Camera Questions Answered

hello all,
I just got my ridgeline and thought i would try to contribute something to this forum. I have worked in the photo industry for years and am very familiar with almost all digital cameras. So if you have any questions that you need answered just post them up and i will answer them :)

OK, I'll give you a shot. What's a fair price for a used Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS lens? Seems everyone wants within $100 of a new lens and I'm not going to pay that for used.

The sad part is i have sold used one for within 100 of a new one. Almost any L lens, especially the 70-200 IS has very high resell value. Most people wouldnt get out of one unless they are getting out of photography.


What price does your local camera store sell them for?


edit: Personally i wouldnt pay over 1400 for one because i would just get a new one, but i have sold them 1500

They're online from reputable places (that I've bought from before) for $1569 at buydig and $1579 from Beach Camera. Free shipping and no tax on both of these stores.

I'm with you, I'd spend the extra $100 for a new one too (warranty is worth that).

i prefer local stores but I would just buy new. That lens is a lens you will use for years no matter what camera body you have.

Now all I have to do is justify the cost (to the wife and to myself). I already have the Canon 70-300 IS lens which is a lot cheaper and longer range, but I find it too slow for night sports, which I've just recently started needing it for where I've been shooting for a local paper. Problem is, they don't use me enough to justify the expense on the paper alone.

I'm going to drive into town Saturday and take a look at Dury's. Maybe they'll have a reasonable priced used one, or if I could rent one for the Indy race on the 14th, I could at least try it out that way.

Now all I have to do is justify the cost (to the wife and to myself). I already have the Canon 70-300 IS lens which is a lot cheaper and longer range, but I find it too slow for night sports, which I've just recently started needing it for where I've been shooting for a local paper. Problem is, they don't use me enough to justify the expense on the paper alone.

I'm going to drive into town Saturday and take a look at Dury's. Maybe they'll have a reasonable priced used one, or if I could rent one for the Indy race on the 14th, I could at least try it out that way.


another option is to get sans IS and get a monopod. What body do you use?

another option is to get sans IS and get a monopod. What body do you use?
I have a 30D. Not sure how hard a monopod would be to use at sports, plus it's something extra to carry. Definitely a viable option though. What's a good monopod run? I've never checked prices on them.

Oh, what do you think of the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8? If I were to go sans IS, the Sigma is quite a bit cheaper.

monopod should run 60ish for a good bogen one.

The sigma is good. You will not get the same resell value as the canon. The sigma can be used instead of the non IS. For most things the sigma should be good unless you are doing like HUGE prints. But just an 8x10 13x19 there should be minimal difference.

Thanks for all the info. :cool:

Thanks for all the info. :cool:

no prob :)

any others...

I've been looking at getting a higher end digi point and shoot camera or a lesser dslr camera

i had been looking at i think the powershot a640 (its the newer one with 10 megapixals) or the new nikon d40x. obviously size isn't an issue with i just want a good camera that i can take some cool shots with especially night and low light shots. what you think

I've been looking at getting a higher end digi point and shoot camera or a lesser dslr camera

i had been looking at i think the powershot a640 (its the newer one with 10 megapixals) or the new nikon d40x. obviously size isn't an issue with i just want a good camera that i can take some cool shots with especially night and low light shots. what you thinkI hope you don't mind me putting in my 2 cents. For night shots, a point and shoot isn't going to have good high ISO performance. The sensor is too small. The Nikon is supposed to be a good camera, but it won't accept all the Nikon lenses (just the ones with an AF motor built into the lens). Another option is the Canon Rebel XTI. Canon is supposed to have better high ISO than Nikon, from what I've read.

I'm trying to keep the price down some i don't know how much one would cost. All i know is i have had a olympus point and shoot that was a piece of shiot hahahah and from reading reviews on dpreview the canon has been getting great reveiws i just don't know if i would use a dslr that much

A DSLR can get expensive, especially with all the lens choices you can get. Sounds like you may be better off with a P&S? Depends on your needs, really.

My parents have an SD800 (I think that's the full name) P&S and a 20D. The SD800 has image stabilization, which is nice, and it takes great pictures. Not sure how it would be for night shots though. I don't know much about the one you mentioned, perhaps Cleric can give you insight on that one.

PS. DPReview is a great site. You might want to ask your question there as well.

i've asked there as well and yes they all said that the 640 was really the way to go but when i went to buy it i looked at another one that i liked that had a better zoom and image stabilization and it was very nice

Hey Cleric, I've got a Canon AE-1 SLR Camera (w/ Canon FD 50mm 1:1.8, FD 28mm 1:2.8 & FD 135mm 1:3.5 lens) that I purchased new in 1979 and am wondering if you think it is something worth getting repaired. The mirror foam bumper and back cover hinge foam have deteriorated and need to be replaced. It still takes good quality photos, but for everyday use I have a Canon Powershot A540. I seldom use the AE-1 because the digital is much more convenient and compact. Thanks

i had been looking at i think the powershot a640 (its the newer one with 10 megapixals) or the new nikon d40x. obviously size isn't an issue with i just want a good camera that i can take some cool shots with especially night and low light shots. what you think
For night shots, a point and shoot isn't going to have good high ISO performance. The sensor is too small.I guess it depends on what is called "cool" night shots. Is my Olympus C-740 (3.2 Meg, 10x optical) a point and shoot? It does have a white-balance adjustment and gives control of the more things than I know what to do with. It is a few years old and I paid $250 (online) for. I think the mid to low-level cameras can be pretty good.

Here is two of my very amateur night shots:
grey, white and silver car with lots of different light in the foreground and background
http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q178/keith_757/2007%200120%208thCivic%20Meet%20IsleOfCapri%20Bilo xi%20MS/P1200225_.jpg

and without the building of lights in the background
http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q178/keith_757/2007%200120%208thCivic%20Meet%20IsleOfCapri%20Bilo xi%20MS/P1210263_.jpg

Yes, with tripod (2.5 and 2 second exposures) and low ISO (64 in the case of these 2 pictures), you can get great night shots. What about high ISO (I use 1600 and 3200 often) of say a night race or indoor basketball game where a higher shutter speed is required (1/250 absolute min, 1/320 preferred)?

ISO 3200, 1/400s, f/2.8
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1026/648743397_cf2660e569.jpg

I guess it depends on what is called "cool" night shots. Is my Olympus C-740 (3.2 Meg, 10x optical) a point and shoot? It does have a white-balance adjustment and gives control of the more things than I know what to do with. It is a few years old and I paid $250 (online) for. I think the mid to low-level cameras can be pretty good.

Here is two of my very amateur night shots:
grey, white and silver car with lots of different light in the foreground and background


and without the building of lights in the background

Yes, with tripod (2.5 and 2 second exposures) and low ISO (64 in the case of these 2 pictures), you can get great night shots. What about high ISO (I use 1600 and 3200 often) of say a night race or indoor basketball game where a higher shutter speed is required (1/250 absolute min, 1/320 preferred)?no idea. :D Like I said, I am ranked within the amateur range. I know more than the average $100 camera person, but certainly not a professional. I know my camera can control a lot of things but likely not what you mention, but do I know for sure... ummm.... :confused: :D

Cleric,

Thanks for taking the time.

What do you think about full-auto Canon XTi pics coming out underexposed with the kit lens in lower light (indoor) situations? I've read that "better" glass doesn't have the same problem and that some people have Canon "repair" the situation, with the possibility of some pics being overexposed (dpreview).

I'm a newcomer to the dSLR (or any SLR for that matter) world so I'm not ready for manual adjustments everytime I'm indoors with the camera. Plus, although it's not a P&S, I'd like to be able to take full-auto pics without having to worry about underexposure (sometimes).

another option is to get sans IS and get a monopod.

Just found this thread, thought I would chime in (shameless way to get this on my subscribed threads page :D ).

I have a Bogen Monopod. Love it. Great for keeping my coffee infused hands steady. Collapses down and straps to the bottom of my camera bag. Always there if I need it. Also makes a good walking stick on hikes. Only thing I don't like about monopods (by design) is they don't help you if you turn your camera on its side for "portrait" format shots. Suppose a bracket or something would fix this, but none of my gear has a mounting screw on the grip side.

Thanks for the comments DivotFixer.

Otter, Cameras don't underexpose, photographers do. :eek: The camera is just a tool. Using full auto lets the camera do the thinking for you, but under certain conditions, you just aren't going to get the image you want in auto. I used to use P mode all the time, but now use Av or Tv most of the time (except for flash which I use M mode). It's really easy to take the shot, look at the histogram, and adjust if necessary. And, you have total control over the settings this way.

Cleric,

First of all thanks for giving us your time. It is greatly appreciated. If you have any mobile audio/video questions, just send them my way.

I have a '60's era Leicaflex SLR with 50mm lens. It's not an SL or SL2 so it's not especially collectible. I just don't use it much anymore so I am going to sell it.

My question is this. Should I have it cleaned and the meter calibrated before I sell it? If the value proposition is negative then I won't do it.

Thanks,

Chris

What do you think about full-auto Canon XTi pics coming out underexposed with the kit lens in lower light (indoor) situations?

Hey Otter, I just picked up the XTi a couple of weeks ago. I too felt the auto setting was producing slightly under exposures. I personally don't use the auto mode much. I simply set my compensation to maybe a half stop over and it helped some what. Learn to love your histograms... not so much what the pic looks like on the back. Take it from a master Chimper.... For those who don't know, Chimping is the act of after every picture you take, you have to look at it on your lcd and you start with the Ooo Ooo Ooo sounds....:D Nothing will help you out more than spending time shooting in Av, Tv and full manual modes. Get a feel for what each shutter and apperture change does and in no time, you'll be able to visually estimate your settings and shooting manual...;)

Cleric,

First of all thanks for giving us your time. It is greatly appreciated. If you have any mobile audio/video questions, just send them my way.

I have a '60's era Leicaflex SLR with 50mm lens. It's not an SL or SL2 so it's not especially collectible. I just don't use it much anymore so I am going to sell it.

My question is this. Should I have it cleaned and the meter calibrated before I sell it? If the value proposition is negative then I won't do it.

Thanks,

Chris

If I may chime in....NO. If it works and the meter works, just list it as such. The cost to calibrate to new batteries is not worth it.

Hey Otter, I just picked up the XTi a couple of weeks ago. I too felt the auto setting was producing slightly under exposures. I personally don't use the auto mode much. I simply set my compensation to maybe a half stop over and it helped some what. Learn to love your histograms... not so much what the pic looks like on the back. Take it from a master Chimper.... For those who don't know, Chimping is the act of after every picture you take, you have to look at it on your lcd and you start with the Ooo Ooo Ooo sounds....:D Nothing will help you out more than spending time shooting in Av, Tv and full manual modes. Get a feel for what each shutter and apperture change does and in no time, you'll be able to visually estimate your settings and shooting manual...;)

Who shoots DSLR AUTO....lol

Who shoots DSLR AUTO....lol

My wife...:D

Who shoots DSLR AUTO....lol :D LOL! I wondered that myself.

So is "Auto" the wrong term or are some you beyond using the Auto exposure setting? I'm sensing a bit of elitism here with our photo buffs...:cool:

So is "Auto" the wrong term or are some you beyond using the Auto exposure setting? I'm sensing a bit of elitism here with our photo buffs...:cool:
Sorry if I sounded elitist, but I don't think it's elitism as much as that most people that use DSLRs use them for the control that they give you. Using auto totally eliminates that control from the photographer and puts the camera in control. That's OK in some situations, but in many you won't get the shot you envisioned (remember getting silhouettes against a bright background?).

Really, every mode except manual is somewhat automatic and even manual is automatic for flash pictures. But the more advanced modes give you control of depth of field (DOF), shutter speed, ISO, exposure, and even flash exposure. All things, that in my opinion, you would want to control.

So is "Auto" the wrong term or are some you beyond using the Auto exposure setting? I'm sensing a bit of elitism here with our photo buffs...:cool:

No, Auto is the right term. It's just sand blasting a soup cracker to shoot Auto with a DSLR. AV or TV modes (really AV) are just as easy and give you so much more control.

It's just funny...lol

No, Auto is the right term. It's just sand blasting a soup cracker to shoot Auto with a DSLR. AV or TV modes (really AV) are just as easy and give you so much more control.

It's just funny...lol
You said that sooooo much better than I did.

I'm ok with playing with the controls when I want to, but I also want to be able to point, frame, focus, and shoot. The main reason I want to move to a DSLR from my G6 is I want to be able to change lenses, and get IS.

I use 99% manual or AV exposure when I shoot my weddings and portraits.

I do occasionally use auto if say I have to go straight from the aisle to outside to shoot. I don't have time to change ASA, TV and AV and still keep shooting so I just change my ASA quickly and flip it to auto with the flash on high speed. Gets me close enough to not miss the shot.

SO yes pros do use auto but usually only as a last resort.

For nole1972, Personally I would not fix the AE-1. That body after use will develop what we call the "wheese" the parts are becoming harder to find. CSI Camera in St louis still repairs them I believe but you will be looking at $50 min more like $75 to $100 to overhaul it.

Swampler there is a new EF 70-200 f4 IS L out now. It runs a little over a$1000 and you only lose 1 stop F2.8 to F4. I have a request in currently to Canon for a Pro test drive of this lens sometime in August. I'll let you guys know what I find out. I'll be comparing it to my boss's 70-200 2.8.

When it comes to buying equipment I always buy my bodies from my local pro shop (Schiller's Camera & Video) I buy most of the rest ie lenses, flashes etc. online. I buy new almost always because I can't rely on how someone else treated the equipment and won;t risk it with my customers images.

For anyone wanting to sell equipment the best place I have found is usedcamerabuyer.com They will pay you what it is actually worth. All film cameras are quite low these days as digital has taken over.

Hope this helps you guys.

wow this got popular fast... might need to make separate thread to keep it clear

Hey Cleric, I've got a Canon AE-1 SLR Camera (w/
Canon FD 50mm 1:1.8, FD 28mm 1:2.8 & FD 135mm 1:3.5 lens) that I purchased new in 1979 and am wondering if you think it is something worth getting repaired. The mirror foam bumper and back cover hinge foam have deteriorated and need to be replaced. It still takes good quality photos, but for everyday use I have a Canon Powershot A540. I seldom use the AE-1 because the digital is much more convenient and compact. Thanks

I wouldnt. The main reason is the cost of repair could buy you a nice used camera. AE-1 were nice and the lenses are good but i would think it would be expensive to get fixed right. You might be able to just put some sealant but i would looks for a used eos 3 or eos 1.

Cleric,

Thanks for taking the time.

What do you think about full-auto Canon XTi pics coming out underexposed with the kit lens in lower light (indoor) situations? I've read that "better" glass doesn't have the same problem and that some people have Canon "repair" the situation, with the possibility of some pics being overexposed (dpreview).

I'm a newcomer to the dSLR (or any SLR for that matter) world so I'm not ready for manual adjustments everytime I'm indoors with the camera. Plus, although it's not a P&S, I'd like to be able to take full-auto pics without having to worry about underexposure (sometimes).
Are you using a flash? Some people confuse underexposure with lack of power for internal flash. Good glass will make life easier if you can get a faster lens. I would recommend moving to P which sets shutter speed and apa but allows you some control (ISO, over/under exposure, etc)

Just found this thread, thought I would chime in (shameless way to get this on my subscribed threads page :D ).

I have a Bogen Monopod. Love it. Great for keeping my coffee infused hands steady. Collapses down and straps to the bottom of my camera bag. Always there if I need it. Also makes a good walking stick on hikes. Only thing I don't like about monopods (by design) is they don't help you if you turn your camera on its side for "portrait" format shots. Suppose a bracket or something would fix this, but none of my gear has a mounting screw on the grip side.
They make one. I forgot the product number but it just rotates on one plane. The other thing is some lenses allow you to rotate around the lens collar. I ll try to find the number for you.
Thanks for the comments DivotFixer.

Otter, Cameras don't underexpose, photographers do. :eek: The camera is just a tool. Using full auto lets the camera do the thinking for you, but under certain conditions, you just aren't going to get the image you want in auto. I used to use P mode all the time, but now use Av or Tv most of the time (except for flash which I use M mode). It's really easy to take the shot, look at the histogram, and adjust if necessary. And, you have total control over the settings this way.
yeah, but if we can find the cause it might make life easier.
Cleric,

First of all thanks for giving us your time. It is greatly appreciated. If you have any mobile audio/video questions, just send them my way.

I have a '60's era Leicaflex SLR with 50mm lens. It's not an SL or SL2 so it's not especially collectible. I just don't use it much anymore so I am going to sell it.

My question is this. Should I have it cleaned and the meter calibrated before I sell it? If the value proposition is negative then I won't do it.

Thanks,

Chris
If you find someone willing to buy it they will most likely want to restore it if they choose. I would try to find a buyer and if you have trouble go back and do it later.
I use 99% manual or AV exposure when I shoot my weddings and portraits.

I do occasionally use auto if say I have to go straight from the aisle to outside to shoot. I don't have time to change ASA, TV and AV and still keep shooting so I just change my ASA quickly and flip it to auto with the flash on high speed. Gets me close enough to not miss the shot.

SO yes pros do use auto but usually only as a last resort.

For nole1972, Personally I would not fix the AE-1. That body after use will develop what we call the "wheese" the parts are becoming harder to find. CSI Camera in St louis still repairs them I believe but you will be looking at $50 min more like $75 to $100 to overhaul it.

Swampler there is a new EF 70-200 f4 IS L out now. It runs a little over a$1000 and you only lose 1 stop F2.8 to F4. I have a request in currently to Canon for a Pro test drive of this lens sometime in August. I'll let you guys know what I find out. I'll be comparing it to my boss's 70-200 2.8.

When it comes to buying equipment I always buy my bodies from my local pro shop (Schiller's Camera & Video) I buy most of the rest ie lenses, flashes etc. online. I buy new almost always because I can't rely on how someone else treated the equipment and won;t risk it with my customers images.

For anyone wanting to sell equipment the best place I have found is usedcamerabuyer.com They will pay you what it is actually worth. All film cameras are quite low these days as digital has taken over.

Hope this helps you guys.

The F4 is good, but not as good as the 2.8 in my view. If i am shooting, which is rarely, i use apa priority and control ISO. i agree with the 100 est for the ae-1, if you still want to shoot film buy a used film body for the money.

Sorry if I sounded elitist, but I don't think it's elitism as much as that most people that use DSLRs use them for the control that they give you.
Busting chops with the elitist comment :D ...
So you guys gave great advice when I asked about the D40 in a different thread. I ended up with the XTi. As I stated, I do weddings but use my buddy's gear as it's his studio. For my personal stuff, I just had a simple Kodak point and shoot that took nice pics but I missed the control you speak of. But I didn't want to break the bank. But on the flip side, my wife could give a #$!* about manual settings. Therefore, she prefers shooting in an auto mode. So I shoot mostly manual and she shoots always auto...

It's just sand blasting a soup cracker to shoot Auto with a DSLR.
Ok, now that's pretty dang funny...:D


SO yes pros do use auto but usually only as a last resort.

Ya but it's much more exciting trying to get the camera switched over quick... hehe Do you shoot with someone? I work in tandem so one of us get's outside and ready for the end of the ceremony. Or, we set up a second rig ready to go. Weddings, I am always shooting manual. Especially in the digital age where histograms save your butt. Just watchout that the white balance doesn't bite you in the bottom... hehe:eek:

Just watchout that the white balance doesn't bite you in the bottom... hehe:eek:

That's where shooting RAW comes in. You set WB in post processing...doesn't matter what it's set to when taking the shot. :D

So is "Auto" the wrong term or are some you beyond using the Auto exposure setting?

I can tell you as a "hobbyist" with my Canon DigRebel I spend about 1/2 the time in the P mode (mostly the same as "Auto" (GREEN mode), but no flash unless I want it) the the other 1/2 in the Av or Tv modes (mostly Av, based on my desired subject matter). I wind up taking a lot of photos for my kids school yearbook / year-end slide show. Kids move fast, and for the most part I don't :p, thus P mode can be a big help on fieldtrips. However, when I am out taking "serious" photos, I live in Av. My subject matter is usually nature/landscape and I'm all about controlling depth of field (er, well trying to anyway- :D ).

One of the great things about digital camera (IMHO) is that they capture all the exposure and camera setting information with each picture. So go take some AUTO mode photos, look at the exposure settings the camera picked, and use those as a starting point for exploring the semi-manual modes (Av or Tv).

That's where shooting RAW comes in. You set WB in post processing...doesn't matter what it's set to when taking the shot. :D

Doesn't the file size coupled with the post production of 700 - 800 images for a particular shoot get cumbersome? :eek: I'm a slave to the jpeg. I may have to spend some time learning to appreciate RAW :D

Cleric, sorry for hijacking the thread...:o

Doesn't the file size coupled with the post production of 700 - 800 images for a particular shoot get cumbersome? :eek: I'm a slave to the jpeg. I may have to spend some time learning to appreciate RAW :D

Cleric, sorry for hijacking the thread...:oDepends on what you want. With DPP (that comes with Canon cameras), you can apply the same settings the camera would and export as a jpeg. Or, you can modify one and copy those settings to all of them and then export. If you get good results with jpeg though, it is easier. RAW just gives you a little more wiggle room on exposure and is brilliant for white balance.

wow, I just found this thread and I like it. My degree is in journalism, focus in photog. I only shoot in RAW with my 1D, but with my 20D I shoot jpeg. I don't really know why, I just do more processing with my 1D because its what I use when I freelance games and events. It just depends on what you want to do with the images after the fact.

the used camera site someone posted is great, that is where I got my 20D.

I'm going to Colorado tomorrow for a week, I'll post some images when I get back :)

I'm going to Colorado tomorrow for a week, I'll post some images when I get back :)
What part of Colorado? I went out there some 20 years ago with my Dad, who was doing business out there. Spent 1 month driving around the state and shot 60 rolls of film. Of course I worked in a Photo Lab at the time so I could actually afford to process them...:D
Really looking forward to seeing some Colorado shots!!

I have my Canon D Mark II set to Raw + Small Jpeg. I use the small jpegs for a quick slide show on my laptop of about 20 images from what I have already shot for the guests to view at the reception. Raw is an amazing thing and if used in an organized workflow will take you from OK to Great. Takes up more room but you have the ability to make changes to WB, exposure etc. You also can make multiple conversions to get split exposures(e.g. expose for both the highlights and in a separate one for the shadows.) I currently use DPPro for my processing, but there are other programs out there (e.g. C1 Pro or Adobe Raw).

When I commented about the f4 70-200 I put it out there for another possibility. I will shoot with a 2.8 lens if at all possible but if the lens focussing speed and the sharpness are as good as the f2.8 version I can find a lot of other places to put $600. As I said I will be testing this lens against the 2.8 version in August through Cannon. With the longer lenses I normally don't shoot my weddings lower than f4 anyway. If I want to control my DOF to f4 or below I have a 28-70 2.8 that allows me to keep my people close and throw everything else out of focus.

When I commented about the f4 70-200 I put it out there for another possibility.

I've heard the f/4 IS is sharper than the f/2.8, but for low light / night sports that one stop will make a huge difference.

I use the small jpegs for a quick slide show on my laptop of about 20 images from what I have already shot for the guests to view at the reception.
Really.... Is this a lot of work? Do you project or just display on the laptop? I would love to see some of your wedding work. Do you have a website I could check out? You can pm me. I'll also send you the site for the photographer I work with... :D

Really.... Is this a lot of work? Do you project or just display on the laptop? I would love to see some of your wedding work. Do you have a website I could check out? You can pm me. I'll also send you the site for the photographer I work with... :D
I'd like to see it as well, if you don't mind.

So this is my best friend from high school. He was the one who got me into photography way back when. He pursued it as a career. I kept it as a hobby, yet I've worked for him on weekends for about 10 years. I primarily assisted with lighting during the film days, loading his Hasselblad backs, taking meter readings, now in the digital age I shoot just about the entire event with him capturing a candid aspect and shooting different angles and aspects than he is. I love doing it because I get to use all his top notch equipment and shoot all day and at the end of the day, he hands me a check and I'm done... :D

Love any feedback... and yes, the beach wedding was one he shoot a couple months ago in St Maarten. We'll shoot anywhere for a price...:D

www.parmarphoto.com

www.westrichphoto.com

The work you see is from everyone who shoots for us. My Boss Rob is the owner, I am the only one as a full time staffer. We shoot anything with people.

There are three main reasons we shoot raw. 1) greater lattitude in exposure. and 2) I want to make the conversion. By just shooting jpegs you are letting the camera make your conversion for you. 3) jpegs are a compressed file!!! Every time you open it up and resave it you degrade the image. Jpeg compression keeps the LAB (bright and Dark) info and basically crushes the color information. E.G. imagine a soda can as your file, first time you have it its great. Crush it a little and then try to reform it (thats the compression) It can not reform exactly, if you do that several times you now have a real mess and have creases and holes in your data that the program tries to fill in.

I do my editing and then right before I go home I start the conversion process which can be hours for the 600-1500 images per wedding. When I come in the next day I have them done and can get right back to work.

I just run the slide show off the the side by itself(no music) that way those who want to see it can and it does not interfere with the bride and groom's plans. Most weddings I can get a show done for the reception but sometimes I just don;t have the time. My boss uses our 23" Apple Cimema Display for his slide shows. We project in our display room but the problem is most projectors are not calibrated and are 1024x768 max resolution.

my thread got jacked :(


its quite alright though. I am better on the equip. The thing about the Raw vs Jpeg is how much you will do post images. Snaps shots i do in jpeg cause i just print and go. Weddings or events would be raw so i could do more editing

my thread got jacked :(Sorry 'bout that. :o

We project in our display room but the problem is most projectors are not calibrated and are 1024x768 max resolution.

Too bad you're in St. Louis, I could set you up with the right projection system. If you're serious about upgrading, I can recommend a projector and an ISF calibrator in your area.

Back to the OT.

Tripods. Can you recommend a good tripod? I'm looking for something to handle the weight of a D80 with up to a 300mm lens without wobbling. I'll be using it for mostly still life and occasionally some outdoors work. I'm thinking a 3 axis head is what I need. I've been searching on Amazon, but none of the reviews help out. I'm willing to spend up to $200. TIA.

Tripods. Can you recommend a good tripod? I'm looking for something to handle the weight of a D80 with up to a 300mm lens without wobbling. I'll be using it for mostly still life and occasionally some outdoors work. I'm thinking a 3 axis head is what I need. I've been searching on Amazon, but none of the reviews help out. I'm willing to spend up to $200. TIA.

I would go a bit over 200 (250ish) and get a bogen 3021 pro and than an 804 head, assuming its not the 300 f2.8

i've asked there as well and yes they all said that the 640 was really the way to go but when i went to buy it i looked at another one that i liked that had a better zoom and image stabilization and it was very nice

You might want to look at the Pentax D10 DSLR. Has all the bells and whistles and body is dustproofed.;)

Whizzer

I personally would stick with the Bogen or Gitzo tripods and heads. Both are built extremelly tough ( my boss can't even break them). When in college I tried just about everything else trying to save a little money and didn't.

Go to your nearest PRO store and try them out. You may find you like the weight of a particular set of legs but want a different head.

I use the 3021 legs with the 3030 head for most of my stuff. When I pull out the 4x5 I switch to a 3047 head. Both heads have been updated to newer models 3030=804RC2 3047=808RC4. I personally don't like ball heads (because getting horizon lines exact is not quick) but others will swear by them.

[QUOTE=jpphoto;222930] I personally don't like ball heads (because getting horizon lines exact is not quick) QUOTE]
Really?! What is quicker? I've always thought this was the main advantage of ballheads. That is why pro landscape photographers only shoot with ballheads.

Divotfixer - in regards to your monopod, they make them with a 3 way head. I've got a Sunpack (Quantaray) QSX EZ Pod that allows me to "flip" the camera on it's side to take those portrait shots.

Cleric - need some help. My girlfriend is in the market for a new camera. She is looking for an all around point and shoot, but has a knack for shooting some pretty awesome maco. I realize the "elitist" answer will state that you can't really do macro with a point and shoot. Ignoring that answer, any guidance?

Raplon when it comes to ball heads it it real easy to get one axis off kilter while trying to correct another. I use three way heads that way I only have to worry about one axis at a time. I shoot weddings and a ball head would only slow me down. Plus they are not as solid as a three way when tightened down. The friction knobs on them are either too tight then too loose, or the ball shifts when tightening them down.

I don't know of a commercial photographer that uses a ball head, several of the other Wedding photographers in my area do but the elite in my area all use three way heads. I know just about all the major players in town, and have visited numerous studios in the midwest.

A three way head is a more precise way to put proper tilts on the camera.

Divotfixer - in regards to your monopod, they make them with a 3 way head. I've got a Sunpack (Quantaray) QSX EZ Pod that allows me to "flip" the camera on it's side to take those portrait shots.

Cleric - need some help. My girlfriend is in the market for a new camera. She is looking for an all around point and shoot, but has a knack for shooting some pretty awesome maco. I realize the "elitist" answer will state that you can't really do macro with a point and shoot. Ignoring that answer, any guidance?

Thanks for the info. Now I have another piece of equipment to upgrade (:p).

FWIW - I have always been a Canon fan, and my last 4 PnS cameras have all been Canon. My latest, the SD900, has some amazing electronics in it. Good macro mode also (for a PnS). Had the 800 model (the one with image stabilization) for awhile and wish the SD900 had the IS stuff in it. Took the 900 on a trip to London last year and had a blast.

I do a lot of outdoor sports. Skiing, mountain biking, whitewater kayaking, etc. I want a small point-and-shoot that I can take with me that has a fast continuous mode to capture action shots.

I notice most point-and-shoot cameras have a very slow continuous mode. You can usually find no better than 2.5 fps. I noticed Panasonic's new 12.2 MP camera they announced (LUMIX DMC-FX100) has a 8 fps continuous mode, but it is limited to 2 MP. If you are dropping a 10 foot cliff on a bike or skis, you need to have faster than 2.5 fps. If you capture that awesome shot, you'll want more than 2 MP to blow it up. I want something with at least 4 or 5 MP and 5 fps.

I don't want an SLR because of the size and weight. When you are 20 miles out in the backcountry with only a Camelbak, you don't have the room or want to carry the weight. So that's why a point-and-shoot would be the best. You also don't want to take the chance of destroying an SLR camera in a wipeout.

Does what I want exist yet? If not, I'm curious why the industry hasn't provided it yet. I have heard dozens of soccer moms and dads complain about the same thing.

hello all,
I just got my ridgeline and thought i would try to contribute something to this forum. I have worked in the photo industry for years and am very familiar with almost all digital cameras. So if you have any questions that you need answered just post them up and i will answer them :)

How can I take a pic of my Black RL that will do it justice?

I've taken countless pics...
Dl'd them to the comp...
Only seen one that I liked.

Camera = Kodak Z712 IS

Fastang

I do a lot of outdoor sports. Skiing, mountain biking, whitewater kayaking, etc. I want a small point-and-shoot that I can take with me that has a fast continuous mode to capture action shots.

I notice most point-and-shoot cameras have a very slow continuous mode. You can usually find no better than 2.5 fps. I noticed Panasonic's new 12.2 MP camera they announced (LUMIX DMC-FX100) has a 8 fps continuous mode, but it is limited to 2 MP. If you are dropping a 10 foot cliff on a bike or skis, you need to have faster than 2.5 fps. If you capture that awesome shot, you'll want more than 2 MP to blow it up. I want something with at least 4 or 5 MP and 5 fps.

I don't want an SLR because of the size and weight. When you are 20 miles out in the backcountry with only a Camelbak, you don't have the room or want to carry the weight. So that's why a point-and-shoot would be the best. You also don't want to take the chance of destroying an SLR camera in a wipeout.

Does what I want exist yet? If not, I'm curious why the industry hasn't provided it yet. I have heard dozens of soccer moms and dads complain about the same thing.

Why not just get the Pentax Optio W20 or W30? It's waterproof, dustproof and takes awesome video clips. Slim and pocketable too. One goes with me where ever I go.

Why not just get the Pentax Optio W20 or W30? It's waterproof, dustproof and takes awesome video clips. Slim and pocketable too. One goes with me where ever I go.

The Pentax W30 is a nice camera. It's fine for whitewater kayaking, but not the other sports because of the long full-autofocus shutter lag (1/2 second) and 1.5 fps continuous mode. It has a good high speed continuous mode at 4.5 fps, but it is limited to 3 MP. It would be the perfect camera if they could just increase the high speed continuous to at least 4 or 5 megapixels to give me more flexibility in cropping or blowing up. Hopefully the next version (W40? W50?) will increase the HS MP count. Then I'd be all over it.

How can I take a pic of my Black RL that will do it justice?

I've taken countless pics...
Dl'd them to the comp...
Only seen one that I liked.

Camera = Kodak Z712 IS

Fastang

hey sorry i have been off the board for a little while.

What to you mean you are unhappy with them? If you have a freshly waxed car it will reflect a lot so you will want to get the car away from things, maybe in a field. you will want the sun behind you and try to get an angle with less reflections of you. also turn the flash off.

if you show me what you liked i can try to give you some more details

Is the Canon 50mm primary lens a good lens, not the new L series lens, but the lesser lens. the 50mm f1.4 USM or EF 50mm f1.8 II

How can I take a pic of my Black RL that will do it justice?

I've taken countless pics...
Dl'd them to the comp...
Only seen one that I liked.

Camera = Kodak Z712 IS

Fastang

Is the Canon 50mm primary lens a good lens, not the new L series lens, but the lesser lens. the 50mm f1.4 USM or EF 50mm f1.8 II

the 50mm f1.2 L is a lot of money and not worth it. The 1.4 is great for low light and 50 mm on a non AP-C chip d camera (rebel or 30D series).

But i would get the 1.4 if you need slight mag or the 85 f1.4 if you need a bit more (or the 85mm f 1.2 if you really want to spend money)

i would avoid the 50 f1.8 personally, its plastic

the 50mm f1.2 L is a lot of money and not worth it. The 1.4 is great for low light and 50 mm on a non AP-C chip d camera (rebel or 30D series).

But i would get the 1.4 if you need slight mag or the 85 f1.4 if you need a bit more (or the 85mm f 1.2 if you really want to spend money)

i would avoid the 50 f1.8 personally, its plastic

sweet, thanx for the info...forgot to mention that i do have the Canon Rebel XTi, i was looking into getting the 30D but opted to get the XTi for cheaper $$$. For now, i recently purchased a Tamron 28-300mm XR Di multi-purpose lens, i'm in search for something to use indoors and for low light lens. other than that, i'm truly happy with the Tamron XR Di.

sweet, thanx for the info...forgot to mention that i do have the Canon Rebel XTi, i was looking into getting the 30D but opted to get the XTi for cheaper $$$. For now, i recently purchased a Tamron 28-300mm XR Di multi-purpose lens, i'm in search for something to use indoors and for low light lens. other than that, i'm truly happy with the Tamron XR Di.


indoor get the 50 1.4