nuno_saldanha

<p>Hi Mark. Since you're using a crop sensor, you dont need very long expensive zooms. Of course that also depends of the size you need to print it. Almost all the advices already gaven could be very helpfull, specially on what concerns about stars and how to play with long exposures. Dont forget that when shooting the moon, is like shooting a lamp, so you dont need very fast lenses, wich might spoil sharpness and DOF. I tried last year with a simple 55-250mm, and wasn't so bad, since I not even had the fundamental tripood to shoot it. I used a Canon EOS 550D, at ISO 100, 1/350 sec at F/6.7, 250mm (about 400mm in a cropped sensor), and naturally EV - 2.5. Is not perfect, but it's an example of what you can get with simple gear, and cheap lenses. (it's a 100% crop)</p><div></div>

<p>Hi Canonists. Found interesting this contrast between the Cat's rounded shapes and the rigid geometry of the building windows.</p><div></div>

<p>Here it goes...(just an example)</p><div></div>

<p>Just love Ralph's picture! Another way to get blurry/movement images, even of still objects like a tree, is to make a HDR image like this:</p>

<p>With all this going on, I'm sure soon the terrorists will start a movement called "I'm a terrorist, not a Photographer", since it will be more difficult to circulate in the crowd as a photographer.</p>

<p>Excelent shot Alen! I must get myself a dog! lol</p>

<p>Good afternoon canonists friends. Someone I caught cleaning his teeth in a park yesterday.</p><div></div>

<p>If I were you, I would buy it right now! Stop waisting time. The 5D MKII it's an excelent camera, and you'll probably not need the new features of the 5 D MKIII. Anyway, if/or when it cames out, the prices will be much higher, money that you could use in good glass. It takes some time to learn how to work properly with a camera, so, start shooting. I'm telling you this because I had the same question for about 6 months, and I finnaly decided to buy it last week. And I'm very happy with my decision. The prices went higher last week, it's true, but now they're going down again. I bougth mine brand new for 1650 euros (body only), when in some places they were selling for 2400 euros! In one year or so, if you think you need the new things of the 5D MKIII, or any other new camera, just sell that one and buy the new one, and keep the lenses. Enjoy your shooting!</p>

<p>Some nice silver angel in a silvershop</p><div></div>

<p>Indeed, it's a fact already pointed in some other places, posts and foruns. Of course we all understand the logics of Capitalism, but that doesn't makes it right. And I also dont think it's Canon's fault, since they didn't changed the MSRP lately. On the other end, I see prices rising like a Tsunami since last week! And that's some reselers fault, not Canon's. I understand that prices might raise if there's a stock shortage, but, selling exactly the same camera that you bough for 10, for 50 it's unethical. In fact, I just bought a Canon 5D MKII last friday by 1700€ How lucky I was! The same camera raised to 2200€ last Monday, and yesterday to 2400€! The price that I had to pay last week for a bundle with the 24-105 L IS!</p>

<p>Here's an example of Santarem's catedral ceiling Nikon D700, F/8 24mm ( i also think i need a wider lens)</p><div></div>

<p>I tried the 24-120 F4 VR in some cameras, film and digital (mostly F100 and D700). It's a very good walkaround lens, multi-purpose, and the worse and best things I find it are: terrible distortion (specially at 24mm - dont ever use it on buildings), but on the other side, the best VR system I have ever seen! (much better then canon's 24-105) It really works! I took some shots handheld at very low speeds (1/3 or 1/2 secs - cant remember exactly sice it was on the F100).</p>

<p>I agree with Harry (someone who is the author of "Alexandria Indecision" is naturaly someone to ear all his good advices). And dont misinterpret my intentions when I posted that Ph Pro picture. It's just that when you cant (by whatever reasons) get one calendar pin-up for your photos, and pay to hairdresser or make-up, you can always improve your model, but not necessarily the photo. Portrait Photography it's not easy, and depends on a lot of issues. Some faces are not pretty, some are not interesting, some are unexpressive, and each case is diferent from another. You have to study and find the best of each. Look and study the Grand Masters of Painting Portrait, that can give you some good inspirations. If your goal now is just studing light, I agree with Harry that you could use a manequin, because that will free you up from the particularities of an human model (male or female, child or adult) and focus only in the light issues. By the way, it might help also to know what kind of gear you use, camera and lenses, besides the light equipment.</p>

<p>here it is</p><div></div>

<p>Mark just came first with my suggestion! lol I dont have the program, but was tring to make an example with the demo mode of PP. He it is!</p>

<p>John,<br>

(It is regrettable that innocent questions will always raise these pointless and unpleasant debates between film and digital fundamentalists, but what can we do?)<br>

But, answering the question that really matters here, and to you, the poster, my reply is: there are a lot of people, everywhere, using the Canon 1V (or the HS), as you can confirm in this post, nonetheless they might use other cameras (film or digital). Even though I also tried others (film and digital, and from different brands) for me, was one of the best 35 mm film cameras I've ever had the pleasure to work with (including the F100 or F6 – I still missing the experience of the Leica R9 that I just bought). I think Canon has not yet reached the point of being able to make a similar digital version of this superb camera (that is, with the top quality and innovation for the year was released). I also agree with some of the arguments herein, that the Canon EOS 3 might be another excellent alternative, and slightly cheaper (though both have an almost unbelievable price taking into account the original values). Why I still use film today, although digital? Because I do it for over 30 years, and as they say, old habits die hard. I use digital when I don't have another choice, and I have to check immediately the result, because it is difficult to return to the same location to repeat the picture. Let’s say that digital is an instrument of work, as a computer. The film is for the pleasure of photography.<br>

So, my advice is, go for it! Don’t hesitate; purchase the machine, which is always a good investment!</p>

<p>next try</p><div></div>

<p>Good Wednesday everyone. Nice shots. Here's one of the Cloister at Santarem's catedral, converted to B&W. Hope you'll enjoy it.</p>

<p>Hi Melissa, I'm with Bob too! Did you try film before? There's a lot you still can do and learn with your camera, be carefull with this "consumer appeal" from digital Era. Indeed D700 is one of the best DSLR cameras on the market, but remember it's going to be replaced soon (summer). Considering the type of photos you like, do you indeed need to take pictures with 1000ISO or more? Stay above 400ISO and use a tripood. Or push some film rolls. And like Bob also mention, you can always try another back, wich will be better, or a newer Mamiya AFS body.</p>

<p>I agree with Don's point of view. I though that was the objective of this posts. Maybe I was mistaken then.</p>

<p>Good day Nikonists. Another shot at Fatima, the new Holy Trinity Church, under dark clowds at sunset.</p><div></div>

<p>Here's the image</p><div></div>

<p>Hi Joel, The answer to that i not an easy one, because it depends on what do you want (need) to do with your work, and what type of gear and film you will use. Can't say much about 645, since MF was a possibility I gave up, precisely because couldnt afford a proper scanner for it. But in 35mm, you can get very good results with a dedicated film scanner, like the Reflecta proscan 7200. Just bought mine last week and I'm very pleased with it (film, slides). You can check this site wich will give you very good tips on to get a scann and hardware tests (<a href="http://www.filmscanner.info/en/Dichte.html">http://www.filmscanner.info/en/Dichte.html</a>). I'm enclosing a 2400dpi scanning of a Kodak EBX 100 taken with an Nikon F100. Remember that, besides the scanner, 50% of the scanning results will depend on the software you use. Vuescan or SilverFast can give you better results. Hope this will be helpful.</p>

<p>Evening everyone. Can't believe what I was reading!? The comparison it's so absurd, that I'm surprised it has so many replies. What's next? Nokia N8 versus Nikon D3? What can I say... some people have the cameras they deserve...</p>

<p>Good evening Nikonists. I'm a bit late, but just received my new scanner Reflecta and needed to scann some images first. Things didn't go so well because just found I scanned the wrong size (lol). Well, just flipped the image. I'll call it "Thank's God for Nikon"<br>

NIKON F100, Nikkor 24-120 F/4 VR, Kodak ECE 100, Reflecta Proscan 7200, 2400dpi</p><div></div>