jody_stowitts

<p> Call Steve @ Steve's Camera in Culver City (Sepulveda, below Culver Blvd). He's super! May save you time too!</p>

<p>All true.</p>

<p>So, as far as my routine 6x9" prints go, with a Nikon D800's 35MP's, my 50mm lens is a 50-122mm zoom. I know this one narrow minded way to look at it, but was just curious to see what "in theory" could be done with just one lens. With an 85mm lens you could get a 85-208mm zoom. </p>

<p>Dieter: Wow, square root of the ratio. Sounds good. Thank you!</p>

<p>Matt: OK then, notwithstanding the "perspective" issue, what focal length (mm lens size) would I be able to "simulate" using 35MP with an Xmm lens? 1.5X, 2X, 2.5X? Put another way, if I can make a beautiful 6x9" print from 6MP, what new 6x9" print of equal quality using a 35MP sensor can I get (by cropping) that would "appear" to have been made originally with another lens of longer focal length--expressed as a factor of "x- times the shorter focal length" lens that was actually used? My thinking is only in regard to being able to carry a modest (50mm) lens and being able to create a print that I couldn't have made without a longer lens. I.e., by what "nominal" size (power) have I now given my 50mm lens that it didn't possess before. Hope all this makes sense!</p>

<p>Good decision David! Besides, if there REALLY is a "5Dx" in the future, it might be even more of a rationale to bide your time. I too, read all the latest dope on the new III and decided that I'd better (for now) be plenty happy enough with my 5DII. The only temptation of the new III, for me, were the exceedingly usable 2+ higher ISO's.</p>

<p>I print 6x9's with my dye-sub printer @ 300dpi. Beautiful results with my Canon 5D. (Even though using all 12MP's, same results are possible with only about 6+MP's). My question is: If I took a picture with a 50mm lens at optimum aperture, and presupposing perfect focus, how far could I crop this image and still get the same 6x9 result if I used the new Nikon D800 (35MP) camera. In essence what I am asking is, "what size mm lens would be the equivalent of this new image cropped "as far as it could go with the same quality result". I.e., can I take a 50mm lens and via a 35MP sensor, crop the image down, and get the same result as if I had originally used a 100 or 200mm lens and not cropped it? I have not tried this yet empirically, but thought some "sharpies" here on p.net could tell me. Seems like a pretty nifty idea to use only one lens (50mm), and be able to produce shots that previously required a long (100 - 200mm or ??) lens. Thanx for your input!</p>

<p>Greg Luna: AMEN!</p>

<p>Response from Canon: Yes you can change the Kelvin temp. the entire gamut.</p>

<p>You made out like a bandit !</p>

<p> After downloading and reading the owner's manual for the new 5DIII, I am led to believe that a recently taken RAW photo can now be "played with", and a "new" jpeg copy created, "in-camera". The manual was a bit sketchy, but i think it said you can make some alterations to the RAW such as color temperature (Kelvin change). This would be of interest to me as I am essentially a "print from card" person. Seeing that most of my needs would be just slightly correcting the warm-cool Kelvin value of a shot taken in AWB (auto white balance), this would be a wonderful addition. I think this could be done very easily on the rear monitor visually, either by the overall look of the image, or if there is an object, i.e., white, in the image you could adjust the kelvin visually of the white object (on 5x or 10x enlargement), and the rest of the image would "follow suit". This would also work on any other colored object(s) you KNOW the color of. Anyone have any corroborating or non-corroborating knowledge of this ability of the 5DIII, and possibly the number of degrees K that can be altered? I've emailed Canon on this question but no answer yet. THANX.</p>

<p>Same type service @ Steve's Camera Service in Culver City here in So. Cal. Steve will tell you "up front" exactly what to expect, so you don't throw away money and time at poor or "no" results.</p>

<p>Same type service @ Steve's Camera Service in Culver City here in So. Cal. Steve will tell you "up front" exactly what to expect, so you don't throw away money and time at poor or "no" results.</p>

<p>Sounds absolutely ideal. You should have outstanding resolution, especially with E model.</p>

<p>Tripod needed only if your shutter speed is too slow for the situation. No different in principle. Just "up-the-ante" , and shoot at higher shutter speeds, especially when using longer lenses. This is especially true for the AAfilter-less E model. </p>

<p>Are you sure you don't have 1/3 stop + or - set from a previous shoot on one of the modes? Could be also that camera displays different fractions of EV in the two different modes. Or, light changed just a bit between the two exposures. If all else fails diagnostically, pick which of the two exposures you like the best and "go with it". One third of a stop is also probably within acceptable parameter going from mode to mode If no settings error, my guess is the second instance. The AV mode, remember, is "stepless--i.e., the shutter speed is much more finely divided than just 1/3 of a stop. Y our AV shutter speed could have been 1/17 of a second or so, and the "closest fraction" is used to represent that speed on the display.</p>

<p>Suspect you've got bracketing set.</p>

<p>There are millions of bayonet M Leica lenses out there waiting to be hung onto full frame cameras. Seems like one ought to come along sooner or later for quite a bit less than than $7000.</p>

<p>Thank you Scott. Your referenced site, at the latter stages, got out into the stratosphere too far for me. Good though, because I'm happy to settle for a more modest goal and leave the rest up to the pros and those with much deeper interests and ambitions.</p>

<p>Two question for you sagacious ones: Why can't the adobe RGB color gamut be used for simple "camera flash card to printer" technique, i.e., why must go thru computer program first then to printer? Secondly, if picture taken in sRGB vs. AdobeRGB and run thru computer would colors (gamut) be any different using my fairly modest printer that uses the 6 color inks (blk, yel, cyan, photo cyan, mag, photo mag.)? Basically, why can't the larger Adobe color gamut "fit into the sRGB" space in the camera "to begin with"? Can't the "space" just be made larger to fit in the "other" colors and simplify everything? Thanks in advance for your respose. P.S., if a terse yet sufficient answer would require a laborious explanation, any referral to a site with a concise explanation would be appreciated. Thanks again.</p>

<p>If you've shot with an F5 and know about exp. comp. (white dog-black dog), just read in the manual about white balance and the environmental color temp. changes ( Kelvin temp. degrees ) during the day, you've eliminated most of the mystery. If you want to know how it all works, you'll do OODLES more reading than shooting.</p>

<p>ROBIN KANTA, LOMPOC, CALIF. VERY GOOD! </p>

<p>Not a dig. Leica shooter yet, but the pinnacle for me would be a .91 (M3) viewfinder and doubling the ISO to 6400(+) to yield "virtually noiseless" JPEGs. Due to the increase in body thickness, the M3 type finder may not be possible; but evolution of the microprocessor alone will probably yield a digital M able to simulate ISO 16 or 3200 transparencies of yesterday"s ISO 50 Velvia quality</p>

<p>What is "CG" please?</p>

<p>Probably add some amber and maybe a tinge of magenta by trial and error or look up the mired conversions.</p>