marco ussi

Oh dear, It looks like I'll have to buy some Sony machinery in the future but I've also seen some great IR stuff made with a Canon powershot G2, anyone to share some experience out there?

It might be a more practical solution for me (same BP 511 batteries and Compact flash cards as my 10D) but It looks like Sony cameras are unbeatable in the Infrared business.

Thanks Richard and Brad. (very nice Infrared pictures as well!)

In fact the IR potentialities of Sony digicams are no secret at all, but I've recently bought an EOS 10D for work, so I'm on a budget for the next months. While the F717 is reasonably expensive, the F828 is out of reach at the moment (here in Italy).

 

I was also looking for some IR friendly and small cameras as well (if there are any) since my usual gear is an EOS 10D plus Sigma 70-200/2.8 and sometimes I need some rest as well.

I'd like to look around a little bit more before going Sony in the end. So I'd be glad if I could get some more information on other cameras having similar IR features.

Thanks

Hy folks,

I'm astonished by the way digital infared pictures look like. I have

always been an infrared devotee but I've only made a few attempts

with the Kodak HIE since I don't have an easy access to a darkroom

(lack of time, distance from a photoclub...)and because of the

complexity of the whole process.

Digital cameras seem the solution to my problem since they have ( or

at least had) some sensitivity to IR light.

I know for sure that Sonys' are the best in this field but the major

drawback is that they don't support Compact Flash (I own three 512 MB

CF for my non infared friendly EOS 10D, why should I pay some extra

maoney for little capacity 128 MB memory stick card?)

My final quaestion is : In your experience, which is the best

infrared - friendly digicam that support Compact Flash card and that

is available on the market?

 

Thank you very much

I think that a big problem of this and other sites is the lack of commentary on photos. I mean, it seems to me that many people think they are at a beauty contest rather than in a constructive forum for thoughtful photographers.

Where's the point in giving a high rate or even worse a low rate without saying why? There's no point for me. In fact I've decided to rate fewer photos but give more comments. I may not be a professional but at least I deliver my point of view.

The hidden identity of raters, for me is pretty useless. I've just found out that the main reason for its introduction was to prevent revenge rating and I could not believe it. Hey guys, where do you think we are? At the kindergarten, it would seem to me.

My forecast. Hidden identity will just lead to more low, unexplained, useless, ratings. Would you like to improve the site? There's only one way: making the comment mandatory!

Hi folks out there, I need some advice on a Tokina lens.

I shoot pictures for our local triathlon club. The guy who's in

charge of the team has recently bought the Fuji Finepix S2 Pro

(compatible with the Nikon AF-D mount)and he has also found a Tokina

AT-X pro 80-200/2.8 available on e-bay (that lens was used on a Nikon

D100). I have two simple questions. First: Is this lens fully

compatible with the Finepix S2 pro? Second one : Is that a good lens

for sport shooting or should we go for the Sigma equivalent? (Nikon

being too expensive)

Thanks a lot for those who will answer.

An explanation to Scott's second statement.

 

Of course You can buy optics that are more expensive than your body, especially with a relatively cheap camera like the 7N. I think 75% of Canon lenses are more expensive than the Elan 7N. If you have the money why not?

 

I was specifically referring to the combination Elan 7N => EF 70-200/2.8 L USM IS, It seemed an odd combination to me.

You have a medium range body with a high end professional, ultrafast and expensive zoom. If one can afford such a lens then why limit yourself with a 7N, why not going EOS 3 or EOS 1V.

It's with those cameras that you can get the maximum with such lenses not with the 7N, not mentioning the more precise and sophisticated overall image control (a true 2.5% spot metering on the Eos3, for example).

 

I'm not a pro, I don't understand the physics behind an optical system. In my previous posting I just wanted to point out that I'm just glad Sigma gives me the opportunity to experiment high quality photography at more affordable prices for my student's pocket.

Yes, what a dilemma. I had the same one between the Eos 3 and the F100, I went through many forums here in photo.net and in the end I realized the cameras were pretty much the same in terms of overall quality and performances. I choose the Eos 3 simply because it cost me 300 Euros less than the F100 (1Euro=1.15$). As one of the guys suggested in a previous forum you can't go wrong in any case.

 

One issue that I may bring you to your attention is about lenses.

You are worrying about the weight of the 70-200/2.8 (Canon) and the 17-35/2.8 (Nikon). I'd worry about the PRICE! I have a price list at hand here (price in euros here in Italy, so you may have some variations in your country):

 

- 70-200/2.8 (Canon) => 2.699,80 Euros

- 17-35/2.8 (Nikon) => 1999,80 Euros

 

while the N80 (F80 here) => 499,80 Euros (body)

Eos 30 (equivalent for the 7N I think) => 549,80 Euros

 

Sorry, but I don't see any reason to consider such lenses that cost 4 or 5 times your body.

 

Have you ever considered Sigma? You have the same quality at 1/2 price. Well, No. Canon USM autofocus is 1 nanosecond faster than Sigma HSM!

I don't believe the story that you have to stick to the same brand for the lenses.I own a Sigma 28-70/2.8 which is a faboulous piece of machinery,for the same price Canon and Nikon give you some crappy 3.5/5.6 zoom so when there's a cloud in the sky you won't shoot a frame with your favourite Iso 100/160 pro film (let alone Velvia 50) unless you have a tripod always with you.

I think Sigma has a good 28-105 2.8/4 zoom at half price than the ones you mentioned so why not think about it? 1f stop less means bringing home a picture or not.

 

Canon and Nikon also make very good lenses but You have to pay a lot for them that's why I'll buy the Sigma 70-200/2.8 Ex Apo Hsm And save 1500 Euros that will stay in my pocket rather than in Mr.Canon's one.

 

Cheers, Marco

James, I didn't explain well. Of course this photo shooting is about people doing their beloved sport but I was looking for a reliable film which also has a decent reproduction of skin tones among his features. Since I don't know yet my position on the field I'm not sure If I can take tight head shots of the athlets and you may agree with me that perfect skin tone reproduction is slightly secondary when shooting a full figure wearing an extremely bright color outfit. Then to one of the previous postings (don't remember who) I'll be shooting inside a swimming pool (I'll go at least 800 there) Then I'll run outside to take photos of the bicycle section and race section and this is what I was referring to when I mentioned the 400 Iso film. Thanks everyone for your contribution I must be clearer next time I ask a question, sorry.

Hi everybody, a local triathlon club recently asked me to shoot

photos at the next competition which takes place in a couple of weeks.

My doubts regards a good reliable 400 Iso film with fine grain.

Reproduction of skin tones are not an issue, while the possibilty of

some good enlargments are a priority. Please somebody with experience

reply also i'd be grateful if you could posts some examples of photo

shots or direct me to some good folders. Thank You