pfp_o

<p>Hey everyone, sorry it took me a while to get back. Thanks for the feedback on MPIX, I think I'll give them a try. I don't need anything as heavy as card stock, just something sturdier than that Kodak stuff. </p>

<p>Hey again all!<br>

<br /> I don't typically give prints when I shoot, mostly only the CDs. Every once in a while, I print something for someone who just wants maybe an 8x10 to go along with their CD. I don't have a home printer that I think would be good for that but I don't know (the only printer I have is my Epson Workforce 500, the all in one type).<br>

<br /> Either way, I have to print a lot of stuff for my primary field, so I don't want to be spending a ton on ink to print photos when photography is secondary.<br>

<br /> I've been using Kodak's online service to get my prints. It's cheap and the color looks good to me and more importantly good to the people I'm giving the prints to, but the paper seems thin to me compared to the thickness you get from places like commercial chain portrait studios or office type places.<br>

<br /> I looked around through the options to see if you could pay more for a sturdier stock and either there wasn't an option to change the paper stock or I just couldn't find it (if you know where it is, please tell me lol) I want to be able to order a print on a sturdier stock. I just don't know of any other online printing places.<br>

<br /> I DID search this forum, but honestly, I haven't heard of ONE of the online places that have been mentioned, which makes me wary of using any of them, because the opinions seem to be scattered. The one that was mentioned here that I've seen mentioned on other sites though is <strong>www.mpix.com.</strong><br>

<strong></strong><br /> I've seen enough positive feedback on them to be willing to give them a try, but how do I know which paper stock to choose? If you've ordered from Kodak, basically, I want something stiffer than that, closer to the thickness of what you'd get if you dropped your prints off at a Kinkos or Rite Aid or something or better.<br>

It's been a long time since I've compared different paper types, so I can't really describe it better. I know the quality of the image itself is the most important thing, I just don't want paper that's as flimsy feeling as that Kodak stuff. I worked for Lifetouch for a while though so maybe I just got used to whatever paper stock they were using and it's making me THINK Kodak's is flimsy ::shrug::<br>

<strong>Any advice on choosing the right stock?<br /> Any opinion on mpix? <br /> Any idea if Kodak offers sturdier stock?</strong><br>

<strong></strong>Also, sorry if I'm saying stock and should be calling it something else like weight or something. I'm willing to consider other online printing places too, but please keep in mind that I <strong>need</strong> the prices to be low, less than $5 per 8x10 print.</p>

Thanks everyone! When I'm in the city, I do stop into B&H before buying, but I don't actually live near there so being on a bit of a deadline with a few things, I wanted to get as much information as I could before going there in the event that I may have to order a camera without doing any hands-on tests. I've been looking at all of the cameras you each suggested and I'm certain that any one of them will be an upgrade from my Pro1. I'll let you all know what camera I choose and how I like it after I've used it for a while and thanks again!

Wow, I'm not doing too well here, I cut off the other half of that last message. The rest said that I'm not sure how to tell you in specs what I consider to be a fast enough burst rate for my needs, so the best I can do is say that if I'm hitting the shutter button at the same tempo that a pocket watch ticks and the camera can't keep up with me, it's too slow. Rather, that's as slow as I'd go.

adanced = advanced (sorry)

Oh, quick firing! I'm looking for both in that sense, sorry I didn't clarify that too.

 

I do mean one that doesn't have that insane shutter lag that the PSPro1 has, but after using a variety of DSLRs, that seems to be something that's resolved in better cameras anyway for the most part. I was more so referring to burst rate since, particularly for fashion photography, I need to be able to take consecutive pictures quickly (which I poorly described as snap snap snap lol).

Hey, I'm back! Thanks so much for all of the quick responses, I love it! I'm going to look into all of the suggestions you made immediately and here's some more info for those who asked questions.

 

I don't really remember what lenses they were, but they were for my Canon EOS Rebel G11. Not sure if that helps. I'd love to continue with something from the Rebel line as long as it will give me the results I want and it seems people are fairly confident it will, so that's definitely promising.

 

Also, I need a new camera now (within two weeks), so saving isn't an issue. It's either less than $1000 or it isn't. That's why I'm most concerned with getting a camera that will do what I listed as is (ie; with whatever one lens it typically comes with). If it's a camera that isn't usually sold with a lens, then whatever lens you think would be a great starter lens for that particular body is good.

 

I guess I need to clarify that photography isn't my career. It's something I freelance doing because it's related to my career and makes me enough money to pay the bills while I pursue my career, so in spite of doing a lot of pro work and it being a good chunk of my income, I'm not looking to spend thousands on photography equipment.

 

I'm also not adanced enough to care about tiny technical details that set one camera/lens apart from another in ways that aren't noticable in function or result to anyone except other advanced photographers.

 

Basically, if I set two cameras down in front of someone who knows nothing about photography and tell them to take a few pictures with each one, the only things I care about would be the things a person like that would notice right from the start.

 

I'm good just owning one fast, decent quality, all purpose (in terms of zoom range) lens. Anything I may need creatively later on, I'll worry about later on. For now, I need my new camera to do what my PSPro1 does, just a lot faster and with higher quality at higher resolutions better for print.

 

As for the noise, no matter the surrounding conditions, if I took a picture with my PSPro1 at anything higher than 100, it looked as if someone took a perfectly good photo and then applied a "grain texture effect" to it five times lol At 400, forget it, it looked like someone drew the picture on sandpaper.

 

At first I thought I was doing something terribly wrong, but after days of browsing the net and talking to other photographers who own one in addition to their DSLRs, everyone was in agreement that the PSPro1's noise level above 100 is particularly unacceptable by any standard. After seeing what it does and what some other cameras do at the same ISOs, I'm sure any of the suggestions here will be a vast improvement lol

 

I hope that's helped to clear up a few things about what I'm looking for. I'm off to look up some of the models you ladies/gents suggested but I shall return!

Hey everyone! I own a Canon Powershot Pro1. I love the camera for three reasons...

 

1) Image quality 2) Remote control 3) Timer.

 

...but there are a few things I absolutely cannot deal with anymore and that's...

 

1) Excessive noise above 100 ISO 2) Slow focus and shutter speed

 

I purchased the PSPro1 back when it first came out (I have the upgraded firmware). It was exactly what I needed

back then, but it's limiting my work now. I need high quality action shots. When I'm doing things like landscapes and

product shots where stuff isn't really moving, my PSPro1 is fine. Unfortunately, the majority of my work is fashion,

runway, production stills, and event (no sports) and it doesn't perform the way I need it to for those applications.

 

My new camera MUST have all of these qualities...

 

1) Very quick firing even in low light (fast shutter speed so I can snap snap snap as people move instead of

saying, "Okay, hold please!")

 

2) Great image quality and at high resolutions (which it seems most SLR's produce anyway, but I specifically need it

to be able to produce those quality images in resolutions high enough to print larger than 8x11)

 

3) Costs less than $1000

 

4) Both manual and auto settings.

 

It would be nice if it had a remote control and timer like my PSPro1 since I really like to take shots of myself, but I

can hang on to my PSPro1 for that. It would also be nice if it was a Canon, since I have a

bunch of Canon EOS lenses from when I was shooting in film and would like to use them, but shoot out any cameras

that come to mind even if they aren't Canons. Any help you can offer will be great!