graham_broadbridge

<p>I have a particularly bad spot on my sensor in the lower left hand corner of the viewed image.<br>

Can sompone please tell me if that corresponds to the lower left hand side of the physical sensor (from behind the camera body), or if it is the upper right as would be the case with film.</p>

<p>Thanks</p>

<p>Places to avoid in Australia would be Sydney Melbourne and Brisbane :-) Honestly if you've seen one modern city you've seen them all. You'll see the same traffic, smog, shopping centres, Mac Donalds and KFC you will find anywhere else. My biggest dissapointment when I visited China last year was the proliferation of Pizza Hut, KFC and Mac Donalds everwhere totally ruining what used to be a great place to visit.</p>

<p>Use those cities as a launching point to go somewhere interesting :-) If you have time, hire a car and avoid 'tours'. Drive around Sydney and Melbourne. Try to get lost and get out of the car and walk around. That was how I found the real China.</p>

<p>For camera gear, I would take the SLR and two lenses - you pick which ones. If you take a P&S you will regret it later.</p>

<p>Graham.</p>

<p>Hamilton Island is pretty but remember it is a tourist resort where kids can stay free, so expect lots of kiddies. Cairns can be interesting even now.</p>

<p>No offense James, but walking around with that on your back in many places in the world makes you a target for theives and murderers.</p>

<p>I use a similar backpack for transporting my gear to a country, but then use a well worn backpack or even a carrybag or a small suitcase to carry essential gear to location. I pad it well and just throw it into the transport at the airport. I do not put FRAGILE or other stickers on the item. The less fuss you make about an item, the more likely it is to survive especially in Africa.</p>

<p>Of course, always have insurance that covers the gear - it may not cover consequential loss, but at least it will replace equipment if stolen.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Firstly keep that 17-85 IS USM lens. It is a great lens. You can read Bob Atkins review here<br>

<a href="http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/ef-s_17-85_review_5.html">http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/ef-s_17-85_review_5.html</a></p>

<p>It appears that some of the posters in this thread are confusing it with the 17-85 kit lens which is not all that great.</p>

<p>For a longer zoom, you really cannot beat the EF 70-300 f4-5.6 IS USM for general work. Although the USM is not ringless, it is fast and I use it a lot for birding.</p>

<p>Graham.</p>

<p>Firstly keep that 17-85 IS USM lens. It is a great lens. You can read Bob Atkins review here<br>

<a href="http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/ef-s_17-85_review_5.html">http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/ef-s_17-85_review_5.html</a></p>

<p>It appears that some of the posters in this thread are confusing it with the 17-85 kit lens which is not all that great.</p>

<p>For a longer zoom, you really cannot beat the EF 70-300 f4-5.6 IS USM for general work. Although the USM is not ringless, it is fast and I use it a lot for birding.</p>

<p>Graham.</p>

<p>You guys are nuts.</p>

<p>FYI, I shoot 120 film with an ETRSi and digi on a canon d5.</p>

<p>The comparisons here are not valid. You shoot film and then convert to digital using a scanner. Effectively you're shooting digital no matter how many dpi you set the scanner to or whatever bit depth you scan.</p>

<p>The result can be no better than a decent digi camera saving RAW images as the same limitations of dynamic range etc apply.</p>

<p>A traditional print on a decent piece of paper processed R41 will blow away a digi print for sure, but comparing onscreen images and saying the one that originated on Velvia is somehow better is just nonsense. An LCD screen has less dynamic range than the digi cam sensor for gods sake, let alone compared with film.</p>

<p>Talk about the blind leading the blind.</p>

<p>I'm not a pro by any means, but you need to be careful using 'snaps' as a description of a photo.<br>

<br />I've been known to take two types of photo's. Some I think about which I call 'Photographs' and some I may take on a whim without any thought to exposure or composition - these are 'snaps'.<br>

<br />Snaps are usually taken using an in phone camera. Photographs are taken with a real camera.<br>

<br />Anyway, back to your question - If I were taking photographs of a wedding (been there and done that) I would shoot RAW for key photos and JPEG for the obligatory guest shots.<br>

<br />I would develop the RAW photos in lightroom and send to a photo lab for printing on real photographic paper. Paper choice (matte vs gloss) is up to the customer. Glossy paper does tend to have better blacks.<br>

I tend to use Adobe RGB rather than sRGB but that is a choice based on the software I have to hand.<br />As far as I can tell, any print shop that uses real photographic processes to print the images should be okay - beware any place that uses inkjet/bubblejet prints. I always use Fuji Frontier labs as they can print to 11x14.</p>