dkord

<p>Yes, it's odd that they allowed it in the B&W category but it's the judges decision.<br>

Only thing you can do is look over the rules again and then ask the decision makers why it was allowed.</p>

 

<p>One word...<strong>Portfolio</strong>.<br>

If you can not sell your services with an outstanding portfolio, then it doesn't matter what kind of gear you use.<br>

A print portfolio with a variety of sizes will overcome concerns about gear. The 20D can easily print up to 12x18 without uprez software. If you're thinking stock then it's a different story. Having the correct lens for the job also makes a big difference, a lot of people use the wrong lens, apply bad technique and they blame the camera.<br>

Having good people skills and being accommodating also goes a long ways.</p>

I think you're asking in the wrong place. From my research on the video, I think without proper technique and

supporting gear you're going to be in for a rude awakening.

Definately nothing like a video camcorder you pick up at the store.

 

This link is probably the best place for 5DmII video resources:

 

http://www.cinema5d.com/index.php

Photography is a medium, and to be good at that medium you need to know it's craft.

 

Painting is also a medium, and to be good at that medium you need to know it's craft.

 

Cinematography is a medium and to be good at that medium you need to know it's craft.

 

Sculpturing is a medium and to be good at that medium you need to know it's craft.

 

................ is a medium and to be good at that medium you need to know it's craft.

 

So you can paint a barn, or draw someone's face...take pictures at a wedding, does that make you an artist?

 

I guess my point is, no matter what the medium, there's a is point where a line is crossed.

Where it goes from just an illustration or a photograph of something pedestrian to an image

to be consider art.

 

Maybe it has to do with an emotional connection from the viewer?

Perhaps it strikes a deeper meaning than the obvious surface.

Or is it art because the person behind that craft is able to use that medium to manipulate the viewer's reaction?

 

Move a person or people in some sort of subtle but profound matter...isn't that what Ansel did?

 

Can it be one or all these things?

 

Why can't a photographer who is good at his craft use that medium to create his or her vision or...art?

I doubt the DX format will soon go away.

I think it will eventually morph into a non reflex still/possible video camera, kinda like those EVIL cameras.

 

http://www.here-ugo.com/BridgeBlog/?page_id=27

 

Basically this will reduce the size of the cameras since you're forgoing a prism and reflex mirror.

Panasonic has one comming out, the G1 and Oly is suppose to have one in the works...both are using the 4/3rds 2x

crop sensor.

If it takes off, I'm sure Nikon and Canon will follow suit using their DX/EFS lenses which of course means using their

crop sensors.

 

I think true reflex mirrored DSLRs will eventually be predominately full frame cameras.

<div></div>

<div></div>

The question is not when, but whether it will be available. Hearing pre-orders are getting filled.

Shooting at 400 iso hurt your background. Those blown highlights in the background would of been more balanced if you shot at 100 iso.

Bokkeh is nice at f2.8 and f4 but since sun was so bright and shooting at 1/200 you lost those highlights. 100 iso would of given you a couple of stops.

<div></div>

Quote: "Derek Hammond , feb 01, 2006; 01:12 p.m.

how can the 70-300 f4.5 possibly be classed as too slow in this age of digital slrs when 800 asa is a conservative sports film speed. I can understand the comment if you are shooting sports in a floodlit stadium using ektachrome and a film slr, Otherwise i think too much is being made of a one stop decrease in light transmission. The loss of one stop is more than made up for by the reduced weight of the lens and the improved handling."

 

There's a couple of things to think about.

One, it's f/4.5 at 70mm, from 200-300 it's f/5.6!

The other is on most Canon DSLRs the focusing system is designed to be more optimal with 2.8 lenses. It will focus and track faster so using a camera like the 20D shooting 5 frames per second you will find more keepers. Especially in low lighted venues like Indoor Soccer, Basketball and Hockey you'll probably wish you had something faster! Here in the Pacific Northwest, we get for more cloudy and overcast days, so 2.8 makes a big difference compared to f/5.6!.

 

Canon makes an IS and a non IS version, the price comparison of the 70-300mm DO is about the same as the 70-200 f/2.8 with no IS.

Not sure about most people, I rather have 2.8 for my portrait work than 4.5-5.6! But then, I rather use the 85 1.8 or the 1.2L for portraits.

lol sounds like your girlfriend needs a job or you need a new girlfriend :P Seriously, maybe the 55-200 4-5.6?

I still don't understand what the big deal is. So it's larger, if it works what's the problem? It's 8 megs, not 80 megs.

It only cost me a few minutes of my time, I did it while watching tv.

I haven't updated the camera since I bought it, it was running on 1.03.

I'm greatful I didn't have to do a bunch of older updates just to get the new one installed or have to send it in to the service center for these updates.

I don't know how the WHOIS link works, but I used a domain I know, dpreview.com. It shows up as being in the US, if I'm not mistaken, Phil is in the UK.

<div></div>

If it's mainly a color issue, then look at your photofinisher.

It might be a combination of poor color and/or density correction and bad(old) chemicals in the processing.

Kodak 100/200 should still give you decent sunsets.

 

You might want to grab a roll of slide film and do a comparison, at least you'll take the finishing out of the equation. Use a lab with a good reputation with E-6.

 

The camera or the lens is not to blame when it comes to poor color on prints. Now if it's exposure then it's about learning a new camera's metering system. If it's sharpness, then yes, you lens might not be as sharp. If it's camera shake, then it's cause the shutter speed is slower and you're not using a tripod, but you should know all that.

They are inheritly faster than CF cards. You can get an XD to CF adapter to use them in CF devices.

 

I doubt if you can tell a performance difference between a Extreme III or an Ultra II in a point and shoot.

<div></div>

The Diagonal AoV of the EF 24-70 L is 35mm: 84-34 degrees. APS-C: 52.55-21.25 degrees. APS-H: 67.12-27.12 degrees. That's from the EOS systems catalog 2/05. The 35mm Diagonal AoV for that lens is listed the same in their EF Lens Works III book.

<div></div>

Never tried this product but give B&H a call.

Hama Lens Mount Adapter - Canon FD Lenses on Canon EOS Bodies

 

 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=89910&is=REG

<div></div>

I have the G3 and the 20D, they are great combo. I captured the Blue Angels with it in manual focus.

For normal touristy shots you shouldn't have any trouble, the hardest thing is that quick capture of a facial expression that you weren't ready for.

Specs wise, it's a very fast lens: F2.0-3.0 at 35-140. That is hard to beat for low light speed. For those bright days you can flip the Neutral Density filter down and it lets you shoot 3 stops slower.

You get movable partial metering along with movable focus.

The flip screen is great for candids and shooting over your head when watching a stage show.

 

If you need faster focus/shutter response, you might want to look into a Sony W5 or W7. It has a big screen that actually works in bright sun. Pics are sharp and it does give you limited manual control. Better movies than the Canon G series and a relatively decent built in flash. I like it as a point and shoot, fun camera.

Bob, most digi cams with a powered zoom will have some noise. If you really need noiseless operation(zoom), you might as well look at a fix focal length with some digital zoom or just upsize with more megapixels later.

Otherwise:

One camera you might want to look at is an older Canon G3/G5: You should be able to get one at a good price. The focal length is 35-140. You can use a infra red remote or if you have it tethered on a long USB cord, use remote capture from a laptop. They use the BP 511 battery so the batterly life is excellent. They have a built in intervalmeter and you can shut down the auto power off,use manual focus and custom settings.

The other model perhaps is a Canon S60/S70. Battery is not quite as good but they do have the same remote options. You can also buy a waterproof housing that is actully waterproof, 130 meters.

 

Speaking of remote capture and time lapse, check out this website. I got to beta my G3 with it, works great.

 

http://www.granitebaysoftware.com/Default.aspx?ContentID=1&ContentVer=1

<div></div>