shlomi

<p>I think you should look only into Mamiya and Hasselblad, as the other systems are marginal and not a good investment for the future.</p>

<p>Craig Shearman said "most of the MF world revolves around Hasselblad" - I'm not sure that's true anymore. Hasselblad is not showing very good signs, and Phase One/Mamiya/Leaf seems to be cornering the market.</p>

<p>As far as quality, the HC II lenses are the best, but the newest and equally expensive Mamiya/Schneider lenses are pretty much equal. With Mamiya you have the freedom to get cheap older lenses, and to mix and match backs and bodies with practically no limitations. This is for sure preferable for an amateur, and also many professionals chose Mamiya for that reason.</p>

<p>As far as "needing" MFDB - this is a good question. I would say MFDB is required if you are shooting in the extreme technical parameters, where lenses suffer the most. If you are shooting object 1m-4m far, in f/5-f/16, then you will not see a huge difference between MF and 35mm. If you want to get good results in any parameter and for any requirement for product photogaphy, then MFDB is a must.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>The camera that you need is Fuji GX 680 III (not IIIs, I or II).<br /> The total for all the parts except digital back, should be like $2500 if you can find it used.<br /> You will need a Kapture Group control module (OneShot), and an adapter to mount your digital back to the Fuji.<br /> There is a cheap Chinese adapter on eBay, or the better kind from Kapture Group, which also rotates.<br /> The shift of the Fuji is only 7.5mm, which might not be enough for you to counter architectural distortion.</p>

<p>If that's not enough, then the other solutions are quite expensive:<br /> - Phase One 120mm TS - $5000 only for the lens, plus ~$2000 for a used Mamiya body<br /> - Large format - $1500 for a used body, $1500 for a new back adapter, $1500 for a good lens - if you want electronic shutter and shutter control then a few $1000 more<br /> - Alpa</p>

I have a 1Ds that I use tethered to Windows XP via firewire.

I also have Lightroom 1.1 installed on the laptop.

 

My problem is that whenever I connect the camera, Lightroom starts

automatically.

 

Does anyone know how I can stop this from hapenning?

I indend to get a 1Ds soon, and I would like to see a raw file first hand.

 

Any help will be appreciated!

 

shlomi@shlomi.net

1DMKII with battery, card, body cap and no lens, comes to a delightful 1600g.<p>

 

Shlomi<p>

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

I would stay away from the 1Ds at this point in time. <p>

 

Your consideration should be between 1DsMKII and 5D. If you can't afford 1DsMKII' then get the 5D. Note that there are rumours the Mark III will come out this summer, so the 1DsMKII prices should drop. 5D prices will drop regardless as it is currently overpriced.<p>

 

I have a 1DMKII and the 1.3x crop factor is not significant for me - much less of a problem than 1.6x. I would not consider any non-1 after using the 1DMKII.<p>

 

Shlomi<p>

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

Hi,

 

 

Does anyone know what are the recommended default values for the CS2

Smart Sharpen filter Amount and Radius fields, for Canon 1D Mark II?

 

 

Thanks,

Shlomi

I think it's exaggerated to say that a one stop difference is not significant nowadays. When shooting indoor sports that 1 stop is the difference between ISO 800 and ISO 1600 - there is a definite difference. Anyone shooting basketball for instance would feel a real difference.

 

When shooting outdoors, the f/4 can go only to 280mm with 1.4x TC, which means you can't shoot birds well with it - birds need at least 400mm due to their distance keeping. So there too the f/2.8 allows you to mount a 2x TC and go to 400mm.

 

And of course when shooting any king of action or portrait and wanting to isolate the subject from its background - there is a big differemce in background blur between f/4 and f/2.8.

 

For me these are three very big differences. Are they worth the extra weight - for a pro definitely yes. For an amateur, depending on his priorities.

I have a 70-200mm f/4L and I am not very happy with it.

 

The optical quality and USM are fine, but the f/4 is a significant limitation. You can put only 1.x teleconverters (and still have AF). The bokeh is not appealing at all with TC.

 

When shpooting action I feel significaltly limited both by DOF and but shutter speed.

 

If you want to have the really right lens get the 2.8 IS - don't kid yourself that for less than half the price you will get something "almost" identical in quality.

 

Shlomi Bernthal

www.shlomi.net

The Tamron is about as sharp at the 28-70, but has a color problem. I have the Tamron and intend to sell it to get a Canon 24-70. I've used the Canon 28-70 on a 300D (a problem copy maybe) and wasn't impressed. Comparison between the Tamron and the Canon 28-70 was inconclusive. The Canon 24-70 is much better suited for digital. If you are using a film body the 28-70 should be great. If you are using a digital body get the 24-70.