craig_buckingham

Stuart, I did just that recently on my trip to Vietnam. I took my EOS-3 and left the 20D at home. It was great to have the photos done there and be able to show them to my Vietnamese friends.

 

I have about half a dozen crackers that I will have scanned and printed soon. Probably on an Imacon 949.

Stuart, the claim was that most 35mm films easily out resolve digital 35mm. I just don't see it, in fact to me it looks the other way around, even with the best films.

 

I think if one was to use much higher ISOs on digital and not sharpen the images at all they would look closer to film resolution.

Well, got me beat, my eyes must be playing tricks on me. The 40D looks like it out resolves Fuji 160C quite easily.

Les, I already looked at your pages. I could only find one digital film comparison, the D2X Nikon vs techpan at 25ISO. The D2X is pretty close to out resolving the techpan except there seems to be excessive sharpening on the D2X image.

<i>Les Sarilephoto.net patron, Jan 12, 2008; 09:10 p.m.<br/>

 

William, unless you are talking about comparing a highly disadvantaged film compared to digital, you should not only expect to get more detail from film but you <br/>will. Lossy desktop scans from 35mm film outresolves all of today's DSLR . . . let alone a 5MP digicam.</i><br/>

<br/>

Les, what do you make of this article on Luminous Landscape?<br/>

<br/>

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/d30/d30_vs_film.shtml<br/>

<br/>

According to Reichmann the D30 out resolves Provia 100F.<br/>

Here is a lens that produces best resolution wide open at f/1.8 to f/5.6 with the resolution dropping at f/8.

 

http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/200mm/index.htm

Thanks James for filling in the gaps for me. So you can see my lack of knowledge on exposure for certain things. "Zone 6" you speak about I take it relates to doing exposure using the zone system which I have heard a lot about and have just googled. So now I know.

 

I only new that daylight had too much dynamic range and that one had to choose the object they wanted to expose for and under/over the other stuff of less interest. Or if permitting two exposures to get it all and combining them later.

Sure James. Grey card or in camera meter, pretty much the same thing. But if you spot meter the area of interest in a high dynamic range scene you can then expose correctly for that area of interest. Sunny 16 rule doesn't work in those circumstances.

 

So these articles that say sunny 16 rule is all you need are really not true. It is a good starting point and that is about it.

James I am not sure what you are saying there. Are you saying that light meters don't work in extreme lighting conditions?

I don't understand how sunny 16 can be of any use.

 

Doesn't natural sunny daylight have more dynamic range than any camera can cope with?

 

If so there would always have to be some adjustment depending if one need s to capture shadow or highlight areas in an image.

Smart move by Nikon to push in an area where its main competitor is week. Canon have superlative telephotos and so there is less gain to be made making a lens that performs much the same in that area.

Well I have been told parts are no longer available for 400 series 1 model and the 180 also. So if that is the case it seriously detracts from their resale value.

Charles,

 

My 20D is front focussing when I manual focus. It is really easy to see if I use a wide and focus on newspaper or magazine print.

 

My understanding of the diopter is that it adjusts for best focus of the screen. Since the screen is a matte finish and not an aerial image the diopter will not correct the focus error if any visible on the screen.

 

I know my 20D is front focusing also because AF just about always gives sharp photos but the image looks defocussed. If I move the focus more towards infinty after AF focus it looks focussed in the viewfinder but ends up backfocussed after shooting.

 

I believe I have a focus screen / viefinder registration issue. It has already been to Canon once and they said it was within specification. My understanding of the big corporations is these days they have deadlines and targets and don't have the time or expertise to fix these things properly.

 

The comparitive quality of these things is lower than it was 30 years ago.

My reading of a number of Leica lens datasheets was that they had not taken the path of fluorite and preferred using their own tried and tested glass formulations.

 

There are some glasses like FPL53 that are fluorite blend glasses that have performance very close to fluorite.

 

Canon L wide zooms are a lucky dip for sample to sample variation.

 

Most Zeiss, Leica, Zuiko and Nikkor wides generally out do Canon wide primes not to mention zooms. If Canon made wides as good as telephotos then that would be heaven.

It is interesting that sRGB is specified for the Web. I would like to know where the colour bottle neck is in PC - web use.

 

I noticed when switching from sRGB to Adobe RGB that the greens improved out of sight on my monitor which is a nothing special LCD type. That is where the aRGb colour gamut is much expanded over sRGB. So my PC, operating system, application software and monitor all seem to handle the change from sRGB - aRGB.

The way I use the Expodisc is to point it towards the dominant light source such as the sun and then take a reading.

 

Sometimes it is not possible to place a grey/white card in the scene, such as when photographing wild dangerous animals. Although this would always be the preferred method where mixed lighting is used.

 

I have a 72mm expodisc and was using a super tele today and I thought how can I white balance it. I simply used the expodisc as a grey card and place it in the sun. Took a shot of it through the tele and all was done.

 

I think that is something even the makers of expodisc don't advertise.

 

I saw a test on Kodak grey cards and apparently the RGB levels are all over the show. That is something that expodisc provides, a RGB measurent for each disk.

I come from an electronics background dealing with the design of A-D and D-A convertors.

 

I may be missing the question here but the way I see this, it is really simple.

 

The digital sensor and associated electronics have a certain dynamic range. You want that dynamic range to capture the areas of interest in your composed shot. If you set the exposure to far positive or negative you run the risk of not only getting the wrong exposure but pushing things into postive clipping (over exposure) or negative clipping (under exposure).

 

When clipping occurs the information that goes beyond the clipping level is lost forever. You cant recover what was never recorded.

 

The sensor has a finite dynamic range. It is simple really.

They should have eyepiece shutters on all SLRs. How much would it add to the cost?

Most of the people here are aware that Canon marketing are playing games.

 

Can anyone tell me where the Trademark infringment is. I am sure this one will be thrown out. If it is upheld does that mean I can't sell a used lens to someone overseas through eBay?

 

This is all about market control and nothing about customer service. These are the facts.

 

1) All Canon products leave the factory with a warranty. They do not sell products without warranty cover at a disocunted price.

 

2) Canon lenses have international warranty. If you buy a lens overseas and return home with it the warranty is covered under the international warranty terms.

 

3) If a grey market item is bought and has a warranty issue Canon come out ahead under their current policy as they will refuse warranty cover and will charge for the service. So the original item before it became grey market had warranty coverage factored in to the price. The same lens could have been bought on a holiday to Singapore for example and will still have warranty cover when you return to your country of residence. So they get to charge for a service or repair on an item that had warranty coverage pricing factored in all ready.

 

As someone said earlier, this is all about market pricing structures and market control. A lot of countries have laws against market monopolisation and restrictive trade practises.