kari v

Looking at the live pictures at http://heavymusic.free.fr makes me think some subject motion (and perhaps wider angle) would be nice addition. It feels odd to see just frozen images of guys like Sepultura's or Haunted's guitarists. I play that sort of music myself and if a photog portrayed me as still life in all shots I'd give him a funny look or two.

Right hand picking 400 times per minute and 22 inches of hair flowing...

 

Ok, this is aesthetics and off-topic, but I think Laurent needs both sharper and more blurry pictures. A fast prime or two solves this nicely.

300 000 shutter clicks, 24 assigments per year, let's say 1000-3000 shutter clicks per job... the shutter will last for 4-12 years and after that a replacement cost $250.

 

Just ignore the counter.

"Do you think F:4 is enough to do something decent in indoor situation without flash ?"

 

Not a chance if someone is moving around. In small venues even f2.8 is often slow.

50/1.8 is cheap, fast and has good image quality but it's really too long when used inside. Other problem is that you have to use around 1/60 - 1/90 sec for handholding. Compared to 28/1.8 or 35/2, which you can handhold (with some practise) at 1/30, you "lose" a stop or so. There's also the Sigma 30/1.4 which is the cheapest option at this focal length and f1.4.

 

There's a world of difference between 30 and 50mm in general shooting. When you get your body and the kit lens try setting the zoom at 30 and 50 and walk around the house and you'll see what I mean. I'm quite sure you'll find 50mm limiting indoors.

 

About zooms. They're flexible but f2.8 is not fast for low light stuff. Sure it's fast compared to cheap zooms' f5.6 but in practise f1.4 is so much faster than 2.8 that it's not even funny.

Simply underexposed. Don't trust your meter and the camera processor to do perfect job in conditions like this.

 

Read how the meter works and how to read the histogram, two simple things that get you far in any situation.

"From page 3 of the manual: "The temperature range for camera use is 0 C to 40 C (32 F to 104 F)." You may be able to squeeze out a few degrees beyond those limits."

 

0 C?

That would make a Really bad marketing leaflet for us living in the north. :D

 

All the cameras I've tried work fine at -20C or so, battery drain is considereble though. When it goes below that (with even the slightest wind) it's me who wants inside first. At -30C eyelashes start to freeze annoyingly. At -40C or more... erm... just make sure you don't drop your fingers off while operating the camera. ;)

Actually Nikon's math for dots is 1920x480 = 900K, but resolution in the way people usually understand it is 640x480 because one pixel has three components, RGB.

Justin Serpico: "Actually it's a 900K DOT screen but the legit pixel count is a mere 300K, or only slightly nicer than the ones on the K10D. Actually factoring in that it's bigger, i'm not sure it's all that much nicer. Basically it looks like a small upgrade (although an upgrade) in screen resolution, not a massive upgrade."

 

Have you actually seen the Nikon screen? Going from 320x240 to VGA was one of the biggest visible changes in monitor technology.

I've never understood the way the manufacturers speak of 230K or whatever screens. Marketing I guess. Canon has a 320x240 screen and Nikon 640x480, that's a serious difference.

Nikon multiplies by 3 and so does Canon.

"and could hold an entire 1990 computers worth of programs and info on a card the size of a finger nail clipping you'd have laughed too."

 

It's actually more like a 100 1990 computers - 4Gt SD vs 40Mt HD. :)

 

 

"Prediction: The cost for 128 kilobytes of memory

will fall below U$100 in the near future.

Creative Computing magazine

December 1981, page 6"

I don't consider basic adjustments "manipulation". Developing RAW is like developing and printing film in a certain way. Nothing is really added or omitted, it's just a way to make a picture look good. Camera doesn't take the picture, you do.

 

Art, do whatever you please.

 

Reportage / document, take a situation representative picture.

"For a while now I have been studying other photographs on the net of the 50mm 1.8. and I cannot see the difference!"

 

50/1.8 is $100, 17-55/2.8 is $1200, should this tell you something? ;)

 

Trying to find any meaninfull differences in small sized pictures on your screen is totally futile + all the variables.

 

If you need the speed or just happen to like shallow DoF, get a prime (or two), if not, then zooms are nice. For best *sharpness* you would be shooting any prime at least at f2.8...

Pentax K100D Super is cheap and very capable.

 

If you want to spend a little more the K10D with the kit lens sells for $749.95 at B&H which is about $100 more than the XTi - I'd consider that almost the best $100 ever spent. You'd get a nice sturdy semi-pro body with weather sealing, image stabilization and a good bright viewfinder.

 

Nikon D40 is good, small and the viewfinder is surprisingly good. Just make sure you understand how much choosing this body will limit your lense options. Of course the situation improves all the time but at the moment it's not so good... or let's say not so cheap if you want quality.

250-500Gt hard drives are not expensive, that's around 125000-250000 2Mt photos, even a very cheap 80Gt will hold 40000. One DVD is good for 2300 files... are you absolutely sure you want to re-compress / resize all your files?

"Hearing the arguments I am now tempted to get the 50mm f1.8 and a cheaper zoom."

 

I really don't know what you're planning to do with a cheaper zoom. f2.8 is not fast for concert shooting and not cheap. The 50mm is a nice lens but at close distances it's useless unless you want headshots only. Something in the 24-35mm range is a whole different story, you could move around and shoot a small gig without changing lenses at all.

Anthony Rhoades: "Sure, but shooting snapshots, why use 6x6, especially these days?"

 

I don't think Bud Gray said anything about snapshots, just that he needs to scan his stuff for the family and friends to see. Perhaps he's getting the larger and more important prints professionally made? I'm still 100% sure that a non-photographer is not going to see anything wrong with a reasonable sized print made from a flatbed scan.

 

How are your PS skills with scanned files and how long do you want to spend scanning, Bud? Lower price -> more work and time spent waiting.

Pushing: For the look (high contrast + grain) or if you have to because of low light levels.

 

Ilford HP5+ is a good film to start experimenting with, it tolerates a lot. Try EI 200-1600. Tri-X should be similar but I haven't tried it.

Come on guys, for friends and family flatbed scans from 35mm are fine when you learn how to post process them properly.

4x6 and 5x7 look very nice from a low end Canon and the occasional 8x10 can be managed with enough quality to Auntie Ann - seriously, most people don't inspect prints that are given to them with a loupe.

With 6x6 film it's even better. And of course in web size almost anything is perfect.

 

One thing though, cheap scanners are slow and can't hold many frames at a time. Scanning a mountain of slides can be really painfully dull experience.

One more: AF in macro work with extensions doesn't feel useful, it's more likely to be annoying if works at all.

"has anyone noticed that "pronounciation" is incorrect?"

 

Yes, sometimes I just have to pause and think "this is English, don't write it in the logical way"... ;)

I'll second that, it beats the XTi hands down.

Pentax K10D is cheap now and it offers a lot for the money, image stabilization included. Viewfinder is good and the camera feels solid in hands but not too bulky. It's very different from the entry level Canon and Nikon offerings. I almost purchased one myself but then decided to concentrate on shooting medium format film for a while.

 

K10D + 16-45/4 + Pentax 35/2 (or Sigma 30/1.4) is not terribly expensive combo but gives you a nice 24mm equiv. wide angle zoom and a fast sharp normal lens for low light. Just add a telephoto later and you're set for a long time.

f1.4 - f2 + image stabilization + ISO 1600 = if that's not enough you're doing something wrong. ;)

From customer reviews:

"I have been using this card for about 8 months now in a Canon 1D Mark II and I have had not problems. Even at 8 frames a second shutter speed, it keeps up just fine."

 

I think it's fast enough for most cameras (most new cards are) or do you have some sort of special needs?

I haven't used a 14mm but 17mm for film / ff sensor isn't too wide to control. It takes some practise but you can get quite "normal" looking pictures if you want and the ability to really play with the perspective is there.

 

There are serious uses for an ultra wide but it's also fun to play with. Kids like it. (Actually there's nothing non-professional in amusing kids...)<div></div>

But you're right about the strap and the MLU button. I guess I could glue a little safeguard for the button.

You could walk around with the wlf and a 80/2.8.

Of course with the prism and that CZJ the weight is considerable. About as much fun as lugging a 1D MKIII and 70-200 2.8 IS around your neck all day, something I wouldn't do.