bangengeman

<p>I second Bob; Lens cleaning paper (most of these are ok, doesn't have to be Kodak/Tiffen, at least for me), and a clean one would be much more ideal.</p>

<p>Also, nice pickup by Ray on the part <em>"*Caution: cloth itself does not scratch surfaces, but can pick up particles that do scratch. Serged edge may scratch delicate surfaces with direct pressure."</em></p>

<p>Too late for them, coming from someone who is tired of Nokia not being able to keep up with Android/Apple in terms of the user interface, and HTC/Samsung in the hardware side. But you gotta hand it to them, they sure do know how to make a really good camera phone; They always were one of the best in that department.</p>

<p>I've owned only Nokia phones over the past 13 years, and I've been pretty happy with them until they've slowed down considerably on the software development over the past couple of years. The sucky apps, the slow performance of the phone and the clunky interface have driven me off, but if the new Symbian is as good as they claim, they just might have roped me in again</p>

 

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<p>DPP has had recent improvements lately, such as highlight and shadow control. And for the price, I really recommend it over LR. To be fair, LR has a whole lot of advantages and convenience over DPP, but again, LR can't beat DPP's price.</p>

<p>Try Picasa also, but I'm not too happy over the way it doesn't read Canon's default picture styles (I might be wrong since it's been a year since I've last used Picasa as a RAW converter). I do like the way it handles (online and local) album generation, tagging and other "extra" features.</p>

<p>I think by being stuck, Steve might have misinterpreted it as "not leaving my camera body forever under my own volition", not "somehow physically melded together" stuck. That's what almost happened to mine.</p>

<p>Just sayin'..... ;)</p>

<p>Personally, I'd reference a few sites: Photozone.de , <a href="http://www.the-digital-picture.com/">http://www.the-digital-picture.com/</a> , and dpreview.com . Other than those, I'd probably rummage through the forums here and on fredmiranda.com (not necessarily objective) for more hands-on reviews.</p>

<p>If you're thinking wireless, I'd second the RC1. Not sure about the new RC6(?) if it's any better, but I loved that the RC1 can be hooked to the neck strap, and has the optional 2 second delay.</p>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<p>+1 Picasa... The newer versions have been faster and sleeker. And it's a nice photo editor for the price. I like the integration with the online browser where you just have to click on a button so it will automatically sync with the online album. Minimal fuss, no money out.</p>

<p>The first step to recovery is admission that you have an addiction. Good for you.</p>

<p>Get rid of:</p>

<ol>

<li>18-135, </li>

<li>Sigma 50 OR the Canon 50 1.2L, depending on which you feel you'd need/want more. Personally, I'd sell the Canon. </li>

<li>17-40</li>

<li>70-200 f/4L</li>

<li>I'm not sure if the Tokina 11-16 is for crop or FF, but if it's for crop, I'd get rid of it too.</li>

</ol>

<p>Now, I'd replace those with a 16-35 2.8L, and a 70-200 2.8L (IS/No IS). You might want to get a macro lens there too. I'd like to think the new Canon 100mm 2.8L Macro would be great. If you really need a wider lens, try looking at the Sigma 12-24 for FF. I suggest keeping the primes because they'd be great for most studio work.</p>

<p>Off the top of my head, you might have some extra money for a few more stuff like strobes, tripod or a baag.</p>

<p>Wow. Personally, it's an ambitious project, but here's how I *might* try to shoot that:</p>

 

<ol>

<li>If I'm not mistaken, the Normans can shoot at 1/1200s at full power. That's still WAAYYY too slow for a speeding bullet. Not sure if they support High speed sync, though, so you can shoot at max. shutter speed (1/8000, on 5DII, right?). </li>

<li>If you can't speed up the light and shutter speed any more, slow down the bullet. If you take out some gunpowder out of the bullet (DO NOT TRY THIS AT HOME, DANGER, EXPLOSIVE, CAUTION), it *might* work. Again, CAUTION. WARNING. DANGER. EXPLOSIVE.</li>

<li>You might want to use a wider angle lens, and lots of DOF (f/8? f/11?). Also, you might want to pre-focus.</li>

<li>Your remote trigger for the gun trigger should be synced with the remote trigger for the camera. I'm thinking the gun blast should be faster than the the mirror swinging up. Or at least I hope so. </li>

<li>If you plan on shooting it with some motion blur, you might want to shoot in 2nd curtain if it's available.</li>

<li>Cheat. Seriously. Shoot the bullet on a black background, Photoshop the heck out of it. That's what I would do.</li>

</ol>

<p>I'm gonna keep a close eye on this thread, just in case someone can offer sane advice on this.</p>

<p>Personally, I'd want to say yes. However, after thinking about it more, it's just modern technology at it's finest. We'd all be obsessing over dodging and burning and maybe cloning things out at the old darkroom if PS wasn't around, and there'd be that debate of whether to post-process or not.</p>

<p>Vacuum cleaners, spell checkers, microwave ovens, Photoshop. Created by us to make life easier. </p>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<p>Better yet, see if you can rent out both, and take them on a test run?</p>

<div></div>