jbauer

<p>I have found success with button issues on XXD cameras by using contact cleaner. I was able to get a small can of it from Radio Shack and then I spray a little in the lid, use a pared down q-tip to work the cleaner around the button and then work the button itself pretty hard. The contact cleaner dries away and leaves no residue. </p>

<p>"No longer in use" is night and day different from "no longer useful". I shoot primarily with an older Canon EOS 1D body that is not generally "in use" much these days so people may deem it 'obsolete' based only on that definition of the word. <br>

When in reality the camera is still extremely USEFUL and really not 'obsolete' at all by that definition of the word. </p>

<p>Canon EOS 1D Classic<br>

It will focus the pants of any ole' 40D...</p>

<p>Popular Photography's squishy "reviews" of any camera from any manufacturer. They seem completely paranoid that they may in some way offend a potential advertiser that even poor performance is candy coated to the point where there are no sub par products or performance from <strong>any</strong> company in the entire industry. The camera world needs a magazine that has the cahones to call a spade a spade.</p>

<p>The second item is what I would call the "dumbing down of photography" for years by camera manufacturers to the general public. At some point most major camera manufacturers decided that the buying public was just too slow to understand the relationships between aperture, shutter speed and ISO and thusly the scene and auto modes became king. This particular gripe is tied very closely to a similar one in my mind regarding the lack of effort and thought that people put into something like photography. We are becoming more and more societies of the "do it for me" crowd.</p>

<p>A "virtual SLR camera" is available at Camera Interactive's site here:<br /> <br /> <a title="Cameras Interactive" href="http://www.camerasinteractive.com/home.php" title="Cameras Interactive">http://www.camerasinteractive.com/home.php</a> <br /> <a title="Cameras Interactive" href="http://www.camerasinteractive.com/home.php" title="Cameras Interactive"></a> <br /> This site lets you play with a virtual SLR camera to begin to understand the interrelationships between shutter speed, aperture and other settings. A pretty slick tool. Very graphically oriented.</p>

<p>There is also the classic 'Sim Cam' that I played with quite a bit in the past. You can find that one here:</p>

<p><a title="Sim Cam" href="http://www.photonhead.com/simcam/" title="Sim Cam">http://www.photonhead.com/simcam/</a></p>

<p> </p>

<p>Understanding Exposure - Bryan Petersen. You can get it at the local library or pick up a copy at Amazon or your local Borders or Barnes and Noble. Great book that focuses on what is important in photography - the inputs into the process - not the post processing. </p>

<div></div>

<p>The two lenses that you have mentioned have very different zoom ranges - 17-70 and the current 70-300. I think that the range of the 17-70 would be good for shooting kids around the house. I use a 24-70mm range lens around my home with the kids and it works great. It would be great for low light shooting to try and grab a constant aperture lens - one that will give you the f/2.8 at all focal lengths. Sigma makes a lot of nice (affordable) options in that arena. They make a 24-70mm f/2.8, a 24-60mm f/2.8, a 18-50mm f/2.8 and all of these offer the constant aperture. Look into these models.</p>

<p>I agree that you can get some nice options from Bogen/Manfrotto that are very high quality products without completely breaking the bank. Carbon fiber is nice but pricey......if weight is not too much of a concern then you can skip the carbon fiber options and save some dough. </p>

www.photography-on-the.net or right here at photo.net are the best sources for sales of photo equipment to me. I have bought and sold many items via both sites with much success. And neither of them want a cut of my money!

I most of your landscape work is done on the top of a tripod then IS is pretty useless. I am in agreement with Ralph here - faster glass is always my preference to any image stabilization system. Remember that IS only addresses camera movement and only controls that half of the "blur equation'. A larger aperture also allows better handheld shots AND gives you faster shutter speeds to boot - both side of the 'blur equation'. So if you are ever shooting a moving subject in low light - larger aperture is king.

I leave my 20D on most of the time as well. Only turn it off when I place it in the bag for long periods of time or take the camera on a trip or something of that nature. The 20D wakes up so fast with a quick press of the shutter I'm spoiled now on the ability to pick it up and shoot. (Plus I hate where the power switch is placed on the Canon 10/20/30/40/50D cameras anyway, it is like its placement was an afterthought on Canon's part and its awkward to turn on and off over and over. I much prefer the on/off switch placement that was on the older Canon EOS 300D.)

Good thread - love DIY stuff and the camera strap is a good candidate for that. I hated the boxed straps from Canon - they are too narrow and slip all over the place. Went with and OpTech strap and have never looked back. Comfortable and the quick release clips are very handy.

One that Bob for some reason left off his list is the classic 420EX. You can grab these in the used market for $150 or less and they are a nice flash to be sure.

The most amazing part of this thread to me is the fact that you purchased Canon-branded batteries and chargers. Those have to be some of the most overpriced parts of the Canon line.

 

You paid for Canon though - so they need to make you whole with Canon products. Their notice is so overly written its not even funny though. By their count, my 20D should have exploded years ago! :-)

You don't for some reason have your ISO setting set at 3200 or 1600? I sometimes forget to put mine back to normal.

For the best results overall YOU need to be telling the camera what to focus on rather than letting the camera decide what the subject of the photo is. Either set the center focus point as the default and always place this point on the spot that you want in the sharpest focus or set your camera up so that the focus points are easily selectable and move them around manually as needed prior to focus lock.

The 300D, although a bit long in the tooth technology-wise, was probably my favorite camera to use so far. It does have a slow wake up time, smaller photo buffer and a bit more noise than today's models, but image quality wise, it is still a top performer. There are also the alternative firmware versions that are available for it that turn on a lot of the nice features found in the 10D.

 

I think that this camera could work for you, and the price seems fair to me. If you could take your expenditure up another $100 (US) or so you could potentially get into a 20D which has a feature set that is more up to date.

I also believe that with the kit lens, you are going to have better IQ success for prints at the longer end of the zoom than at 18mm. That would be a quick suggestion that I would add based on some reviews I read at some point on this lens.

You do not mention what equipment you have, but here is a GREAT resource offered by Canon but that would have applicability to any equipment. It's called the Canon Digital Learning Center and you can get to it here:

 

http://www.usa.canon.com/dlc/controller?act=HomePageAct

 

Hope that helps some.

John Clark wrote: "I'd rather a fast lens than an image stabilized lens in most circumstances."

 

Here, Here, I am in full agreement with this.

I think that the basics of photography are still the most important aspects; rules of composition, exposure, DOF, etc... These things to me are infinitely more important than any gadget, technology or post processing software that is available to me as a photographer. If the initial photo is not desirable, all the other things are just putting a bow on a pig.

 

I think that people need to spend more time and effort investment on the FRONT END of the photographic process (prior to the release of the shutter) rather than on the BACK END of the process (after the shutter has been released). We seem to be moving more towards the idea that we just need to get something down on the CF card and then we can worry about what the final product will look like later. I wholeheartedly disagree with that premise.

If you could only have one or the other to get sharp shots in low light - which would it be? Image stabilization or wide, constant apertures? I personally think that wide apertures are definitely more usable and useful than image stabilization.

 

What say ye?

Long before IS or VR or OS there was a version of image stabilization that has stood the test of time, many

people still use it successfully today. You might have heard of it. It's called a decent set of tripod legs and

a good ball head. If you really think about your shooting and what you shoot most, do you need image

stabilization in the lens or in the body? Or is this really a kind of "photographic crutch" that companies are

feeding up and charging us more for in the long run.

 

I can throw my camera and lens on my trusty tripod and I have stops and stops of wonderful exposure freedom when

it comes to shutter speed. More freedom than I could ever get from a stabilized lens or body. And the great

thing is that this stabilization system works on any lens, any body and any equipment that I might have. Talk

about flexibility! I hear people argue all the time about what is better, in camera or lens-based stabilization.

How about neither? Isn't that an option?

 

Companies like Canon are now pushing stabilization down into less expensive lenses and I cannot decide if that is

a good thing overall or not. I think in the long run I would almost always prefer faster lenses paired with a

good tripod to any stabilization system in my equipment. Maybe we have become "tripod lazy" and we just cannot

be bothered anymore to drag out the 'ole three legged wonder.

 

What do you think?

What lens are you using to capture these shots? What is the widest aperture that your lens provides? If you want to avoid flash and higher ISO settings you need "fast glass", or lenses that offer wide apertures of f/2.8 or wider.