were: corrupted memory cards, (his biggest beef) exposure problems, and excessive battery usage.

So you got double BS from that person.

Not necessarily! There are those ignominious creatures posing under the moniker of ‘Lemons’ rolling off assembling lines every day. Its quite possible that he could’ve gotten hold of a ‘Monday Morning Special’, or a late ‘Friday Afternoon Express’. He certainly wouldn’t have been the first person cursed with that affliction. Nor, sorry to say, the last!
L
LRK
Apr 14, 2004
Things are looking a little better. I might end up with money for the 300D after all, in a week or two.
JV
John_Vitollo
Apr 14, 2004
Great…then this thread can get back track! :-X
L
LRK
Apr 14, 2004
And I even made my estimated tax payment for 2004…

Pshyco hype battery being charged as I type. 🙂
R
Ram
Apr 14, 2004
Macmanx,

You’re talking about hypothetical conclusions based on a model you’re not even sure of, used by a person you ran into in a coffee shop, and you feel confident to express an opinion on a camera you’ve never used and debate it. It certainly puts your previous posts into perspective.
R
Ram
Apr 14, 2004
… your previous posts …

I’m referring only to those aimed at me, of course.
C
Cindy
Apr 14, 2004
sigh….beautiful day outside…
L
LRK
Apr 14, 2004
Here too Cindy. We even got a cold front if you can believe it. 🙂
R
Ram
Apr 14, 2004
Unfortunately, not here. It was 92 degrees on Saturday, now we’re back to an expected high of 64 today. Overcast, possible rain.
Raining (and cold) here for the past 4 days & looks like it will not clear until Saturday.
M
macmanx
Apr 15, 2004
You’re talking about hypothetical conclusions based on a model you’re not even sure of, used by a person you ran into in a coffee shop, and you feel confident to express an opinion on a camera you’ve never used and debate it. It certainly puts your previous posts into perspective.

Oh man, here we go again… this topic is perilously spiraling out of control, so I’ll take the initiative step to rise above it and put it to sleep.

Somehow, somewhere, we got off to a rough start, Ramon. I’m throwing out my white flag… Truce..?
M
macmanx
Apr 15, 2004
Things are looking a little better. I might end up with money for the 300D after all, in a week or two.

Linda,

Keep digging away… I need a 300D ciber-buddy to share my trials and tribulations with once I eventually spring for mine… 🙂 Hopefully, Cindy will take us under her wing as well.

That darn old tax man… seems like every year he wants a bigger slice of the pie, doesn’t he? One of these years we’ll just have to throw up our hands and say: enough is enough, and go on strike. Or, form a union! Maybe that’ll teach ’em… 😉
L
LRK
Apr 15, 2004
MacManX: I’m trying to remember… Do you already own the 300D or are you getting ready to buy one? Cyber-buddy sounds like a good idea… Kind of like an extension of what we are doing in this thread. Cindy has been a wonderful resource and inspiration with photography to me… and provided she has the time, I trust will enjoy teaming up with us.
C
Cindy
Apr 15, 2004
I never miss an opportunity to share about my most recent obsession…:)
R
Ram
Apr 15, 2004
Macmanx,

Truce..?

By all means. Skip my posts; I’ll skip yours. 🙂
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 15, 2004
Very extensive Nikon D70 review at <http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D70/D70A.HTM>.

The D70 is compared to the Rebel 300D and other cameras in a very comprehensive review. The review seems to concur with my earlier opinion that at only US$100 more than the digital Rebel 300D (camera bodies only) the Nikon D70 is MUCH more camera.

Among other things, the author in detail and with sample photos disusses the HUGE benefits of the latest Nikon flash technology as expressed in the D2h and D70, confirming what I posted earlier:

"From the above, it’s easy to see that flash photography is one area in which the D70 easily outdistances its competition. To even approach the capability offered by the D70, you’d have to spend several hundred dollars more for a wireless strobe trigger system for a competing d-SLR. And even with a wireless slave system, you’d still lack the effortless TTL flash metering the D70 provides. If you have any significant interest in flash photography, the D70 really stands alone (along with its big brother, the D2H) in the d-SLR market."

This review seems to concur with my earlier opinion that at only US$100 more than the digital Rebel 300D (camera bodies only) the Nikon D70 is MUCH more camera.

I may buy one while I wait for the D2x to appear.
L
LRK
Apr 15, 2004
Allen,

Thanks for the link. I went there and attempted to preview some of the photos. After a few previews they crashed my browser. I’ll try downloading them this time so I can see up close how things look.

I’m hoping to find an updated page with comparrison photos between the 300D and the D70. I realize I’m supposed to not go by all that but it’s better than nothing right now. 🙂
L
LRK
Apr 15, 2004
I hope you don’t hate me… I know I’m not supposed to go by those samples… but I figure who ever took those pictures surely knows more than I do, so I must somewhat go by them… but I think they are missing something… particularly the Musicians group. Ugh!
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 15, 2004
Linda-

That review site has reviewed almost every digicam since digicams started coming out. Generally they do a very good job.

The pix are not supposed to "look good." They are a standard set of pix they take with every camera reviewed, to attempt to compare different sensors/software/etc. Particularly early in the digicam evolution individual cameras would shoot warmer or with a green cast or whatever. Today mostly they can help with identifying resolution quality and the ability to check shadow detail.

The musicians image I believe they use to visualize white balance changes. You may also check the same musicians image as tested on the other cameras you consider. However in my strong opinion what really matters is what YOU test shoot. Like I have said many times, ergonomics are far, far more important than small details as reported by any given reviewer, and more important than other folks opinions in this thread, including mine.
L
LRK
Apr 15, 2004
Okay… I do appreciate your input and the education I am receiving. Thanks Allen!
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Apr 16, 2004
Ha! It’s too late I just read that Jeb Bush has outlawed the use of digital cameras in the State of Florida because they cause to many car accidents! Or is that cell phones?
C
Cindy
Apr 16, 2004
Ha! Its cell phones..
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Apr 16, 2004
Excuse me…!
B
Buko
Apr 16, 2004
That is so stupid.

But its ok to eat a hamburger and drive??
C
Cindy
Apr 16, 2004
You would be amazed the things people do when they drive.
T
Todie
Apr 16, 2004
If it saves lives…
B
Buko
Apr 16, 2004
If it saves lives…

Well we better ban cigarettes and everything else that’s harmful.

what ever happened to common sense??
T
Todie
Apr 16, 2004
Second hand smoke doesn’t kill.
<http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2003/05/16/smoking030516> Second rate driving does.

(It’s about others geting killed)

Common sense is alive and well.
B
Buko
Apr 16, 2004
Second hand smoke doesn’t kill

but first hand smoke does.

are you going to tell me that there has never been an accident because a driver was eating or reading the newspaper or shaving or using the stereo or putting on makeup etc…

but cell phones are bad.

OK Todie whatever you say.

Common sense is NOT alive and well.
T
Todie
Apr 16, 2004
Keep your hands on the wheel : )
It’s the law. (… and makes sense)
B
Buko
Apr 16, 2004
Keep your hands on the wheel : ) It’s the law. (… and makes sense)

that’s sensible.

Banning just cell phones is not.
T
Todie
Apr 16, 2004
You can have two laws about the same crime : )

Here, I was looking for "the law" but I found some good jokes instead: <http://www.familycar.com/Driving/smiles.htm>

Enjoy!

(My favorite: "BAD COP! – NO DONUT!!!")
L
LRK
Apr 16, 2004
I didn’t know that law passed. I guess I’d better get in the habit of turning mine off while I drive… since I am a compulsive phone answerer.

As for Jeb Bush, we are lucky to have him in Florida… regardless of what I might think about the cell phone law… although cell phones really are a problem on the road.

Now, let’s not spoil this wonderful thread.

Back to digital cameras? 🙂

I have one of the pros getting ready to show me some shots from his new Nikon D70. He has all kinds of equipment and has won all kinds of awards for his photography. He is elated over the new Nikon so I’m going to take another look.
B
Buko
Apr 16, 2004
Linda you should get a head set. that’s what I use.

$20- $40 in Radio Shack.
L
LRK
Apr 16, 2004
Sounds good Buko. I’ll look into it. Thanks!
L
LRK
Apr 16, 2004
Oy!

What to do now?

I’ve been asked to take some pictures of this year’s Parade of Breeds for our community Equestrian Show (this one not for pay). I lost track of the time and just found out that it’s this Sunday. Last time I used my Nikon 990 but this time I would like to be able to use my new camera… but I haven’t bought it yet… and worst of all, I don’t know how to use it…

If I buy the Canon 300D, I wonder if the automatic settings work sufficiently in a pinch. 🙂
JV
John_Vitollo
Apr 16, 2004
Here’s the mother of all digital camera reviews page. That should keep everyone really busy and this thread back on track.

<http://www.noendpress.com/pvachier/cameras/>

Sunday is cutting it close even if camera is easy to use. But it might be worth a try if you can play with the camera today and tomorrow.
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Apr 16, 2004
See if you can take the Canon "on approval" for the weekend: you have all of today and tomorrow to practice with it so you should be fine by Sunday.

BUT…

Take your Nikon to the Show as well and take shots on both cameras — then you will have yourself covered!
C
Cindy
Apr 16, 2004
Good rational thinking Ann…
L
LRK
Apr 16, 2004
Thanks for the link John. I’ll check it out shortly.

Hi Ann. I got on the phone and called a local camera shop. They don’t have the 300D in stock and are going to call me back about ordering it and price.

I think I’d better slow down. I want to enjoy this process and not be pushed into anything. My 990 did a decent job for the last two shows, better than any other photos I saw if I remember right. It should serve me well enough again. Some of the photos will be published in an equestrian magazine… provided they turn out okay.

Maybe I’ll dig up some from the last two shows and see what you think.
L
LRK
Apr 16, 2004
Hi Cindy… cross-posted with you. 🙂
JV
John_Vitollo
Apr 16, 2004
Bite the bullet and buy the Canon 300D – enough of this monkey business!
L
LRK
Apr 16, 2004
Arf! Did I just get a kick in the pants? 🙂

I have to find one in stock first, lol!
C
Cindy
Apr 16, 2004
Bite the bullet and buy the Canon 300D – enough of this monkey business!

Thats what Im thinking. There are plenty of camera shops in your area. Call around.

I like the idea of taking your old camera to take duplicate pictures..
L
LRK
Apr 16, 2004
Cindy: Yes, that is a good idea… thanks Ann!
L
LRK
Apr 16, 2004
Oy! I’m a little nervous. The other place I called last week was short with me. I want to find a place where they will offer me support and be NICE too. If they are short over the phone without having met me, what will they be like if I end up having lots of questions. I may as well order from Mac Mall if that’s the case… cause I sure won’t have the nerve to go in for help if I’m not comfortable.
JV
John_Vitollo
Apr 16, 2004
Linda,

I’m giving you some tough love :-}

My Apple Store here in NJ has them – how about yours?
MO
Mike_Ornellas
Apr 16, 2004
This is the best deal Linda.

Buy the body and pick up a different lens because the stock lens is junk.

< http://us1camera.com/shop/Product.asp?ProdTypeList=2050& Sku=canonrebel>
L
LRK
Apr 16, 2004
John: I know… 🙂

Maybe the Apple store is a good idea. It’s an hours drive though. It’s getting late to start out now as most places close by 6PM. Maybe I’ll start out early tomorrow morning, start at my end of town, and work my way south to the Apple store. The Ritz store is also in the same mall, which is where I tried out the 300D a few weeks ago.
L
LRK
Apr 16, 2004
Hi Mike,

Just saw your post. I’m checking your link now.

Thanks!
C
Cindy
Apr 16, 2004
The kit lens is PERFECT for starting out. You will not be ready to buy more lenses for a while. I have taken some great shots with it.
MO
Mike_Ornellas
Apr 16, 2004
waste of money…..
C
Cindy
Apr 16, 2004
And just what lens would you recommend for her starting out? Cost?
L
LRK
Apr 16, 2004
LOL! I’ve got to slow down. I’m getting sweaty palms I tell ya… and giddy to boot! 🙂
L
LRK
Apr 16, 2004
I will be buying the kit lens… mainly because I have way too much to learn to be messing around with special lenses at this point. I’ll start with the basics and then add to them once I get more experience.

BTW Mike… what do you use?
C
Cindy
Apr 16, 2004
Cross post so nevermind 🙂
MO
Mike_Ornellas
Apr 16, 2004
Sigma 28 to 70

around 350.

smooth, quick, sharp. Nice unit!

All the photographer geeks are using the 300d.

There everywhere!

;o)

The stock lens is yucky.
MO
Mike_Ornellas
Apr 16, 2004
Yea that’s it.

The less expensive looks like a WAY better choice than the stock unit.

I’d go for that instead Linda.
MO
Mike_Ornellas
Apr 16, 2004
btw.

When I ordered my 300d from US1camera, a free soft case and filer was included.
C
Cindy
Apr 16, 2004
I was just reading how some of the Sigma 28-70 2.8 need to be re-chipped because they are causing ERR 99
L
LRK
Apr 16, 2004
Thanks Mike. I am checking it out.
JV
John_Vitollo
Apr 16, 2004
Linda,

For the extra $75 I’d get the kit lens as it’s nice and wide…then get a second lens in a few months when you feel comfortable with the camera… you might have a better idea on what lens you could use as you mentioned about shooting birds – the 28-70 is just too short for bird photography. Though the pros use 400 to 600mm lens you could get a 300 Zoom as a compromise.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 16, 2004
It appears that prepurchase handling/testing of cameras is a lost concept on this group. <sigh>

It appears that recommendations to stick with the-same-brand for cameras, lenses and strobes ia also lost on this group. Folks seem to think that the cheaper third party manufacturers fully understand what Nikon and Canon are up to with their complex electronics, both now and in the future. <sigh> <sigh>
MO
Mike_Ornellas
Apr 16, 2004
I’m a color specialist, not a photographer.

I know what I know.

take it or leave it.
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 16, 2004
The ERR 99 messages is the Canon "fit all" explanation for anything it can’t quite explain. It happens with Canon lenses too and might not be anything to do with the lenses at all. I’ve luckily never had this problem but know some others who experience it regularly. Canon seemed intent on making this look like a Sigma issue and that is not necessarily the case.

With all that said, I once bought a Sigma lens but sold it pretty quickly and now use Canon only but it was more related to an issue of colour consistency with film because the Canon lenses all seem to have the same look and the Sigma colours were very different and I have to say less attractive. Its debatable if this is so important with so much digital manipulation going on nowadays.

People underestimate the way that a lens can change the feel of an image and its not all about shear resolution. I have run frequent tests between Nikon, Canon, Carl Zeiss and Mamiya lenses and found that the biggest differences are not so much in sharpness but in the way that subtle tonal nuances are revealed.
L
LRK
Apr 16, 2004
I’m really glad you brought up the lenses Mike. It reminded me of what really turned my head toward the Canon 300D in the first place.

This picture <http://www.pbase.com/image/24687570&exif=Y> was love at first sight.

Then I had a conversation with the photographer who took that shot and here is a link to what John Burnett had to say <http://www.adobeforums.com/cgi-bin/webx?14@@.2cd0701a/114> about lenses. BTW, this conversation took place over a month ago.
L
LRK
Apr 16, 2004
Hi Ashley… reading your post now.
L
LRK
Apr 16, 2004
Re Post #1216: Thanks John. Considering all of this.
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 16, 2004
Let me put this in perspective Linda, the Canon images just looked more real to me, but don’t let my one experience from several years ago influence you too much. My chief problem was that everything was consistent on the colour front while using Canon lenses regardless of focal length or when I had bought the lens. If you threw the shots done with the Sigma somewhere in the same sequence, it looked like the lab had messed up with the processing or I’d worked with a different batch of film.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 16, 2004
No insult intended, Mike. It is just that from a gearhead’s technical perspective, inserting third party components into complex *proprietary* computer-based camera/lens/flash systems just to save a few bucks is not smart. This is not film in the 1970s; SLR digicams are complex interoperating systems, not independent stand alone components. You can still take pix with third party (or unmatched same-brand) components, but at the cost of losing some modern capabilities.

And, when purchasing components today, we want to optimize as best we can for the future as well. When I first started paying a bit more for Nikon "D" lenses back in the 80s they really had very little benefit over cheaper Nikon glass with identical optics. However, that small additional amount spent then has meant that those lenses have been capable of 100% utilization in every Nikon tech feature since then, including the latest flash system and camera technology as represented by the SB-600/800 and D2h/D70.
MO
Mike_Ornellas
Apr 16, 2004
When shooting RAW and using Adobe ACR, I capture the original seen extremely well, but than again, I don’t have a Canon lens to compare to.

Alan, no offense taken. I have really tough hide from the years of abuse.

;o)
L
LRK
Apr 16, 2004
This is probably the main paragraph I took note of from John Burnett:

The ‘tomato’ picture to which you refer was taken with a true macro lens – the Tamron 90mm f2.8. It is one of the sharpest lenses available for this purpose. I have recently settled on two other Tamrons, the 17-35 f2.8 ‘di’ and the 28-75 f2.8 ‘di’, to do most of the ‘walkabout’ photography. Note that it took two lenses to cover the range of the kit lens. Yes, I did pick up a bit of extra range, and they are a bit faster, but the chief benefit is sharpness and contrast. Ummmm, and I have that Macro lens. And a 50mm f1.8 for low light situations. And I’m thinking about a longer zoom. Arrrrgggh! You can see why many people opt for a digicam!

Would anyone like to comment on the Tamron that John Burnett spoke about?
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 16, 2004
Like I said, you can still take (excellent) pix. You are just likely to lose some features (e.g. some flash system capabilities) now and/or in the future.
C
Cindy
Apr 16, 2004
He isnt just talking about one lens but two. The first:
Tamron SP AF 17-35mm F/2.8-4 Di LD Aspherical (IF) Zoom Lens EOS = $479 Tamron SP AF 28-75mm 2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical [IF] Zoom Lens EOS = $319

Get the kit lens… After you have used the camera for a while then start your lens research. You cannot do it in a day and you need the camera now.
TI
Temporary_Identity
Apr 16, 2004
Linda,

With both Sigma and Tamron lenses, each within its own line of lenses, you will see a substantial leap in quality (and price) when you go to the faster lenses. The f/2.8 indicated maximum aperture usually remains constant throughout the range of focal lengths achievable by the zoom lens, whereby the cheaper (kit) zoom lenses are slower and their maximum aperture varies, such as 3.5-4.6 or whatever.

All of the above holds true for Nikon and Canon lenses, each within their own line of lenses.

A faster lens with non-variable maximum aperture is just more expensive to make, so it has to be aimed at a more demanding segment of the market.

One Sigma zoom lens that I found to be very good was the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8, for instance. If I were a zoom lens fan, I would have kept it.

Ramón
L
LRK
Apr 16, 2004
Thanks for restating Allen. I might have missed something at some point. I need to go back and reread this thread from today.

Thanks Cindy! You’re right… along with John V… and… whoever else I left out, lol!

Nothing like a good workout on a Friday afternoon, eh! This thread must be smokin’ up the server!
L
LRK
Apr 16, 2004
Thanks Ramon!
L
LRK
Apr 16, 2004
Okay, bear with me please as I have a hypothetical question… for those who are not ready for a nap by now. 🙂

Take the tomato shot. <http://www.pbase.com/image/24687570&exif=Y> If I were to develop the skills and understanding to do so, along with producing the same lighting, could I get a shot that good with a Canon lens?
MO
Mike_Ornellas
Apr 16, 2004
One Sigma zoom lens that I found to be very good was the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8, for instance. If I were a zoom lens fan, I would have kept it.

and get the 1 to 1 converter as well.
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 16, 2004
Linda of course you could get a shot like that of the tomato with a Canon lens and probably better as long as its the Macro version.
L
LRK
Apr 16, 2004
Thanks Ashley! That’s all I want to know. 🙂

I realize that there is a lot more to good photography than a good camera… so my expectations of what I can produce are realistic and not too lofty right now. Just so long as I know I have the right equipment to achieve my goals in time, I will be happy… very happy. 🙂
L
LRK
Apr 16, 2004
Mike, I’m glad to know you have the 300D. I know your expertise is color but I also know that you are particular.

I think I will wait on the extra lenses though.

[edited]
L
LRK
Apr 16, 2004
Re-reading this article < http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/digital-re bel.shtml> from Luminous Landscape about the 300D…

What’s Missing? Image Quality?

Surprisingly little is missing, given that Canon has had to be careful not to cannibalize sales from its next up the model-ladder brother, the almost twice as expensive 10D. Of course image quality is of primary concern, and I’ll cut to the chase. When using the same lenses image quality is essentially identical to that from the Canon 10D. Both cameras use virtually the identical imaging chip and processing electronics, so this isn’t surprising.
MO
Mike_Ornellas
Apr 16, 2004
I trust the people that use the stuff professionally.
L
LRK
Apr 16, 2004
Me too!
Linda–

Slow down. You WANT to test the camera before you purchase it.

For the horse show.. the camera you have will work just fine, you did it before with that camera & you can do it again.

Rushing into this will just get you all nervous & that won’t do you any good trying to deal with a new camera at this event.. you need to be comfortable with what you are working with.

Take the time to find the camera in stock somewhere.. so you can hold it & test it & see if it is a good fit for you. Then you can also look at the lenses & see what you like.
L
LRK
Apr 16, 2004
Bonnie,

You’re right. I might take a ride tomorrow if it looks like my schedule might be clear. But I do not want to ruin this whole thing with a sudden impulse.

BTW, I did test the 300D several weeks ago. Trouble is, at that time I was intersted in the Pro1 which was not in stock… so I failed to take the 300D seriously at that time.

I took a picture of the guy who works in the store using RAW. He also took one of me but used JPG. These were automatic settings though and when I got them home I noticed the lighting was not too good.
So go back re-look at it & be very aware of your settings, lighting conditions etc.. take your camera with you & take similar shots with your own camera.. then compare.
MO
Mike_Ornellas
Apr 16, 2004
buy it.

come on, I know you want it,
JV
John_Vitollo
Apr 16, 2004
Take the tomato shot. If I were to develop the skills and understanding to do so, along with producing the same lighting, could I get a shot that good with a Canon lens?

You can can that quality with your Nikon 990 – just can’t blow it up too big. It’s really the photographer’s skills.

Yes you can get the quality with the Canon 300D too.

The following people use Canon 300D and/or Canon 10D:

Thomas Knoll
Chris Cox
Andrew Rodney
Bruce Fraser
Jeff Schewe – He’s a Canon guy but not sure if you uses the 300D/10D Mike Ornellas

What more can I say? They know something about the Canon image.
MO
Mike_Ornellas
Apr 16, 2004
Russel Willams, Adobe Photoshop Architect.

Steve Johnson, Nature Photographer.

Bill Atkinson, Nature Photographer / Apple engineer.

Greg Gorman…..need I say more.

etc.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 16, 2004
JPEG at its highest resolution is an excellent format with many benefits for some situations. Certainly if a pic in the store was "bad," the use of JPEG was not the reason, unless one of the low JPEG settings was used. One thing to do in testing camera A vs. camera B is to shoot four quick photos set at best JPEG and the same four RAW with each camera. Different cameras may perform very differently (e.g. Nikon D100 is slow at repetitive RAW captures but the Nikon D70 fixed that).
JG
Jim_Goshorn
Apr 16, 2004
I have been reading this thread with interest so I will jump in at this point.

Re tomato – Canon makes 2 very good macro lenses 100 2.8 and 180 3.5L. There is also a MP-E 65 2.8 but that is strictly macro whereas the other 2 function as regular lenses as well.

Re testing the 300D – You should really spend at least a few days shooting with the camera to get to know it. When you test it, test it’s limits so you know when noise appears, when exposures might not be as accurate etc.

As others have said just get the standard lens with the kit and get really comfortable with that before going to extra lenses. When considering lenses, try to but the best you can afford. Let’s say in future years you decide to get a higher res camera like a 1Ds, if you don’t have really good optics you won’t be able to get the most from the camera.

Jim
L
LRK
Apr 16, 2004
John and Mike: Those are some impressive heavy weights alright. Thanks! 🙂

Thanks for jumping in Jim. All this input is so helpful. I’ll hang onto your comments.

Allen: I went back and looked at those pictures again. Actually, other than a little glare from the store backlighting, they are not as bad as I thought. I might post the one I took of the store clerk. I told him I might post it at a forum and he did not seem to object… so I trust it’s okay.
T
Todie
Apr 16, 2004
News and art pictures don’t need model releases.

(make it clear that the posting is for news purposes)

READ ALL ABOUT LINDA’S REBELLION!!! : )
SG
Sylvain_Gingras
Apr 16, 2004
Linda

Safari is not color manage, when you want to look at some pictures, drag the photo to your desktop and open it in PS. That way you can zoom-in and check the levels.
SG
Sylvain_Gingras
Apr 16, 2004
Some good samples for highlight and shadow.

<http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/EDR/EDRPICS.HTM>
L
LRK
Apr 16, 2004
Todie: LOL!

Sylvain: I too like to open them in Photoshop. Thanks for the link. Looked at that picture only taken with the D70 yesterday. I guess it might be good to compare them. I’ll check out the highlight and shadows as well. Thanks!
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 16, 2004
You know everything I am reading about the D70 is extremely positive. I currently use the 10D but I would have to agree with the reviewers when they say that for $100 more it seems quite a bit more capable than the 300D. All in all, I really think that anybody looking at these cameras should go and test them side by side and only then make an informed choice.
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Apr 17, 2004
Linda really has to just buy a camera with some professional features so she can give it a whirl. And she might want bend a knee or elbow when composing the images.

So far it is strictly eye level and a bit…well it have something more to say about the subject.
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Apr 17, 2004
Once she gets an SLR her whole perspective will change — literally. Especially when she starts buying more lenses.

(I am just trying out a new 300mm Zuiko on an OM4 — a pretty impressive combination. Of course, it does use FILM…………………

;~O
L
LRK
Apr 17, 2004
I’m back… had a minor emergency to handle…

My neighbor came wandering over to my house kind of delirious. She had fallen off a makeshift ladder and hit her head pretty badly on the cement. She was having trouble remembering things. I sat her down and put peroxide on her elbow scrape, called her doctor and was told to take her to the ER, where we have been until now — 10:45 PM. She had a cat scan and seems to be okay. It ended up being a nice time getting to know her better… after 15 years. All’s well that ends well. 🙂
C
Cindy
Apr 17, 2004
F i l m . . FILM? Wassat?
JV
John_Vitollo
Apr 17, 2004
Good to hear her cat was scanned and seems to be okay…But what about your neighbor.
L
LRK
Apr 17, 2004
LOL, did I speeel it wrong?
D
Dan-o
Apr 17, 2004
I decided for certain I am going to get a D70 in a few weeks. Even if it doesn’t wind up being my workhorse camera, it will make an excellent backup.
T
Todie
Apr 17, 2004
Staff photographer Bob Rosato’s collection of gear is fairly typical. To a football game he takes four or five EOS-1D bodies and 600mm f/4, 400mm f/2.8, 300mm f/2.8, 70-200mm f/2.8, and 50mm f/1.4 lenses. For basketball, he adds five or six EOS-1Ds cameras and dispenses with the 400 and 600mm lenses. Of the ten or so camera bodies that he takes to a basketball game, many are of course mounted overhead or around the basket for remote operation.

< http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-6453-6 821-6822>
R
Ram
Apr 17, 2004
That’s a small fortune right there.
CC
Chris_Cox
Apr 17, 2004
It’s a small fortune just for the 600mm !
C
Cindy
Apr 17, 2004
$7179.94 for that lens
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Apr 17, 2004
That’s kind of amusing! For football or basketball game!

It is also amusing to see that sports illustrator has so many digital images. It was posted here many times that this magazine shoots mostly digital these days so I picked up a couple of copies of different issues. I took a pretty close look at the photographs.

That film grain filter they’ve been using to make those digital images look like they were shot with film is impressive.

Over 1 million photos just digital I wonder how many images they use in an issue times twelve times the number of years. It’s amusing!

What a folly!
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 17, 2004
Come on Wade, lets not turn this into a digital v film debate. Adobe will be sending us bills for band width usage if we go down that road…

Surely this is all a case of being free to use whatever we prefer.
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Apr 17, 2004
Sure I just find it amusing.

But one small observation…

"Surely this is all a case of being free to use whatever we prefer."
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 17, 2004
We look forward to seeing you at future games with your Linhoff!
L
LRK
Apr 17, 2004
The Canon was in first place… then the Nikon began gaining ground… then the Canon pulled ahead again… and now the Nikon is pulling up almost toe to toe. What a race!

I’m obviously not quite ready to buy yet. Must remove all plausible doubt… whatever that means. 🙂
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 17, 2004
Eeny meeny miney mo…
L
LRK
Apr 17, 2004
Gosh the suspense is killing me. Oh, wait a minute… that doesn’t make sense. 🙂
L
LRK
Apr 17, 2004
This morning I received a call back from another camera shop that I called yesterday. He told me that the 300D is not American made and would have no warranty in the US. I questioned him about it and he said it is only known at the Rebel in the US, not 300D. So I asked how many mps it has and he said 6.3. I might have jumped in my car and gone over there right away but by the time he said 6.3 his tone was getting a little irate… just what I don’t want. I said "Okay, thank you!" with a certain finality about it and ended the conversation. I don’t like doing that but if I figure that if they can’t be patient over the phone, what will it be like after the sale when I come back to ask questions.

Am I being unreasonable? Expecting too much?
C
Cindy
Apr 17, 2004
Linda,

I don’t know what this camera shop is talking about but if it does not have a warranty then something is wrong. Actually, you should get an extended warranty. I think there are Best Buy stores in Florida that sell a good extended warranty with the Rebel. At least that is what I have heard. Just a thought…
JV
John_Vitollo
Apr 17, 2004
Of course the camera is not American made…Maybe he was saying the camera is a gray market camera and has no US warranty. Avoid this camera shop and any that sell gray market – if your gray market camera has a problem US Canon will not fix it.
B
Buko
Apr 17, 2004
Come on Wade, lets not turn this into a digital v film debate.

I agree if you want to walk down that road for the umteenth time start your own thread. This thread is about drooling please stay on topic.

(practicing to be a forum host one day)
L
LRK
Apr 17, 2004
Cindy,

I think he was quibbling over model numbers. He wanted me to know that the US model is not called the 300D. Is yours called the 300D?

Also, is one just as good as the other?
L
LRK
Apr 17, 2004
Hey, good job Buko! 🙂
C
Cindy
Apr 17, 2004
Mine is called Digital Rebel
M
macmanx
Apr 17, 2004
This thread is about drooling…

I was walking down the street yesterday, when this blonde… oops (fallacious drooling!)

Also, is one just as good as the other?

Good question, Linda… I, too, would like to know what’s behind the two different naming schemes… Anybody really know? Here in Canada its sold as the Rebel by at least one retailer I’ve come across.
L
LRK
Apr 17, 2004
I’ve been comparing the D70 with the Canon Rebel again this morning. Other than my friend Phil’s photos, the Canon is back in the lead.

Now I need to get out of my chair, out on the road, and begin handling these cameras.
SG
Sylvain_Gingras
Apr 17, 2004
I’d go for Nikon, better build, better noise, all my gear are compatible. But as Allen say, have a feel of them in hand before buying.

This thread is addictive.

No Linda you are not unreasonable, keep on seeking…
JG
Jim_Goshorn
Apr 17, 2004
Don’t get too caught up in the numbers. There is an interesting read on luminous landscape illustrating this:

< http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/8mp-altern atives.shtml>

Every camera has it’s idiosyncrasies no matter what you pay for it. When it comes to lenses you will find that one manufacturer is better at certain focal lengths than the other. Just keep the basic questions like these on your mind:

Feel of the camera (shape, controls, weight etc)
Image quality (should be judged by prints)
Viewfinder (easy to focus, bright enough etc)
Color rendition
Auto focusing (accurate, easy to override if you want to do it yourself) Flash (accurate, easy to use)

The more choices we have the harder it is to make a decision and the easier it is to question if we have made the right one. All we can do is make our best judgment and go with it. Believe me I have questioned more of my decisions than I want to admit to so I understand quandaries 🙂

Jim
L
LRK
Apr 17, 2004
Thanks Sylvain!

Jim: I’m enjoying the article. I’m trying to remember the keyboard shortcut for reading the text reversed. My eyes are playing tricks on me with that white text over black.
L
LRK
Apr 17, 2004
Anyone interested in an African Photographic Safari? < http://www.luminous-landscape.com/workshops/andy-july04.shtm l>

I am… but not this year.
R
Ram
Apr 17, 2004
Linda,

He told me that the 300D is not American made and would have no warranty in the US. I questioned him about it and he said it is only known at the Rebel in the US, not 300D.

Never deal with that shop again. He obviously had a "Gray Market" item, meaning imported directly from Japan without Canon’s authorization. That’s why Canon will not honor the warranty in the US.

Some shady dealers even utilize that tactic so they can charge way more for the US-warranty model, usually hundreds of dollars more than their advertised price. They may not even have the gray market item at all; if you insist on buying a gray market camera at the lower price, they’ll just say it’s out of stock.

I’m trying to remember the keyboard shortcut for reading the text reversed

Control Option Command 8.
L
LRK
Apr 17, 2004
Hi Ramon,

Thanks for the keyboad shortcut.

About the guy from the store, I think I explained it wrong. He told me that the 300D was gray market and was discouraging me from ordering it. He just wanted me to know that the US model was only known as the Digital Rebel ESO. This was sinking in as we spoke. The part that bothered me was the edge that increased in his voice when I asked about the mega pixels. I had not been on the phone more than 60 seconds and sensed the guy was getting impatient.

I know this is going to sound silly, but I am at a point in my life where I would prefer to surround myself with people who are more positive and less irritable. I realize that we all have our moments and we have to tolerate a certain amount of stuff, but whenever possible, if I have a choice, I would like to to find postive, supportive, and most of all patient people to give my business to… oh and honest of course. 🙂

I guess I would like to be treated as well as I try to treat my own clients.
R
Ram
Apr 17, 2004
Linda,

He told me that the 300D was gray market and was discouraging me from ordering it. He just wanted me to know that the US model was only known as the Digital Rebel ESO.

I misunderstood, sorry. Yes, that would be correct, the model sold in the US with a USA warranty is called the EOS Digital Rebel.

<http://www.canoneos.com/digitalrebel/digital/index.html>
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Apr 17, 2004
Well it sounds like he is an honest guy after all and that it is your interpretation that is flawed. Also he was just responding to what to him must have been seen as a sign of mistrust on your part after he explained it was the same camera and made it quite clear that it was the camera and model you would want to buy if purchasing it for use in the US.

Quite frankly look at the picture you painted of this person and how everyone jumped on him just from taking in your view point. Hell on the phone or over the internet is really difficult to come to such conclusions in 60 seconds.

I think the guy is better off if you don’t buy from him. That s my conclusion!
L
LRK
Apr 17, 2004
Thanks Ramon. I can see how you might have thought that. My apology for the confusion. 🙂
L
LRK
Apr 17, 2004
Wade: Yep! You’re probably right. The guy probably did wonder about me… and yes, he probably is better off without my business.
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Apr 17, 2004
Now you are being considerate of the salesman, yes leave him alone. He’ll live longer and be happier.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 17, 2004
Long ago in this thread I suggested that Linda not try to use the camera shop guys for info; naturally, some folks disagreed. Also the whole USA/non-USA warranty issue was discussed. But do use a retail store for test handling the gear and for actually buying the product. IMO it is unethical to handle product at brick-and-mortar retail without buying at brick-and-mortar retail.

Manufacturers and dealers love selling extended warranties! IMO extended warranties on high tech gear are no way worth the relatively very high cost, since most anomalies occur under warranty, and by the time the warranty expires the product has become old tech anyway. And such warranties seldom if ever cover the most likely thing to happen to a camera, which is shock-related damage.
L
LRK
Apr 17, 2004
Allen:

About the extended warranty, I think you are right. I called and got info from Best Buy that they offer a four year extended warranty for $100, which is very good. The guy also said parts was covered automatically 1 year, labor only 90 days. But when I checked the Best Buy web site I got different informamtion. There it said both labor and parts are covered for 1 year.

I think my expectations for service and support are unrealistic so I’m just going to buy from the camera store at a mall close by for convenience. I might even spare the people my presence and allow my husband to make the purchase. 🙂

Now that my husband knows that I’m supposed to take pictures for the horse show tomorrow he wanted me to buy the camera tonight. I actually have decided it best not to use a new camera at the horse show because of all the dust in the air. I’d rather take pics with my old camera than to subject my new camera to all that dirt while it is still new.
L
LRK
Apr 17, 2004
BTW Allen: I truly appreciate your perspective on things and whereas I do think handling the camera is a good idea, I’m sure either the Nikon or the Canon will handle well enough for my liking. I still think I’m going with the Canon, although I’m recommending the Nikon to some people I know.

I still would like an 8 MP but I think the Rebel should be enough for me to learn on this coming year. It will be interesting to see where we all end up next year. 🙂
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 17, 2004
"I still think I’m going with the Canon, although I’m recommending the Nikon to some people I know"

Way to go Linda, I recommend Windows to a lot of people too.
L
LRK
Apr 17, 2004
Ashley,

I worked on a CD package last year. I happened to remember that the photo on the back was shot by some local people that I know a little. I called the guy this morning and we had a nice discussion about cameras. He uses Canon film and his wife uses Nikon digital. His wife is looking to buy a new digital. They haven’t had time to research the reviews so I sent her an email filling her in on the new D70.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 17, 2004
IMO selecting among cameras without handling them is a mistake. Any given camera can "feel/handle" very different to different folks. E.g. I have large hands and many cameras are clumsy in my hands. A person with smaller hands may well have a whole different set of preferences. Those preferences have a significant impact on how readily a photog "gets the shot." And that is just hand size, only one parameter of ergonomics.

That said, there are all kinds of good interpersonal family finances reasons for having your husband "pick it out." <g>

IMO 6 MP vs. 8 MP is an almost meaningless issue. Optics, ergonomics, optics, flash software, optics, etc. are all much more important.

Use your new camera – that is all it is good for. Don’t leave it in the closet for fear of dust! And any 6MP SLR is a much, much better horse show camera than the s-l-o-w CP990. You can still (literally) have your CP990 in your pocket, just in case.
L
LRK
Apr 17, 2004
Thanks Allen. Good points… especially about the speed. I might actually get some horses while they are still jumping. 🙂 Last time I had to guess and click early in order to catch the horse as it went over the jumps.

My husband may be out buying one now… to surprise me. He asked the model of the one I want a while ago… then left to run some "errands".

So if he buys it, you think I should take it to the horse show? It really gets dusty with the horses kicking up all that dirt. I’m sure it will need a good cleaning after the show.

Other than canned air, what do you all use to clean your equipment?
R
Ram
Apr 17, 2004
Linda,

Do not, repeat: do not use canned compressed air inside the camera. Use a rubber blower bulb only.

Not only can the canned air damage the mirror, but it can leave residue on the sensor. Read the camera’s instructions first in this regard.
JG
Jim_Goshorn
Apr 17, 2004
If you are worried about dust, one good thing is to put a UV Haze filter over the lens. I have them on all lenses that will except them.

Be careful with canned air otherwise the propellent might get sprayed with the air. There are sensor swabs and eclipse fluid for cleaning the sensor when the time comes. You could also get a lens brush to brush dust off the filter.

Jim
JG
Jim_Goshorn
Apr 17, 2004
If you are looking for a blower I found this link:

< http://commerce5.pair.com/hunts/Merchant/merchant.mv?Screen= PROD&Store_Code=HPAV&Product_Code=715412009256>

Don’t have this one but I am considering it since the one I have doesn’t have much force…

Jim
R
Ram
Apr 17, 2004
Jim,

the one I have doesn’t have much force…

I would keep that blower. Gentle force is all it takes; a powerful jet of air combines with the dust to make a mini sand blaster.
L
LRK
Apr 18, 2004
Thanks Ramon… and Jim.

I’m glad to know about the rubber blower and sensor swabs/eclipse fluid.

The surprise turned out to be ice cream, lol! So I don’t have to worry about taking a new camera tomorrow. I will want to clean my Nikon just the same. Glad I know not to use canned air. I think I have used it in the past. Lucky I didn’t damage it.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 18, 2004
Linda-

To take moving horse jump pix with an SLR digicam, typical 18-55 zoom lens, no flash usage:

Get a good spot <g>

Set exposure to Aperture Preferred, f-11.

I suggest you shoot JPEG Highest setting at first. Save RAW photography until you have practiced a lot.

Read the shutter speed in the viewfinder. It should be 1/250 or faster. If it is less than 1/250, change the ISO setting to a larger number, e.g. 400 or 800 so that your shutter speed ends up to be about 1/400 to 1/250 or so. Use the lowest ISO number that will give you 1/400 to 1/250 shutter speed.

Set to manual focus and focus where you expect the horse’s eyes to be.

Depress the shutter release half way as the horse approaches. Press the shutter release all the way when the horse gets where you prefer.

Check the LCD and exposure compensate as necessary for the next shot.

Check the LCD and zoom in to check for blur in the image. If the subject parts you want (and always including the horse’s eyes) are not crisp, recheck the point that you are prefocused on, and if that is ok, change the f-stop setting to a larger number like f-19. Then redo the ISO setting as needed like you did above.

—————————–

If your camera has a high speed high resolution shot capability you can set the camera for High Speed and get multiple shots as the horse goes over a jump by holding the shutter release button down.

——————————

Obviously there are many other details and lots of other choices to experiment with, but the above should achieve useful pix, first try.
L
LRK
Apr 18, 2004
Allen: I’m tickled to have your detailed instructions and will hang onto them. It might be good to practice on one of my horse trainer friends after I get familiar with everything. Thanks very much!

As it turns out I didn’t get the camera yet but it won’t be much longer. I can hardly wait to start using an SLR.
R
Ram
Apr 18, 2004
Linda,

It might be good to practice on one of my horse trainer friends

I hope you mean when they’re riding, as opposed to their physiognomies or eyes resembling those of a horse.
L
LRK
Apr 18, 2004
Yes, while they’re riding. 🙂

I’m out of here for the day… Hold the fort… 🙂
M
macmanx
Apr 18, 2004
Allen-

Set exposure to Aperture Preferred

I’m curious as to why you’d prefer to use Aperture priority in this case…

Before I start shooting, I always weigh the perks of motion versus DOF (depth of field), then try to arrive at an acceptable compromise between both.

So, when I shoot ANY moving pix, I always opt for Shutter priority. For me, stopping camera-shake/subject-motion would seem more important then DOF.

In this case, I’d set my shutter for 1/250 and play with the ISO to arrive at a suitable aperture. If lighting conditions should happen to change during shooting, I’ll have better luck getting sharper images.

If, however, I’d want some form of motion blur, then I’d simply Pan the action utilizing a slower shutter speed.

I’ll go along with the rest of the techniques outlined in your post… All good strategies!
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 18, 2004
macmanx-

The answer is simple. What I gave Linda was a relatively bombproof, therefore simplistic, setup for: first SLR 24 hrs new; challenging moving critter pix; photog coming from extensive experience with a CP990. As I said:

"Obviously there are many other details and lots of other choices to experiment with, but the above should achieve useful pix, first try."

———————————————-
As to why aperture priority rather than shutter piority, I have found shooting ski racers with the lens discussed that the most common reason for unintended blur is the subject getting out of the camera’s in-focus range. 1/125 second is actually fast enough for the shutter, so the 1/400-1/250 second speed suggested actually gives 1-2 stops of shutter speed slack to Linda. IMO what makes a pic like a horse jumping look good is having minimum workable depth of field ("DOF"). If set to Shutter Preferred [a] the photog is wrapping his/her head around shutter speed, and I try to teach photogs to learn Aperture/DOF; and [b] as lighting changes (like it always does) the camera auto-adjusts DOF, and either too much or too little DOF makes for a poor pic. I want the photog to primarily be thinking about DOF and aperture on every single shot.

The reality is that the choice of Aperture or Shutter Preferred does not really matter to an experienced photographer shooting Auto, because hopefully we think about both settings with every shot, and it does not really matter whether you adjust SS to achieve 1/125/f-8 or you adjust Aperture to achieve 1/125/f-8. The result is still 1/125/f-8!

So it gets to the thought processes, and I prefer to teach folks to learn via Aperture Preferred, because planning DOF is essential for every single pic, and small changes in DOF always change the pic. Unlike shutter speed, where once you get in the habit of providing a stable platform the properly exposed pic does not change whether the shutter speed is 1/60 or 1/5000. Pretty much the only time I use or recommend Shutter Preferred is for panning or other planned motion-blur shots, or in bright light when synching to old style flash systems that give limited camera to flash shutter synch speeds.

Panning or other planned motion-blur shooting is beyond the scope of day 1 suggestions to Linda. <g>
L
LRK
Apr 18, 2004
I’m back. As mentioned last night I did not get my new digicam in time for the show today. So I used my old Nikon 990 and just did the best I could considering I could hardly see the monitor. I am long overdue for a new camera.

Allen is so nice to explain how to get the best results with a SLR. Some of the follow up explaination seems almost greek to me, but I’m determined that God willing, I will learn it in time and hopefully be able to converse intelligently with some of you.

I spoke with another professional photographer at the horse show today, a Nikon man with a lot of money tied up in Nikon lenses, and he also is interested in some of the information I’m gathering about the Nikon D70. So much of the great advice from this thread as well as some of the reviews about the new D70 is proving helpful, not only to me, but to two other photographers within two days.
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 18, 2004
Linda- It is not "greek" it is "geek…" <g>
L
LRK
Apr 18, 2004
Got it Allen! 🙂 Geek!
M
macmanx
Apr 18, 2004
Proficient explanation, Allen… thanks!

I guess it all boils down to what techniques you first learned and started out with. In my case, Aperture preferred automation wasn’t even available on some of the earlier cameras I used. If I remember correctly, the Canon A1 may have been the first camera I bought with that option.
L
LRK
Apr 18, 2004
Just curious… If I buy a flash memory card the size of a CD, how many RAW images can I get on it.
CC
Chris_Cox
Apr 18, 2004
LRK – that depends on the exact camera model. For my 10D, and probably the 300D, RAW files can be anywhere from 5 to 8 Meg (depending on the image content).

On a 1 Gig card, I typically get between 170 (conservative) and 200 (if I’m lucky) images.

I usually carry at least 3 Gig of CF cards – and have shot over 500 images per day on those (usually wildlife, so it’s not steady shooting). If I were shooting a sports event, I’d shoot a lot more images and thus need more CF!
L
LRK
Apr 18, 2004
Thanks a lot Chris. That’s very helpful. I wonder if I should get a larger card. I need to check what’s available and the prices I guess.
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Apr 18, 2004
See that is the kind of misinformation I am referring to, Chris, Linda is an amateur photographer with limited knowledge of what is going on she has to learn to walk before running.

First of all you don’t shoot sports events and are not a professional photographer and what you do or think should be done should be expressed in that light.

For instance I might shoot between $400 to a $1,000 of film in a day and may only do 6-8 different compositions that the nature of what I do but if Linda was buying a film based camera I would not be so irresponsible to suggest to her that she should bring a $1,000 worth of film on a shoot. Nor would I suggest it to an amateur like yourself.

She probably only needs one card this should have been your answer:

On a 1 Gig card, I typically get between 170 (conservative) and 200 (if I’m lucky) images.

Period!

If I were shooting a sports event, good luck!
For my Nikon D100
(Linda this is the camera I had at Photoshop World)

I have 3– 512 cards.

Shooting in RAW I can get about 55 shots per 512 card
Tiff..28
Hgh/fine jpeg.. 150
Normal jpeg…300
JV
John_Vitollo
Apr 18, 2004
Wade I think you awoke on the wrong side of the bed this morning.

She probably only needs one card this should have been your answer:

Wrong Wade. At least two – both don’t have to be 1 gig in size – having one as a back-up is good insurance. Any good photographer has extra batteries, polaroid film, regular film extra camera body, etc…
L
LRK
Apr 18, 2004
Wade: Why not let go of your grievances with me and move on. There’s no need to take out your frustration on everybody else. Let it go. No hard feelings, okay?
L
LRK
Apr 18, 2004
Thanks Bonnie!

Thanks to you too John!
AW
Allen_Wicks
Apr 18, 2004
Linda-

Best value was (last week, who knows what it will be next week…) to buy 512 MB cards. If you were to shoot a batch of pix of something (e.g. a wedding, a horse show, whatever) one card’s batch of images fits nicely on a CD. With 2 cards you can have one uploading to a laptop or a portable CD burner while you continue shooting on a second card. Two 512 MB cards is plenty to start with, maybe forever if you end up routinely uploading to something portable like I do.

Note that you may use neither laptop nor portable CD burner at this point in time, but having pix come from the camera in ~500 MB chunks has its benefits.

Which reminds me, a FireWire CF card reader is a necessity unless you use a CF–>PC card adapter in a laptop. Uploading via USB cables is not recommended.
BF
Bruce_Fraser
Apr 18, 2004
On the 300D, I typically get between 75 and 80 raws on a 512MB CF card.

I prefer carrying more smaller cards because

2 small cards cost less than 1 big one, and 512s are really cheap.

when one is full, I can be downloading the images on the laptop while I continue to shoot with another.
L
LRK
Apr 18, 2004
Thanks Allen. The idea of using similar size cards to CD space sounds sensible and easy to manage. I currently have the Microtech CameraMate USB card reader. I probably will need firewire to speed things up.

I took 136 photos today before I ran out of cards. I ended up erasing some images to get more, so I could have used more space.

Thanks Bruce. Two 512 MB cards probably would be enough to get started. Glad to know it’s cheaper to do it that way.

I realized this week that it won’t be long before I need a laptop. I wasn’t thinking because of photos but rather being more mobile with my work. Now that you all mention it, having a laptop to take when shooting pictures would be very handy when warranted.
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Apr 18, 2004
It wasn’t address to you Linda, it is to those who might not recognized that it is simply not a requirement for them to have outrageous amount of equipment and that some of the people posting here altoughg behaving as if they are professionals are not that at all.

There are many Photoshop users who read these threads that do not post respones as they come forgeneral knowledge, as I pointed out several times I thought that the info that Allen and Ashley and Todie and Buko and John and Ann and the others were extremely enlightening and exceptionally responsible. Because they understood what they were talking about and that it was a real world exchange of information.

Taking an extra card or battery is one thing taking tons of them is ridiculous for someone getting started, and Chris Cox is not the Pro he dreams about being and should come down to earth.

You only need a card or two, after all today you probably shot between twenty and thirty images at the most am I correct.

You don’t shoot hundreds of photosa in a day let alone in an hour.
L
LRK
Apr 18, 2004
Wade,

I do not understand your reaction to Chris. I am very grateful for his advice. It is right on the money for me. I took 136 photos today before I ran out of card space. I will probably do exactly what Chris recommended.
L
LRK
Apr 18, 2004
Correction:

Actually I will probably do what Allen and Bruce Fraser recommended, although Chris’s suggestions are helpful as well. Sorry for the mixup.

[edited] Getting all mixed up with who said what. 🙂
CC
Chris_Cox
Apr 18, 2004
No, I’m not a pro. That’s why I practice.

I told her what I do, and how much CF it takes.

It’s up to her to decide whether she needs that much or not.
L
LRK
Apr 18, 2004
Thanks Chris. I do appreciate your feedback.

Note: I made some corrections in my previous post. Got a little mixed up trying to figure out who said what. 🙂
L
LRK
Apr 18, 2004
Another note: What Bonnie said too.
With 2 cards.. I toted around a laptop (downloading images from one card while I used the other)

With 3 cards I leave the Powerbook at the studio (less to carry) & use a card reader when I get back.

Have yet to need a 4th card.
BF
Bruce_Fraser
Apr 19, 2004
I think it’s idiotic to make any assumptions about how many or how few images someone else will shoot in any situation, but one thing I’ve noticed with people making the transition to digital is that they quickly learn, when in doubt, take the shot anyway.

The metadata that accompanies each digital capture provides a great tool for learning why some things work and others don’t, for learning how trustworthy the on-camera metering is, and for learning how to expose for digital rather than film (which is a learning curve everyone who wants to shoot digital needs to ascend).
L
LRK
Apr 19, 2004
Thanks Bonnie!

Having a laptop certainly has advantages. The main one being you can continue working if something takes you away from the office for an extended amount of time. I spent several hours in the ER with my neighbor Friday night after she wandered to my house somewhat delerious after having fallen from a makeshift ladder. Fortunately I had wrapped up my jobs for the day… but it confirmed the need to have a backup solution for continuing to work if taken from the office unexpectedly and feeling pressure to meet a deadline.

There is a new Web site I might be designing for an Optometrist. If I get the job it would require taking pictures of equipment in the office. Having a laptop would be ideal for sorting through the images on site for approval before taking them back to my own office. I won’t be buying one for this job but it would be nice if I had one. Hopefully by the time I’m ready for a laptop the next generation will be out. 🙂
L
LRK
Apr 19, 2004
Bruce,

"Quickly learning to take the shot anyway" is right. Since I’ve had my Nikon digital I always take more shots just in case. Besides, with that little monitor I can’t really tell how good a shot is until I get it back to my office.

I want to be able to take a very generous amount of pictures, and even all the more while I am inexperienced… the more I take, the better the chance of getting a good one. 🙂
L
LRK
Apr 19, 2004
Folks: It appears I have stepped over a line with my many postings here. I’ve received an email from Wade letting me know how foolish I am, for this and other things. I apologize for monopolizing this thread. I admit that I can be self-centered but have truly enjoyed interacting with you all on this topic. I hope I have not offended or irritated anyone else here. If so, please accept my apology.
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Apr 19, 2004
What an unbelievable brat!
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Apr 19, 2004
I can’t imagine that anyone (except the one who complained?!) is in the least irritated by LRK’s posts in this thread — in fact I suspect that they are helping many lurking readers to understand the dilemmas that anyone faces when trying to decide on whether to make such a major purchase as this.
L
LRK
Apr 19, 2004
I’m sorry Wade. Tonight was the first time I decided to share this with others. I’ve kept quiet about the series of events that led up to this. You seem to have an extreme problem with me. We either drop it right now or I’m going to continue to involve other people in this. I have no idea what goes on inside you to provoke such anger.
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Apr 19, 2004
Bringing it to the forum was stupid at best!

Ann no one goes through this process when considering equipment, not to this extent!

But you are correct this kind of tedium does make me angry!
L
LRK
Apr 19, 2004
Wade: It might seem stupid to you but to me it’s wisdom. This problem has been going on for a while. It’s not really about this thread and you know it. I have tried to make things right and drop it. You have put me in a position that I felt best to make others aware of it.

I apologize to others about this. Not sure it was the right thing to do but not sure keeping it quiet is either.

Now, I don’t want to ruin this very interesting and helpful thread for others so I will stop posting here about this matter.
L
LRK
Apr 19, 2004
Perhaps Neil might like to delete just the posts between me and Wade so the thread can go on. I hope he won’t close it though.
BF
Bruce_Fraser
Apr 19, 2004
Linda,

If you cross a line, the Forum Hosts will let you know. It’s not like you’re holding a gun to anyone’s head and forcing them to read the thread…

….and the fact that this is post #1339, and the thread is still generally on-topic, would suggest that your contributions have value.

I don’t think you owe anyone an apology for anything you’ve posted here, and it’s probably pointless to apologize to anyone who is twisted enough to get offended by anything you’ve posted here. Of course, it doesn’t hurt to try, and you’ve done that. Now you can move on with a clear conscience.
L
LRK
Apr 19, 2004
Bruce: Once again you have proved to be the kind and caring person that you are. I truly appreciate your comments. Thank you!

Now… I hope to resolve an ongoing issue with Wade and put it behind us.
L
LRK
Apr 19, 2004
Re #1337: Thank you Ann. I’m sorry I missed your post earlier.
C
Cindy
Apr 19, 2004
I only see one idiot in this most recent conversation and it isn’t Linda.

Linda, just keep hanging in there. I enjoy your posts.
L
LRK
Apr 19, 2004
Cindy, Thank you for your support… I really want to see this resolved without causing any more hurt feelings.
C
Cindy
Apr 19, 2004
Linda, some things you just can’t fix. This may be one of them.
WZ
Wade_Zimmerman
Apr 19, 2004
You are correct some things can’t be fixed and this is one of them. And I am pleased that you recognize that yo are an idiot for judging something you know nothing about Linda is bringing an unknown issue to the forum highly unfair thing to do!

And it does not belong on this thread!
C
Cindy
Apr 19, 2004
I always say put things in the light and they become quite clear.

BTW Wade, you are the one that brought this to the thread. It has been quite clear you have a problem with Linda so if you don’t want something in the thread put down your sword.
L
LRK
Apr 19, 2004
I think I’d better get some sleep. Have a good night all! 🙂
M
macmanx
Apr 19, 2004
I’ve personally enjoyed this thread immensely. Probably because, like Linda, I’m in the market for a DSLR. The abundant flow of diverse info I’ve gleaned from within all these posts has been truly helpful.

Keep on posting, Linda… 🙂
B
Buko
Apr 19, 2004
Wade for someone who dislikes digital photography so much you seem to have way too much advice about digital photography for Linda. Either you do it and understand it and know about it or you don’t, and you repeatedly show your distain for digital photography. You claim you don’t use digital, so how can you advise someone about digital photography?
L
LRK
Apr 19, 2004
Thanks Macman… and Buko.

Today might be a good time for me to do some shopping. 🙂 Very excited about this purchase!
L
LRK
Apr 19, 2004
Doing a little more last minute research on the Canon Rebel vs Nikon D70.

I noticed one article mentioned something about Photoshop not being able to read the D70’s raw????

Now I’ve lost the article and trying to find it so I can post a link.
JV
John_Vitollo
Apr 19, 2004
The Nikon D70 just came out so was not supported by Camera Raw…but a beta Camera Raw is in the works. Whatever camera you decide it will be the best one. Congrats!
L
LRK
Apr 19, 2004
Thanks John!
D
Dan-o
Apr 19, 2004
Everything that has a beginning… has an end… even civilized Adobe threads. Was fun while it lasted. Good luck with your shopping Linda.

🙂
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Apr 19, 2004
One point to keep in mind while making your final choice: "How quick-on-the-draw is this weapon?".

If you have any type of action photography in mind, you must have a camera that responds instantly — and allows rapidly repeating shots at full resolution.

[Actually, this is another area in which film has hitherto had the edge, but maybe the new batch of DSLRs can now compete? A good powered winder can give you between 3 to 5 frames per second — although a well trained thumb doesn’t do too badly either!]
L
LRK
Apr 19, 2004
Thanks Dan-o… I’m sure someone else will pick up this thread and keep going with it. My guess is, it might have another 1,000 miles on it with all the new technology springing up.

Even if another new one comes out next week, I will be satisfied with the Canon. As I’ve said and keep reaffirming, it’s the pictures I’m interested in. I like the pictures.
L
LRK
Apr 19, 2004
Cross posted with you Ann. I’m getting ready to leave. Catch you all later.
MO
Mike_Ornellas
Apr 19, 2004
Weed, Um….. I mean Wade.

Take a chill pill. When were you voted director of vapor land?

If anyone needs to be kicked out of here it’s me, but than again, ask me if I care.

I realized this week that it won’t be long before I need a laptop.<

The other way you can go about this is a new nifty little device that is the size of a small, oh lets say 5 X 7 X 1.5 inch thick gizmo that has a built in LCD screen and 30 gig hard drive for about 400 bucks.

and no, it’s not color managed.
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Apr 19, 2004
MO’s "Gizmo" seems to be the answer.

My idea of a really inefficient and over-burdened photographic expedition would be having to lug a laptop along as well as a camera-bag — the "Gizmo" would answer that problem nicely.

Who makes it?
MO
Mike_Ornellas
Apr 19, 2004
lemme see if I can find it.

A few companies make it.

Hold the phone…..

While you wait….

<http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/news/default.jsp>

I guess this dude ate too much of his own product.
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Apr 19, 2004
You might say that he was "out to lunch" once too often.

:~(
MO
Mike_Ornellas
Apr 19, 2004
That’s OK.

I feel every CEO should be a part of our lives. I say grind that fat bastard up and put Mr. swine into the food chain.

I like special sauce in my burgers.
AS
Ann_Shelbourne
Apr 19, 2004
"FlashTrax can safely store high-resolution images transferred from any flash memory card onto the built-in 40GB USB2.0 hard drive and displays them on a 3.5" LCD that outperforms tiny on-camera screens. By using the sleek control pad, the user can change the image, zoom in, zoom out and scroll, or choose a slide show function – all without the need of a PC."

That sounds like the perfect answer:

The size of a couple of 5 x 4 DDS and a mere 12 ounces — you could pop that into the bag and not even notice that you were carrying anything extra.
CC
Chris_Cox
Apr 19, 2004
Note that most of those storage devices will handle JPEG, or the manufacturer’s brand of RAW, but not all types of camera RAW files.
MO
Mike_Ornellas
Apr 19, 2004
hmm..
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 19, 2004
As a matter of interest Chris, have you ever had focus problems with your 10D?
CC
Chris_Cox
Apr 19, 2004
Ashley – no serious problems. But I have found that digital cameras (on all dSLRs I’ve tested) are more demanding of proper focus than film because you can get sharper details and no grain. If I were printing everything at 4×6", I would be quite happy with the focus. But since I want to print 8×10", I find that the auto-focus will usually be off by a little bit — but no worse than I could do by focusing manually. This is something that digital SLR makers are going to have to address in the near future (and more megapixels just makes it more obvious).

Then there’s chromatic abberation in lenses that you don’t notice on film (due to grain breaking up the edges), but becomes obvious on higher resolution digital captures….
C
Cindy
Apr 19, 2004
Most of the chromatic abberation can be corrected using PS RAW
CC
Chris_Cox
Apr 19, 2004
Cindy – yes, most can. (Man is that useful. Thanks Thomas!)

But I’d rather that they improved the lens quality rather than rely on a post-process fix that can’t always be accurate (because it can’t know the exact curvature of the abberation).
(and I’ll be happy to test any new lenses Canon comes up with 😉
AK
ashley_karyl
Apr 19, 2004
I’ve had some serious issues that just wouldn’t go away and I’ve had a few of these cameras, however an independent service centre in the UK was recently able to improve the focussing accuracy dramatically and I now feel happy to use the camera on jobs.

As a question of photographic style I like to work at F2.8 which I have always done in the past but Canon were trying to convince me that I should be happy to work at F8 and make countless other allowances, which I refused to accept. It should be in focus where we want and the fact that it now does, proves to me that its possible and that its more a question of quality control on the production line than anything else which needs to be addressed.
CC
Chris_Cox
Apr 19, 2004
Ashley – hmm, now you have me curious. Maybe I should try sending mine in for service 😉
C
Cindy
Apr 19, 2004
Chris,

I have the 28-135 IS. This lens does pretty good except at times I am aggrevated by the CA. It is only in certain types of shots and I am told that it is not as bad as I let on 🙂 The more expensive L glass IS lenses are too heavy though.

They are coming out with DO lenses that are of interest to me but again, expensive.