drfl

Funny, the digidrive looks identical to my smartdisk storage device:

<P>

<a href="http://www.smartdisk.com/staticpages/PhotoBank2.asp">http://www.smartdisk.com/staticpages/PhotoBank2.asp</a>

I just have a 3-ND, but I have tried the Vari-ND and I recommend it (but not for more than about 7 or 8). As far as diffraction, I have battled the same as you with water. I have found on my 20d that I can print large (16x24) up to about f-16. For the most part a 3-5 ND will serve your purpose and keep costs down. I would experiment with that before purchasing the Vari-ND. It's always good to have one of those around anyway. Additionally, although they are not supposed to, Singh-Ray does have a slight ruddy color cast. It isn't too bad, and it can be nice at times. In this example, I set the camera to f-16, used a 3-stop Grad ND and a 3-stop ND. It allowed me to capture some motion in the water while not going too far into diffraction.

 

<a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/4648206">http://www.photo.net/photo/4648206</a>

Yes, I don't understand why nobody has suggested the ULTIMATE feature. CROP factor button. Just click a button and you can go from a 5d 12.8 MP to a 40d 10 MP (1.6x of course) in the blink of an eye. Forget a mirror lockup button, the CROP button is the one for me!

Richard, any actual experience with them? As far as agricultural photography, that is not what I try to specialize in, I try and capture things outside of the "stereotypical" idea of Nebraska/Iowa, etc. I have found quite a bit of interest as the majority of people who live in this area are not rural based nor know anything about agriculture, so it isn't quite what I am trying to accomplish. Anyway, I haven't seen much about them except "They're one of the big 4" and that seems neither positive nor negative except for exposure purposes.

I have been a member since 1999. (Back then I shot B&W film only) Over the years I have used PNet for lots of different reasons. I began because I truly enjoyed the sharing and community. When I uploaded a photo I felt that I received honest feedback. An example of an image with good critique feedback uploaded in 2004:

 

http://www.photo.net/photo/2694318

 

I used these critiques to try and improve my photography. Recently, I have only uploaded for critique only and I am lucky to get even one comment:

 

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?topic_id=1481&msg_id=00LjnX&photo_id=6153358&photo_sel_index=0

 

The experience had stopped me from contributing in every way for almost a year, and I am a paying member! Now, I am slowly returning since I do think it is getting slightly better. With that in mind, however, I still used the reviews quite a bit and would occasionally read the forums. Usually, there is quite a good bit of information to be had and most people are helpful.

 

I cannot say that I every had any business from PNet, but I can say that in the early years the experience helped my photography improve (I think it has, anyway, any critiquer can be the judge of that). The forums have helped me learn about marketing a little and any experience you have had someone else has more than likely had so you can learn from their sucesses/mistakes/etc.

 

It definitely has helped me realize that there is always a great new lens/camera/toy that may help (Of course, all new stuff helps) in my endeavors.

I have been toying with the idea of submitting my work to an agency. I have

researched several - Getty, Corbis (doesn't seem to be taking anyone), Alamy,

Jupiter, etc. and I am intrigued by Jupiter Images. I have a fairly large

collection of landscape photographs of the Midwest-Plains area - Nebraska,

Iowa, and South Dakota, to which Jupiter seems to be lacking as far as depth.

(There is only so many corn/wheat/crop photos that can possibly exist). I was

wondering what people's experiences have been with Jupiter Images as a stock

agency to work with, submit to, etc.

 

Thanks.

The only real reason I mentioned the MPs as a definition is because one of my questions to the Getty-contributing photographer was if he ever cropped down to 8MP, to which he answered he had gone as low as 8 and even as far as 6 on a very few number of items and Getty still accepted them. It seems that as long as they are of the quality they want then my point would be it wouldn't matter what type of camera they came from as long as they were of sufficient quality for most needs. Additionally, this same photographer quite often stiched photographs to create a 32 MP photograph. Now, by my calculation two 10d photographs would consitute a 48MB file.....

3 words: mirror lockup button!

I had this happen when my power switch stopped functioning properly. It only took the shop 3 times to get it fixed right.

As far as the 48 meg limit, I knew a photographer who submitted to Getty quite a bit that upsized his 1ds photographs to meet the limit. I find it intriguing they use file size as opposed to number of megapixels. He also never understood why they limited like they did. I think he said he couldn't understand why there wasn't some Nikon on there that had more megapixels than some of the other cameras. Come to think of it, the XTi isn't on there and it has more MPs too. Strange.

Anybody know the reason why Getty would choose the Canon 30d for submission

over a 20d image considering they use the same chip technology?

 

(See Link)

http://contributors.gettyimages.com/workwithus/article.asp?article_id=1346

Incidently, the 10-22 mm has a close focusing distance that would focus on a close cup of coffee, but the perspective may be off. It depends on what you want it to look like. If you are going for something like this: <a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/5863598">Room with Vase</a> to get close to an item while expanding to include the rest of the room it would work great. Otherwise I recommend the 50 f/2.5 CM lens for closeups. Additionally, I have found that the best bet to keep your perspectives right in inside architectural shots (in rooms with 7-9 ft ceilings) is to shoot at about waist level or slightly above. Otherwise you will be looking down and all your lines will be slanted too much.

I agree with Mark, add the bubble level it is cheap and money well spent. As for the lens, I shoot lots of interiors and houses and have found the 10-22 mm for my 20d a necessity. The extra mm on the wide end coupled with the sharpness is definitely worth the extra $$. <P><a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/5863605">Interior shot with the 10-22mm</a> (Taken at 10mm -f/8) Incidently, the 10-22mm lens can be had for $669 at Amazon.

 

<P>Amazon:

<a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html?ie=UTF8&location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2FCanon-EF-S-10-22mm-3-5-4-5-Digital%2Fdp%2FB0002Y5WXE%3Fie%3DUTF8%26s%3Delectronics%26qid%3D1176865226%26sr%3D8-1&tag=tutorialweb-20&linkCode=ur2&camp=1789&creative=9325">Canon 10-22mm</a><img src="http://www.assoc-amazon.com/e/ir?t=tutorialweb-20&l=ur2&o=1" width="1" height="1" border="0" alt="" style="border:none !important; margin:0px !important;" />

Canon apparently does not want to catch the last half of the US tax refund market this year.

Bob, what was the price of the 5d during the rebate? If I'm not mistaken, Canon lowered the price post-rebate which is better given the history of Canon Rebates.

Pat, what you are looking for is EOS Capture. It doesn't appear to be supported on Vista currently:

 

http://software.canon-europe.com/software/0022669.asp?model=

By the way, I did a simple Google search -

 

http://www.canon-europe.com/vista/en/compatibility_table/dslr.asp

 

Looks like there are several compatiblity problems.

Ronaldo R, you must not deal with Microsoft products very often. More often than not they will not work on a new operating system, even with beta testers. Beta testers generally only test things they are interested in and usually it is large corporate business products such as Peoplesoft, Quickbooks, etc. My advice, either go get a copy of XP while you still can or wait for someone else to have experience with it. I can say from experience with Vista (I've been running it for about 3 months now) that there is alot that won't work. For instance, the brand new latest copy of CaptureOne won't work and neither will my printer (nor will there be support for my printer in the future).

Did you try it straight forward at the level angle or swiveled up?

Do you have the flash positioned at something other than straight on? For instance do you have it swiveled up or to the side. This can cause it to flash.

I was faced with this very dillema. I was going to get the successor to the 5d, but then my 20d bit it, got repaired and now I don't know that I trust it (the shop was not so good from my perspective).

 

Anyway, I may just go for an Xti for a backup and wait it out too. That new Digic III looks pretty nice and I hope the sucessor has it!

Butters is correct, however, make sure that the paper has no shadows. I have seen that cause some undesireables issues in the past.

My next "planned" purchase was going to be the successor to the 5d or 30d depending on what came out next. I was patiently waiting for PMA to arrive to see what cameras would be announced. Whichever I decided, my 20d would then become my "backup" body. Ah, but things so well planned never happen. I recently purchased a 580 EX and a 300 f/4l lens and on the day of their arrival, my 20d wouldn't work in hockeystick mode anymore! So I sent in into the shop. (See that story http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00KCNm&tag=). Anyway, it has left me distrusting my camera and needed to accelerate my plans on a digital backup (I currently have an a2e for a film backup). I will probably be buying an XTi very shortly.

Butters, you are absolutely right about Best Buy's policy. My 20d recently had a problem where the "Hockeystick mode" was not functioning properly. After sending it away the first time it came back not fixed. After sending it away the second time that was fixed, but the boxes would not light up red on autofocus. After sending it away the third time Best Buy did not listen to me and proceeded to send it to my house, when I am not home instead of the store. It did come back working, but on the last two repairs the shop said "We could not find anything wrong with this camera. Please check your batteries or your software." Silly me, I guess 22,000 photographs aren't enough for me to understand to check my batteries. Funny thing is, both times they actually fixed something. Anyway, I talked to a former manager at Best Buy and he said they have a lemon policy. After the 4th time sent away they are supposed to replace the camera. My guess is I'm at repair #1 since the shop claimed there was "nothing wrong" the next 2 times. Additionally, when I was at Best Buy the third time the Geek Squad idiot proceeded to take the lens off and stick his finger into the casing in front of me! I asked him to stop very quickly (and loudly). Needless to say, I have written a letter to Best Buy informing them of their use of unethical shops. Additionally, I do not trust my 20d and I am looking for a replacement/backup which is hard given the fact that PMA did not have any news except for the Mark III (and money I should not have to spend). Too much time, effort, and energy has been spent on MY end for an expensive service plan. I would have been better off sending my camera to Canon. Incidently, I was without my camera for a month, I spent a total of 6 hours dealing with Best Buy workers and I was basically told I was an idiot by their service center. (Precision in Tennessee I guess, whoever they are)

There are some websites devoted to showing the noise differences between 3200 and 1600 underexposed 1 stop and pushed in RAW. I generally start at 1600 and if I am shooting like mad (5 fps is simply not enough sometimes) I find it easier to lower the exposure in 1/3 increments until I get the desired shutter speed. This all takes seconds, but the nice thing is I may only need the shutter speed that 1/3 or 2/3 underexposure affords me with less noise. This is of course if you are not going to clip the shadows off. I normally don't use this method if it is very dark, but I find that I use it more than I don't.

 

On a different note, the last time I checked the XTi was cheaper than the 30d, even without a lens, so I am unsure as to Bob's comment about saving cash. I have been looking for a backup to my 20d ever since it had to go to the shop for a month and the XTi looks to be a very viable backup body. At $700 I can live with the plastic build since it would not be a primary camera.