rogerjporter

<p>I'm guessing if the 60d doesn't, you are probably out of luck on a rebel.</p>

<p>I suspected as much... having experimented with film 3d a while back, it seemed not quite the same. I perused an electronics store this week too and saw the prices on the glasses required to view the 3d tvs... no thanks! i will definitely be passing on this fad for now. thanks for the reply!</p>

<p>thanks for the reply, the price on that lens seems really reasonable, i guess they make up the difference charging a thousand bucks and up for the tv's. that's hopeful marketing if you ask me. Has anyone been able to view the 3d effect on their computer screen? I already have one of those. </p>

<p>I am on the cusp of treating myself to a new micro 4/3 camera, and i am not really leaning towards the Panasonic, however the idea of 3d photos really excites me. I really have no intention to buy a huge expensive tv to view them. The manufacturers website leads one to believe that is the only option to view the photos in glorious 3d... is that really the case? can i view it any way on my computer? and if so, do i still need their fancy expensive glasses to make it work? thanks</p>

<p>OM1 and 55mm 1.2. I still use it. It's simple and can do what my big ugly digital zoom lenses can't. </p>

<p>I am also looking to switch to m43, I was all set to settle on the plastic body epl1, but now with the ep2 price drops, i would sure rather have the nicer build body. I do a lot of wireless flash work with my canon gear, so the epl1 wins there, and if you look at the review sites, the epl1 beats out the ep2 on the pixel peeper tests. Can anyone comment on the actual real world quality difference between the two? the sony has some awesome features, but with no hot shoe it's a deal breaker for me, and like the samsung, is 2 lenses really satisfying? I haven't really completely ruled out the Panasonic either, but i am leaning towards the olympus. I don't mean to hijack your question, but rather add something to it. thanks!</p>

 

<p>I don't have an iphone at all, but i second the motion for the hipstamatic, all my ifriends use it and it has definitely made me jealous, but not quite enough to throw down the monthly fee for an iphone. I am however eyeballing the new ipod touch, but the camera in it isn't as nice as the iphone 4's. Not that it has to be as nice, because it's still just a camera phone, but a fun one that's always with you.</p>

<p>Olympus makes an underwater housing for the EPL1, but it sort of negates the whole compactness of the camera. Sweet housing though, if i did any serious snorkeling that would be on my xmas list instantly. </p>

<p>Last time I shot film 800 speed Kodak gold was really grainy and contrasty... And i used to buy neopan 1600 fuji by the brick (do "new" photographers even know what a brick is?). both these are grainy as heck, and the 800 colors if you don't get the exposure dead on turn to muck. I'm still confused why digital is expected to be different. </p>

<p>Thanks folks, sounds like i will hang on to the ST-E2, i'm not a huge fan of the strobes triggering the sattlelite flashes. I have noticed the AF assist thing too. I had a radio trigger for a while, but it was during a phase where i didn't use it much. As soon as a sold it, I started doing more off-camera stuff. </p>

<p>does it send out much of a flash or is it more like the ST-E2 with the non-visible beam?<br>

and thanks for the reply!</p>

<p>I am planning up upgrading my 30d with the 60d, and i was wondering if i need my ST-E2 anymore? Those with 7d's might know more, I believe they both have a wireless flash trigger built in to the pop up flash. Does the pop up flash go off to trigger the remote flashes? or does it just throw out an infrared beam or something to trigger them? I don't usually use more than 2 flashes off the camera (and most frequently just one), so having the ability do use a ton of them isn't a concern. I would presume the ST-E2 has better range, but I use it primarily for portraits, not architecture or anything big, so that isn't really a concern either. Thanks!</p>

<p>i used to have a scsi to usb adaptor for an old hard drive (i think it was 320 megabytes... for real... ha ha). it worked fine, although really slow. </p>

<p>I have been wanting to "downsize" from Canon to m4/3 for a while now, but common sense tells me i have a couple of L lenses and i am worried that i won't be happy with the glass quality. I'm sure the pics will look great... but "L" great? i can't afford to have 2 systems... I wish i could. I rented a 5dMk2 for the last wedding i did, which was awesome, but 75% of my photography is my kids on the weekends, and having something compact would be amazing. I handled the EPL-1 last week, and fell instantly in love. </p>

<p>I've had my ups and downs with Etsy, the key there is list list list, not in bulk though, because then all your listings get buried together, but 2-3 per day seems to be a good average to stay at the top of the categories. I'm not that diligent usually. There was a point about 2 years ago that it seemed to explode in popularity and it became a lot more saturated. I still list things, but not with as much zeal as i used to (and hence, don't sell as much as i used to).</p>

 

<p>I was thinking at first how clever and useful a double shoe accessory would be, like the old ones that were used for Leicas and such. then i got to thinking, with the plugin port for the viewfinder, it would be the clunkiest accessory ever for a camera, then figured if i end up with an EP-2 (i'm close) i will just have to settle for one or the other. </p>

<p>Do they read the forums, who can say? Do they care what is asked for in the forums? No. If they did, the cameras in our bags would be very different than they are now. </p>

<p>Keep in mind the ipad wasn't designed for photographers, it was designed as a giant fun ipod touch. Photographers will certainly find uses for it, as will everyone else, but as far as a useful tool it just isn't meant to replace a laptop. I'm not saying i don't covet one, but know it's limitations before you jump in. </p>

 

<p>I hope you aren't trying to "fix" the camera! you could auction that off as an xray camera and make a killing!</p>

 

<p>but what does it do? let's see some photos!</p>

<p>It seems some readers don't understand ttv photos. i think the correct answer is whichever lens will get you a macro view of the viewfinder... i don't think there is a right or wrong lens for it, as long as it focuses on the viewfinder glass. What i have seen that does make a difference is to use a tube of some sort (a mailing tube trimmed down, for instance) to block out any stray light. You would put it around the lens and then up against your Duaflex. I've even seen folks tape it all down so it is easier to hold the whole contraption together. hope that helps.</p>

<p>This is relevant, although the uncle (literally) had a Panasonic of some sort and shot video the whole night. the groom is a jazz musician, and hand picked his wedding band out of all his friends, and the bride's brother is an opera singer. When i pitched video at my client meeting (which i do not do myself, but of course have a preferred vendor) they said that they weren't interested, which seemed sad knowing they were going to have awesome music. In walks the uncle, asks if i was going to shoot video, to which i replied sadly "no", and before i knew it he had much of the evening preserved on video (It was an LX 3 or 4, so i'm sure the video will look nice). I was glad he was there, because he captured the motion and music of the evening that i knew still pics would not. </p>

<p>If you have an unlimited budget, hire a pr firm or marketing specialist to sell your photos... that is worth far more than any gear you might pick up. A local photographer i know just did it, he is still in the trial phase, but he posted on Craig's site and got 60 applicants, and ended up hiring someone who had interned at some big magazines in New York. He offered her a base salary plus commission. It's only been a month and a half, so it hasn't picked up momentum, but she is selling. He just went to Dubai and Thailand for 4 weeks to shoot more while she does all the grunt work back home. Sounds good to me.</p>

 

<p>I use a 30d and plan on upgrading this season to a 7d, and i use a 24-105 as my primary wedding lens, and it is on the camera for about 75% of the shots at weddings i shoot. It is plenty wide for me... although i have the 10-22 for the big group shots but it's nowhere near as sharp as the 24-105. The whole "it's not wide enough" argument is pure opinion. </p>

<p>Is this argument even winnable? Obviously a keen eye, years of experience and a full working knowledge of the tools you choose (whatever those are) must count for something? </p>