moli_luo

One thing to keep in mind though is that laptops with two internal hard disks are hard to come by - for laptops with only one internal HD, setting your scratch disk on the same volume as your program file and your pagefile and your photos will severely slow everything down. From experience, while internal laptop HDs theoretically transfer data faster than USB 2.0, the bottleneck I noticed is not from the interface bandwidth but from the speed of the disks. Probably because my aging laptop has a 4200 (4300?) rpm HD but having an external 7200 USB2.0 HD speeds up everything - before it was infuriating sitting there hearing the laptop HD crunch away.

I was in your shoes a few months ago and what I did was get a 160gb WD EIDE HD that they sell for ridiculously low prices nowadays (now that SATA is here to stay) and then you can buy a USB 2.0 HD enclosure thingy for like $20 and that works like a charm. Not only can you put the HD aside and replace with new one if it fills up, it makes things much faster, too, although certainly not as fast as having it internally mounted and connected through EIDE but it does the trick since that removes your slooooow laptop HD revving like crazy from the whole process. Plus 7200RPM desktop HDs are much much faster than any 2.5" laptop HDs - really not only with PS but with games or doing anything in general. Ultimately, what I did was get a Dell 4700 desktop for around $450 (with 17" LCD w/ DVI connector) and spend about $200 and upgrade RAM and HD so it Photoshops like a dream now (2x160gb+40gb hds, 1.5gb RAM), so if you're looking into that route, that's something to think about...

 

Good luck!

Hmm never tried doing two saves at once but one thing you can do is save all of them high-res and create a PS action to scale all of them down to the lower resolution version and save those in another folder. I've been doing that with photos on my webpage (you can also have it automatically add a copyright logo thingy to every low-res photo that you plan to post online).

This site <a href = "http://dealnews.com/">here</a> posts a lot of deals from Dell (and other stores) with coupon codes to apply when you purchase. They had the $1100 20D for a few days last week - I don't know if it's still going on, but they update it everyday so you can check there if happens again.

Uh oh - that's not good. The Canon EOS5/A2 was notorious for that problem. Let's hope 20Ds won't exhibit the problem with that magnitude. You should get it checked out and fixed. Just out of curiosity, how frequently did you actually use the mode dial?

I think this question was asked a few days ago in one of the forums and the conclusion was it's a scam and what happens when you order is the company GigaBargain sends you a phony e-mail that looks like it's from Amazon and tells you to pay via Western Union (a non-Amazon payment method) so they basically take your money and you don't get the product and since it's not through the Amazon pyament method, Amazon can't give you a refund or anything. I think that was the gist of it...can't find the thread though to link to it. :-( In any case, don't go for it - there's no such thing as a free lunch.

Now Rob, I'm sure Canon had a good reason not to include the B&W mode in their flagship camera, just as they didn't include PIC shooting modes. I'm sure there are also people out there who would like to see PIC modes on the 1Dmk2 but canon just wouldn't be targeting the right market segment by the inclusion of those features. Very same reason that most dSLR photos are not super-sharpened and super-contrasty straight out of the camera - they expect most of the people who own these cameras to do some photoshopping afterwards anyway. Of course, there are people who do like that P&S look (a guy I was reading on dpreview started a thread saying how D70 was terrible because it wasn't sharp and stuff and how his P&S was much better) but to position their products the right way, Canon might just have to make these sacrifices and alienate certain consumer groups.

Try checking your metering mode to make sure it's in matrix metering and not spot or center weighted. That "problem" (well okay user stupidity) went unnoticed for awhile on my 20D and frusted me a lot. Turned out I was shooting on center weighted metering mode the whole time so non-flash exposures were all over the place.

Check your camera. It's probably on AF-Focus or AF-Servo mode. Switch it to one-shot and see if it works better (I don't know about the 1v but my EOS3 just has AI-Servo). The other problem might be that your camera is not detecting focus in the first place so make sure AF locks onto your subject before you move the focusing point. A green LED should light up in the viewfinder of the 1V to confirm focus.

I have not used my 20D long enough to have noticed any effects of IS and USM on battery life (I usually recharge around 500 shots, before the battery indicator drops to half charge). However, IS (never really noticed it much with USM, but then again I almost always shoot in AF mode) did drain batteries quickly on my EOS3 w/ PB-E2 and 8x AA NiMH batteries. I noticed the same when I shot Nikon with the 80-400VR as well. Perhaps you can try shooting for a battery charge without IS and see how much of a difference that makes. The other thing to keep in mind is that Li-Ion batteries do lose charge over time, although 9 months does seem awfully short for a battery.

<br><br>Also do you use a lot of flash with your onboard flash on your 20D? Flash does drain batteries pretty quickly...

<br>

<br>Li-Ion batteries don't like to go through a deep discharge, and frequently doing those do shorten their lives. Sometimes you may read in a manual to do a complete discharge of a Li-Ion battery every once in awhile - the reason for that is not because of any memory effects or such, but more to calibrate the battery guage so it knows where's empty and where's full. At least that's my understanding of it. I read about it at a site about my laptop. You can read it here:

<br>http://www.geocities.com/thebithead/I8200FAQ.htm#Power

<br><br>From the Dell Inspiron 8200 FAQ:

<i>

<br><BR>Q: What is the life span of a Li-Ion battery?

<br>

<br>Well maintained batteries should last about 2-3 years or 300-500 charge cycles, if you follow these guidelines:

<BR>

<BR> * Charge the Li-ion often, except before a long storage. Avoid repeated deep discharges.

<BR> * Keep the Li-ion battery cool. Prevent storage in a hot car. Never freeze the battery.

<BR> * If you mostly keep your laptop at a fixed location where there is A/C power, you can run your system on A/C power only by removing the battery and storing it in a cool place.

<BR> * Avoid purchasing spare Li-ion batteries to store for later use. Observe manufacturing date when purchasing. Do not buy old stock, even if sold at clearance prices.

<BR>

<BR>The batteries cycle lifetime is based on the depth of discharge. Shallow discharges provide more cycles than deep discharges. If the battery is stored fully charged and at elevated temperatures, this battery chemistry deteriorates to a 50 percent performance level in about one year.

 

</i>

Mujhe baksheesh do.

 

Then we do your homework for you. ;-)

<p><i>Most formatting in cameras is a quick format as opposed to full format with the computer. Formatting in-camera is more likely to lead to lost data and errors.</i></p>

 

<p>I believe most camera manufacturers recommend in-camera formatting as that allows for the right sort of formatting of the card. For example, some cameras do not support FAT32, so if you were to format it as such on a PC, the camera will probably not recognize it. Moreover, I highly doubt a computer format is any more thorough than an in-camera one. Both sorts of formats just empties any entries in the FAT, to my knowledge. A "thorough" bit-by-bit formatting would take forever and is really unfeasible anyway.</p>

Oops. I goofed. The *bigger* the ratio, the bigger the object is on film.

<i>I'm thinking the Tamron would be quite nice, the macro ratio is 1:8 compared to the 1:2 of the Sigma, and a few other slight things I've just recently discovered.</i>

<p>The smaller the ratio, the bigger the object is on film. A 1:1 macro ratio means whatever thing you're photographing shows up on film as its actual size. Thus, the Sigma has better macro capabilites in terms of magnification.</p>

Your first picture is orangish because you used the light from the Christmas tree and perhaps some other incandescent light source, and without special film or filters, what's lit by incandescent light will show up yellowish. It's slightly blurry probably because you didn't have a lot of light, so you were forced to use a slow shutter speed, and the blur is from your hand shaking (even though you may not think you shook it, it shows up). The picture below that, that white spot looks like dust or something that was in front of hte camera when you took the picture, and since it's closest to the camera (and flash), it's the brightest thing. In a cathedral like that (which one was it?), i'ts probably best to not use flash and hold the camera steady or lean it against something and use a slow shutter speed. As for the last statue of liberty picture, the "added light" is what's called flare. Without buying other lenses, there's nothign much you can do about it except maybe reposition yourself so the sun doesn't shine into the lens or perhaps have the statue's arm block the sun.

 

Hope that helps. Happy shooting.

Actually, I think Canon does a better job than Nikon in this matter. With CF4-2, in one-shot mode, both the shutter release and the * button serve as AF lock. The shutter release locks both the AF and the AE, but if you only want to lock AF and recompose and then set AE, then you can focus, press * while you shift your camera/lens and then press shutter release halfway to lock AE. In AI-servo mode, the * locks focus, which is something I've always wanted in a Nikon. It's very helpful when shooting sports, if you want an off-center shot but don't have time to switch focusing points, you point whatever focusing point at your subject, press *, then recompose (assuming the scene doesn't have too complex lighting), then shoot.

 

But since you're doing landscape, I don't see why you can't normally use MF. It's not like the trees are ever going to fly away. ;-)

...everything I mentioned above is in reference to Canon lenses. I do not know much about any third party ones.

Welcome to photo.net.

 

The 70-200 (f/4, f/2.8, and f/2.8 IS) is in a completely different realm from the 75-300. The 75-300 is a consumer lens that's slow, suffers from color shifts (mine tends to produce blue-ish images), and softness at the 300mm end. The USM version of that lens isn't true USM. It's a good starter lens, but you'll soon grow out of it and upgrade to the 70-200. Especially with the 300d's cropping factor, there's not reason (besides financially) not to get teh 70-200, since it effectively becomes a 320mm at the long end. The construction is very solid and the optics are among the best Canon has to offer. The focusing is fast and everything is just pro leveled, hence its designation as an "L" lens.

 

I'd personally recommend you start with that lens, since you'll probably be upgrading in the future anyway. I only wish I started with that and not the 75-300, which I'm hoping to sell to fund a 70-200 f/2.8.

 

Happy shooting.

Actually, it seems the 4MP D2H has better image quality than some of the higher resolution dSLRs. Bjørn Rørslett has reviewed the D2H and this is one of the pages of his review: http://www.naturfotograf.com/D2H_rev02.html#top_page. Hope that helps.

The 50mm stands for the zoom on teh flash, since flash heads zoom in and out to maximize flash usage. The guide number is used to calculate distance in conjuction with your aperture. For example, a GN of 42m used at f/2 would give you a max distance of 21m. Divide the GN by aperture to find the coverage.

It looks like the night pictures are reddish because of the presence of sodium lamps which are inherently orange. You can probably easly correct that in photoshop, or do some in-camera white balancing. Overexposed picture 1 doesn't look really overexposed to me. Your background is too bright and there's too much tonal range to capture, so the camera properly exposes the faces, and it's inevitable that the bavckground gets overexposed. As for picture 2, I'm not sure...maybe you spot metered? The face doesn't look too badly overexposed. It looks like you used flash, so maybe you used too large an aperture and maxed out teh shutter speed to your x-sync speed and had safety shift disabled? Does it happen without flash?

I've been looking into these lenses myself for my Canon, and it seems that main differences are that:

1. the Sigma is HSM and the Tokina is not, and it seems that the Sigma focuses faster because of this lens motor. This, however, means the Sigma only works on modern Nikon bodies and will not work on, say, my N4004s.

2. the Sigma lens barrel remains fixed throughout zoom, while the Tokina lens barrel extends, so there might be a problem with dust getting sucked in as you zoom with the Tokina.

 

Besides those, the both lenses seem to perform very well. I've used an old Sigma 70-210 f/2.8 and the build quality on that was terrible, so hopefully, Sigma's improved things a bit since that was built. Optically, both lenses seem to harvest favorable reviews, and they're roughly the same price if you buy the Sigma from stores on Ebay. Good luck picking one out.

Are you sure it's the camera and not the lens? Smudges on teh front or rear element of the lens makes the image really soft. Also, did you or this person from whom you borrowed the camera touch the CMOS or anti-aliasing filter? Besides that, I can't think of a reason why things would look foggy.

Velvia is a great film. I love it for anything non-portrait or where overemphasis of reds isn't important (use it on people and it makes it seem like everybody's wearing red lipstick). I shoot at 50, and those who shoot it at 40 usually have a personal reason or preference for it. Try 50 first; if you don't like the results, then give 40 a try. Velvia's blues come out very beautifully, so white clouds on a blue sky look amazing. The reds are very saturated as well. As for processing, I've never tried Fuji, but Kodak seems to do a pretty good job with them. I refrigerate my Velvia, but some people don't and speak of good results, so that's up to you to decide. THe camera shouldn't the slides unless it's leaking light or something. I've nver used the 28-90, but I know that teh 75-300 makes the colors unsaturated and makes them murky blue, even when stopped down to f/8 or f/11. Happy shooting.

<p>ISO 800 is very very high speed film for outdoor shooting. Using hte sunny 16 rule, if you use 100 speed film, you'd get f/16 aperture with about a 1/90 shutter speed. You can then calculate from that (ISO 50 f/8, etc), but with 1/90 x-sync, you probably won't be getting too shallow a depth of field. </p>

<p>Fuji Reala 100 is a great low speed all around print film. If you're not shooting people, then try Fuji Velvia 50. It's a superb low speed slide film. Also, you should take a look at this site for more film recommendations:

http://www.nikonians.com/html/resources/jrp_faq/jrp_faq_what_film/faq_what_film_to_use.html</p>