pdoyle

Here's what I see on my workspace page, in addition to the 2 emails I've gotten in the past week or so asking me to renew my subscription:<br>

Subscriber Services<br>

Status: You are currently subscribed to Photo.net - Thank you!<br>

Your subscription already expired on 14-Nov-2007. Click here to renew.<br>

 

In other words, it says I'm currently subscribed AND it says my subscription expired. I wonder if this is related to a bonus subscription thing that ran a while ago, where someone was sponsoring extended memberships if you re-subscribed during a specific window of time?!? Am I remembering this correctly?

I have the Off Road and have been fairly happy with it. It's nice having the belt to take weight off your shoulder. Inside you could fit the 20D with 17-85 attached and then either another lens or your flash in the compartment next to the camera. The only concern I would have is whether the 70-200 would fit in the external cases that come with the Off Road; however, you can buy other cases from Lowepro and they all attach the same way to the main bag. The front pocket of the bag has enough room for filters, battery. All in all, I suspect you could fit all but one of your listed items in the bag plus two side cases; it's possible you could fit it all but it would be a stretch. Hope this helps. If you have a store nearby that carries the bag, just bring your gear in and try it out first.

If you *do* want to use a UV filter, I have been happiest with the B+W MRC 010 filters. I have also used Hoya HMC filters but found the coating on the B+W easier to keep clean.

I have a Toploader 75AW, and carry a 20D w/ 70-200/2.8IS attached, hood reversed. I can even leave my 1.4x TC on and barely get the lid closed. I bought a couple Lowepro Lens Cases to attach to the sides, which gives me the flexibility to put the 70-200 in there instead of leaving it attached to the 20D in the main compartment. The side cases make the bag more bulky but gives me a lot of flexibility as to what I carry, and they're not too hard to remove if I want to go out without the side cases.

I'm not near my normal computer to look in PS, but I *THINK* you could try a Threshold adjustment layer and play with the slider to isolate a certain high range of values. Then you could throw the adj layer away when you've got your selection.

I'm planning to get a digicam for my wife as a gift. I had planned

for a long time to get her a Canon A610, but we happened to be in a

store together and I casually showed her a couple cameras ... the

A610 was "too bulky," she would like something smaller. So much for

my plan!

 

One of the things I liked about the A610 was the flip-around LCD,

for protection as much as any other reason. I read so many comments

about the LCDs getting broken, especially (it seems) on the Canon

SDxxx series, so I'm wondering if anyone has any feedback on the

relative fragility of the LCDs on the Canon SD450 and the Fujifilm

F10, which are two of my top choices after narrowing down the field.

Any other comments or suggestions, aside from the LCD, are welcome

as well.

Check out the Lowepro Toploader 75 AW: http://www.lowepro.com/Products/Toploading/allWeather/Toploader_75_AW.aspx. I use it w/ a 20D w/ 70-200 f/2.8 IS and it fits fine -- don't have the battery grip but it looks like it might fit too, just eyeballing it. I definitely like the bag.

I've seen this frequently in views of individuals' folders during the last month or two, but never on the TRP page.

Thanks everyone, your feedback was even more helpful than I had hoped. It was a tough decision but I finally went with the 70-200 after all. I'm sure I'll be happy with it! Thanks again.

I have just enough money to buy one of these two lenses to use with

my 20D. As I see it, the choice comes down mainly to the type of

flexibility that I value more, focal length or speed, assuming I'm

comfortable with the push/pull zoom which is not something I'll know

until I live with one for a while. I'm leaning strongly toward the

100-400 for reasons explained below, but before I buy I thought I'd

see if anyone had any strong opinions one way or another, based on

their own experience.

 

I plan to use the lens for shooting kids' sports games, candid shots

of people, and some nature/landscape/wildlife shots. I'm not an avid

birder or anything, but enjoy taking a shot of a bird or beast if

the chance comes along. My only long lens has been a cheap 75-300

that I'm not thrilled with. I use it at 300mm fairly often when it's

on the camera.

 

People generally seem to be very happy with the longer zoom, and the

cost savings of the less expensive 100-400 gets me partway to my

next lens purchase (probably 10-22). Every time I think I've made up

my mind, I read another rave about the f/2.8 zoom and start wavering

again. :) I would not be able to get a 1.4x TC right away to extend

the 70-200, but I guess that would be a possibility in the future.

 

Anyone have any input to help me make this choice, given the uses I

described and your own experiences? Thanks in advance.

<a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8247510/">Associated Press

article</a> about photo labs refusing to print people's digital

photo files if they look too professional, fearing copyright

infringement issues.

I believe I understand how to reverse one lens on another to

increase magnification for macro (use male-to-male coupler), but am

not sure what the pros and cons are of using various lenses in the

reverse position. I have a Tamron 90mm macro lens; I also have the

EF 50/1.8 and 24/2.8 lenses which are my candidates for reversing on

the front of the Tamron. What are the tradeoffs of the two primes in

the reversed position? I just want to buy one coupling ring at this

point and these two lenses are different sizes. Thanks!

Check out the Lowepro Topload Zoom 1. I just got it to use with my 20D w/ 17-85mm lens, and it fits fine without too much extra room (although a slightly bigger lens would be no problem).

Thanks for the answers so far. I'm actually not going to be shooting action shots - the cheerleaders will be posing for individual and group portraits, more or less, but apparently it's traditional to take the sports team shots in the gym...

 

I'm going to bring my 50/1.8 and 90/2.8 lenses and see which one works best for framing with the 1.6x crop factor.

By the way, I've been shooting film up till now, in case that didn't come across clearly. I imagine I'm going to be better off shooting digital in this situation than trying to get film to work well in the setting. Right?

Just got a EOS 20D, and wouldn't you know it -- before I've even had

a chance to put it through its paces I've been asked to do some

[free] shots of a small school sports team, in the school gym in the

evening. I feel comfortable enough with the basic operation of the

camera, so my concern is mainly around the lighting. I will save RAW

files to give myself some flexibility with the white balance, etc.,

but I'm wondering if I will make things better or worse by using my

420EX Speedlight for fill flash. Will the flash mixed with the

(probably) far-from-daylight gym lighting make it harder to find a

WB color temp that works? I'm planning to take an initial shot of a

grey card for color reference - good idea? Should I try to use a

reflector instead of the flash to bounce some of the same color

light from the overhead lights as fill? Any guidance would be

greatly appreciated. Thanks.

I've had that happen fairly frequently too, lately.

Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 is very highly regarded and can be had new for ~$349.

I'm surprised no one in this thread has pointed out the existence of the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 lens ...

I have a Manfrotto 679B monopod with a Manfrotto 3229 head, which rotates about one axis to let you tilt the camera into portrait orientation, and has a quick release plate. I'm very happy with it so far, after just a couple uses. It extends to be quite tall so I never have to bend down if I don't want to (I'm about 6' tall). I think the combo stays under your budget too.

I'd recommend either a Canon 500D or a Nikon #6T with a 58-62mm step-up ring.

Daniel, as far as filters and B&W film, the result will depend on the colors in the particular scene. Read up on filters on this site... basically, a colored filter used with B&W film lets its own color through and blocks light that is "opposite" in color. So a red filter would let red light through but block the blues and greens somewhat. That's why a blue sky looks very dark when you use a red/orange filter. So if you used a red filter for every shot, regardless of the colors in the scene, a red car would come out looking very light but a blue car would be very dark - not necessarily the result you'd want.

One very minor quibble: several excellent 180mm macro lenses (ex. Canon, Tamron) have a max aperture of f/3.5, not 2.8. They focus to 1:1 magnification.

I've read a different explanation of why some lenses are labeled as "good for digital SLRs" -- that they do a better job of suppressing stray light that can bounce around a sensor-based SLR's innards and degrade the recorded image. This is different than the few specific lenses that aren't meant to work with 35mm film cameras.

 

I've read generally very positive reviews of this Tamron lens, including from film users.

Hello,<br>

You can always check <a href="http://www.photo.net/shared/community-member?user_id=980570">here</a>, which is your "Community Member page," but an easier way to do it is to click on the "My workspace" link at the top of every Photo.net page. From either of these places you'll be able to get to the photos you have uploaded.