chriss1

I really miss old look of Photo.net site. When I started here, some like 14 years ago, we had 1-7 scale Aesthetics and Originality rating system and some serious discussions below users' photos. I learned a lot and spent so many hours studying masterpieces provided by the Timecatchers team and a lot more great landscape photographers. Now, every single website looks the same: we see big photos and very few small icons with no description, minimum text (kids-like design), it is therefore more simple watching than deeper thinking about what we see. Everything comes down to browse faster, click "like it" and next, next one please and so on. It's not the direction I'd like the Photo.net follow in the future.

<p>Fellow photographers,</p>

<p>I'm keen on architecture, urban landscape photography, sometimes nature in general and have been shooting with 40D and 17-85 IS lens. I find it very useful (but a bit soft, especially edges, and the ring has become imprecise/sometimes blocks at one position/ after 1 year of heavy using), and the most important - I come across numerous situations that I need some extra focal lenght. It's worth to mention that there are also some difficulties and inconveniences in changing lenses on busy streets or in not-so-safe- areas...</p>

<p>Can I find something even more versatile, but still comparable in terms of optical quality to 17-85 but with additional focal lenght? Are Canon 18-200 or Tamron 18-250, Sigma 18-125 worth considering? I don't really need anything over 200 mm.</p>

<p>My last thought is if I should skip this way of thinking, get used to my deteriorating 17-85 and buy 70-200 f/4 so I could return with it to preplanned locations? My budget is nearly the same as the lowest prices for this "L" lens.</p>

<p>Thanks for the help!</p>

Thank you Mary

Is this possible to report abuse to site administration, when a photo received

some low anonymous ratings strongly differing from non-anonymous? The difference

is more than 2 points (8 anonymous: A: 3.50, O: 3.38; 5 non-anonymous: A: 6.00,

O: 5.80). I noticed that some members are disfavour, no matter how good photo

they publish. In my opinion rate recent feature should contain option to chose

category (ex. landscape, portrait), then people won't browse and rate photos

they don't understand or generally dislike. And, rate recent should also have

comment field below rating field, similarly to the past. I wish that posting

"critique only" wasn't very popular. There are only 1-2 comments received during

few days. But ratings remais the fastest way to select best photos (not always

it works, like in democracy, vox populi isn't infallible).

</br>

</br>

Link to my photo:

</br>

http://www.photo.net/photodb/ratings-breakdown?photo_id=5152926

If you are advanced after using film SLR you will need 20D (or 30D) but when starting with serious cameras, I would recommend something simplier. 400D is newer construction even than 30D and remember that lens is more important than camera. I have similar dillema but my budget doesn't allow me to buy much more expensive 30D body. Great photo.net users gave me helpful advices not to buy kit lenses. So, if you aren't new in photography and have enough money, go to 20D (30D).

Thank you all for helpful responses. I knew that kit lenses aren't perfect but also didn't realise that are so bad. It is better to have one good lens than two poor quality so I'm about to buy Canon 17-85 as good prime for my first DSLR.

Hi, I would ask which option is better. The XTi with Tamron 17-35 f/2.8-4 seems

to be nice option, although is more expensive (costs more than two Canon lenses

together when buying in set with camera) and I will have only wide lens , not so

good to take closer details of waterfalls or creeks. If 18-55 is comparable

about quality to Tamron's lens, there's solution to buy XTi 2 lenses set. Or, if

I had the third way which other combination of XTi/lens(es) to buy, I would be

grateful for help.

</br>

</br>

I have no digital system lenses, XTi is going to be my first digital camera. I

own Canon 20-35 and 35-80 only - bought for film camera and not so good for new

equipment due to 1.6x focal lenght problem. As landscape photographer, I mostly

used 35-80 lens.

</br>

</br>

Thanks in advance.

I meant that need a wide lens as a counterpart of my 20-35 but in digital system. The 20-35 won't be a superwide when using with EOS XTi so I'm thinking about buying XTi set (18-55 or 18-55 and 55-200). Unfortunatelly, Sigma lens costs as much as XTi with 18-55 and remains out of my capabilities. I would be grateful if someone has already used one or both Canon lenses that I mentioned and can tell that are worth or not worth buying. Thank very much for answers

I have been using my first SLR EOS 300 for 3 years. I have learnt a lot but,

unfortunatelly, there are expensive slide films and labs they are processing

them in my country. I'm an amateur and don't earn money from selling my images.

I have to turn into digital system because of costs and limitations of my old

camera, and due to labs in my city that wasting films too often.

<br>

<br>

1. I would ask if is new 400D (XTi) much better than lot cheaper 350D (Digital

Rebel XT) that I have been considering long time to buy, are there any

significant differents? I have only two lenses (designed for analog system -

35-80 in set with my camera and 20-35 I would still remain in use) so I'm

thinking anout buying set (probably with most popular 18-55). And my second

question...

<br>

<br>

2. Is a 18-55 wide enough to be used nearer 18 mm with satisfaction like using

20 mm in analog standard or I will have to buy other lens?

<br>

<br>

My priority is to improve quality of my photos. I use my equipment to shot

landscapes. The 20D/30D are rather out of my financial capabilities...

<br>

<br>

Thank everyone for help

<I>"And let's face it, does any photograph really deserve a rating of 1? I mean...that's really harsh, don't you think?"</I>

<br>

<br>

- I think Yes, for ex. last year I saw a "photo" which was... white square. I doubt if it really was a photo, it could have been made in simple graphic program in five seconds. So, give 1/1 or ignore? I'm still not sure.

I have noticed a big problem in requesting critique. I usually request

critique when system allows and receive finally 9-10 anonymous

ratings, most in first hours. But, last time, for about Monday the 12

of September, everything changed. It looks like system doesn't

refresh. I posted some photos lately and haven't received any ratings,

from the last one - since 24 hours. I don't know why, because every

photo in critique forum always receives ratings, better or worse. I

increased my activity in photo.net community, but I didn't suppose

that it will cause decrease others activity to me. My last question:

why photo.net websites open so slowly and why photo critique works

flabbily too (for my submissions)?

it also happens using Mozilla Firefox: then try resubmit - third time ends with success

Year ago photo.net was beter place: there were less people but much more committing in rating, posting comments and photos. Now traffic increased but photos are rated circumstantially, which means good photos (at least technically) receive bad ratings and worse - better. I don't accept the main Top photos ranking - rate recent avg, because it can't be created on few anonymous ratings. Re-posting photos is one way to get higher ratings at second or third time.

This system is unfair. There are groups of users giving to each other highest possible ratings. Others, like me, return low ratings for photos with comparable quality and etc. How to explain this? What is more annoying, anonymous raters give low ratings much often and there are users who don't upload their own photos. I don't want to take shots only in one way that is appreciated by most users so they would rate me higher. Having good surname is best way to exist here, the qality of photographs is then second thing. The rest of people can only give up.

Thank everybody for wide perspective of possible choices. Gitzo is too expensive for my pocket so I will consider buying any model from Manfrotto/Bogen mentioned in the discussion - if available in my country.

Hello<br>

I need new tripod. I bought Velbon CX-460 as my first tripod but it is

not very stable and too low for me. I shot landscapes so new one must

be not too heavy and importantly high as possible to keep camera

without setting out central column on my eyes level (about 1.8 m). To

have an accurate tripod for years I considered some Manfrotto's (which

name is probably Bogen in the USA) but have no idea which model

choose. What's more my old Velbon has legs and head in one, without

any posibility to exchange and fixing plate which is screwed on camera

and must join it with head surely always rotate (especialy shooting

verticals). To sum up, I search high tripod for landscapes or

travelling and accurate head (I don't know if ball or 3-way to buy),

best from Manfrotto (I heard many good things about it). Thanks for

any advice.

I think that critique forum formula should be changed - when publishing photograph there, 10 first ratings decide about how many others will see it in the Top photos summary so they can't be anonymous. For example, many of my submissions were rated extremely low excatly in "rate recent", and then some people rating directly gave higher marks. I understand that criticism on this site will never be totally objective but we can improve system by eradicate "anonymous" and counting all ratings in all Top photos summaries. Why few anonymous raters should decide whether a photo is good or bad?

I met the same problem some time ago and I think, there is solution: upload your photo to the Photo.net, then submit to rate recent (without waiting a couple of days!) and your work should be visible in "Top photos" usually 24 hours or 3 days at least.

I have some experience with wide angle lens (Canon 20-35 mm), standard Cokin P holder mounted on it cuts some space from left and right side of frame when I set 20 mm but we can always buy special wide angle Cokin P holder which capacity is only one filter.

I would take this one - 24 mm 2.8, but too expensive - 859 PLN = 252 USD .

Thank everyone for valuable opinions, my money is limited, and comparing to 50 mm 1.8: EF 28 mm 2.8 costs twice and EF 20 mm 2.8 thrice! When I paid away big amount on 20-35 mm I wouldn't pay the same price for 20 mm. Although I learned that having no-zoom lens means getting better images. I believed because I can complain of dark and unsharp photos from 35-80. And one of famous National Geographic photographer says that you don't have to shot landscapes with widest lens, he has done great shots with 50 mm (for ex.) and moving back. I use my zooms with strong tendency to choose radical focal lenght (ex. - using 35-80 I usually take with 35 or 80 mm, rarely with between them) so no-zoom could be quite good to combine more how to set the camera.

Thanks for this clue, now I'm sure that it was their fault

right Craig, I did a mistake, my camera is >Canon 300<. I read in some articles for beginners that they should take first a 50 mm 1.4 or 1.8 lens (for landscapes!). I don't understand, why this one, maybe because of optical quality?

I have already written in Film & processing forum about strange orange

dominant after developing my slides in the lab. Now I scanned all pics

and will show one for example; do you think that I can blame them for

wasting my films and want to give me money back or new films in the

same amount and type?<br>

PS. Example photo is before any digital improving, orange areas should

be brighten up and have more details, all more contrast. Film used -

Fuji Provia 100F.<div></div>

Hi,<br>

I have started photography with Canon EOS 300d film camera and 35-80

mm Canon lens. After buying a 20-35 mm Canon wide-zoom I am still not

so happy of images quality. I would ask if Canon EF 50 f/1.8 II lens

could be a good choice for landscapes and getting sharper images? The

advantages are low price and filter diameter (the same as my older

35-80 lens), but I worry that 50 mm will not be enough to take

"space". What do you think?