mattbutterfield

Well, I guess I should have said that I personally probably wouldn't try to clean my own sensor. I would be too afraid of something happening to me like what happened to Mr. Disk there. I'll just keep being extra careful to not get any dust in there until I am absolutely sure that I know what I am doing.

First of all, from what I understand you should never attempt to clean your sensor on your own, especially by actually touching it with anything. If your sensor is that dirty your camera should be sent in to Canon for cleaning. As for if it is the lens or the sensor, well, I would try different lenses or taking a picture without any lens on. If you still see scratches, then it is a problem with your sensor, in which case you need to send your camera into the manufacturer. Probably not a good idea to try to fix that on your own.

I am going to go ahead and disagree with you there.. Cropping is good, but should be used in moderation. Your image "Thai women on the way to the floating market in Bangkok" is a good example of cropping being abused. It just feels so claustrophobic to me, and there is no way an image like that could come out of a camera. I just prefer images that were thought out and composed in the camera.

I live in Dearborn too, we tried to go yesterday but the DIA is closed on Monday and Tuesday! Can you believe that? Drove all the way down there for nothing. Oh well, I am going to go down there tomorrow instead.

 

I went to the Annie Leibovitz show a few months ago which was excellent. Anyone else see that?

Have you ever checked out the Sigma 50-150 constant f2.8 lens instead of the 70-200? It is cheaper, smaller, and has a bigger aperture. That way you could save money for other leses, and maybe get the 17-55 f 2.8 IS.

If you buy the one for the Canon EOS mount..yes.

Have you checked out the 16-35 f/2.8L too? It's about $1400, goes pretty wide on your 30d and can also be used on full frame. Then you could get the 24-70 f2.8, and the 70-200 f2.8. You would be all set for about $3600! Only a grand more than you want to spend...sorry.

But those are all zoom lenses, so I would consider getting the 50mm f/1.4 and 85mm f1.8 instead of the 24-70 to save some money and f-stops. If you are shooting weddings I would think you would want the versatility of the zoom lenses?

 

 

personally, if I had $2600 and was starting from scratch, planning to upgrade to full frame I would buy the following:

16-35 f.2.8 f2.8L $1400

50mm 1.4 $300

and 70-200 f2.8L $1090

that puts you at $2790. If you want you could always get the 85 f/1.8 too later on, because it is so cheap.

 

Of course, I don't shoot weddings, so you might want to consider something like the 24-105 too.

In my experience refurbished stuff is as good as new, especially if it is refurbished by canon. I say go for it. It just means that someone bought it, used it, then returned it, usually just to upgrade to something more expensive. their loss, your gain! (financially that is)

Have you ever tried using photoshop's merge to HDR? If you have CS2, you should try it out.

 

http://www.naturescapes.net/072006/rh0706_1.htm

 

that's a pretty long article (17 pages) but it is really interesting and worth a read.

(that doesn't appear to have a battery however)

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?A=buyUsed&kw=used&Q=12678&O=productList

 

i think that one works.

I shoot quite a bit of basketball. I use a 70-200 as well always at 2.8 and I find that if I shoot at 1600 iso, i can get up to around 1/400 or 1/500 of a second, which is pretty good. I would say you need at least 1/320 to capture the best action shots. The images actually don't look that niosy either, but if you want to shoot at ISO 1000, I would take your 50mm along for sure, you should be able to get close enough.

 

Oh, and take Michael's advice and dit under the basket! that is by far the best place to get shots and be right in the middle of the action. My favorite way to shoot is actually with a 17-55 2.8 to get shots of players in mid-air.

After a few months of using professional DSLR's, I had pretty much settled in. My shooting method really boils down all the complexity until the only extra thing I worry about is the ISO. When I shoot, I mostly use aperture prioty mode (unless I am doing a long exposure or something), so for each shot I am thinking about the aperture, the exposure compensation, and the ISO. Since I shoot raw, I don't have to worry about anything else (sharpness, white balance, contrast, ) until post processing in Adobe Camera Raw and Photoshop. So I have found that I actually spend a lot less time fiddling around with the settings on my camera than when I used film. Even changing a memory card is way simpler than changing a roll of film. I do think however, that most, if not all, cameras come with wayy to many 'features.' For me, all that matters is a nice sensor, a nice lens, and a decent metering system. I even keep my autofocusing point right in the center most of the time except when shooting really wide or shooting action. That way I can focus on the thing I want then move it around in the frame after holding the shutter button halfway down, ensuring that only the thing I want to be in focus has the best focus.

I recently bought an EF-S 10-22 on amazon for less than $700, and trust me, it was well worth the money. If you want true wide angle shots, this is the lens you should buy. It is incredibly sharp compared to the kit lens, plus an ultrasonic motor and it goes as wide as you will ever need. I highly recommend ditching the 1V and getting a 10-22.

 

While you're at it, shell out an extra $70 for a 50mm 1.8 and with these two lenses you will never want or need to touch your kit lens again!<div></div>

Not to beat this to death or anything but IMO Zoombrowser is probably the worst photo browsing software ever. All you need is a card reader and windows explorer. If you want batch renaming, just use Bridge which comes with Photoshop CS2, which is a MUCH better way to browse raw images. Adobe Lightroom just came out and is also great for organizing files and is cheaper than Photoshop. Definately worth spending a little money to avoid using Canon's extremely slow image transfering, browsing and raw converting software.

This is coming from a 20-year-old photography student:

 

My old film rebel and I have had some great times together in my early photo classes. Even though I honestly can't remember the last time I used it, and I can't think of a future time when I'll actually need it, I don't think i'll ever sell it. Of course, I probably wouldn't get that much money for it, but that isn't the point. I consider it to be my first 'real camera' that I bought (even though it isn't exactly professional photojournalist equipment). Who knows, maybe one day I'll feel the need to go out and buy some T-max 400 for old time's sake. I do still have some Ilford silver paper left over...

 

My dad has an old AE-1 that I know he will never sell. He sold most of his lenses for it when he upgraded to the EOS system in the mid 90's but kept the body and a 50mm 1.8 lens. I havn't seen him use it since I was a kid, but it is proudly displayed on a shelf in our living room. Every once in a while I pick it up and dust it off, put on the lens and look through the viewfinder trying to imagine a world long before digital photography.