Forums: Climbing Disciplines: Climbing Photography:
Post deleted by adatesman
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for Climbing Photography

Premier Sponsor:

 
First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All


adatesman


May 27, 2008, 11:24 AM
Post #1 of 34 (9272 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 13, 2005
Posts: 3479

Post deleted by adatesman
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  

 


kriso9tails


May 27, 2008, 11:51 AM
Post #2 of 34 (9252 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 30, 2001
Posts: 7764

Re: [adatesman] Questions on Canon DSLRs [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

adatesman wrote:
Second, I seem to recall there being a difference in frame size for DSLRs and it effecting compatibility of the lenses, but wasn't paying much attention and don't recall what the issue was. Maybe something about less than full frame sensors? Figment of my imagination? Something to do with the "Lens Focal Length Conversion Factor", whatever that is?

The sensor itself is physically smaller than a 35mm film plane. The Rebel XT, for instance, has a 22.2 mm 14.8mm sensor. Some people refer to it as a magnification factor, but really, it's more of a crop factor.


Myxomatosis


May 27, 2008, 2:24 PM
Post #3 of 34 (9220 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 11, 2007
Posts: 1063

Re: [adatesman] Questions on Canon DSLRs [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

If you want to use SD cards and have EF mount len's... just get the 450D (XTi)... which IMO is slightly better than the older 30D.

If you have the cash and want to spend money on CF cards, then go for the 40D...

but personally if I wanted something thats going to last a lifetime, I'd save up a little more cash and get the next model 5D (which shouldn't that far away)


stymingersfink


May 27, 2008, 3:00 PM
Post #4 of 34 (9215 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 12, 2003
Posts: 7250

Re: [kriso9tails] Questions on Canon DSLRs [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

kriso9tails wrote:
adatesman wrote:
Second, I seem to recall there being a difference in frame size for DSLRs and it effecting compatibility of the lenses, but wasn't paying much attention and don't recall what the issue was. Maybe something about less than full frame sensors? Figment of my imagination? Something to do with the "Lens Focal Length Conversion Factor", whatever that is?

The sensor itself is physically smaller than a 35mm film plane. The Rebel XT, for instance, has a 22.2 mm 14.8mm sensor. Some people refer to it as a magnification factor, but really, it's more of a crop factor.

It's kinda a mag-factor as well... on my 20D my 24-105mm lens is effectively a 38-168mm lens, due to the 1.6 crop factor. IOW, for the area of the image which is captured on the sensor, you'd need to blow it up 1.6X to get the same "negative" size as a standard 35mm negative.

You probably would never notice a difference in image quality between an image shot digitally at 100ISO and a 35mm negative shot at 100ISO, though you'd need to purchase a high-dollar scanner to get that negative into photoshop. Photoshop, IME, is where the real work is done. Too bad I haven't spent the time to develop those skills yet, but a good PS tech can do more with your image than the best darkroom tech ever could... PROVIDED HE HAS THE PIXELS TO WORK WITH!


aside from all that, I've been very happy with my 20D. Here's a pretty thorough synopsis of the 20D, and if you poke around on ken's site, you'll find some pretty good information about other digital cameras as well.


kriso9tails


May 27, 2008, 3:24 PM
Post #5 of 34 (9210 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 30, 2001
Posts: 7764

Re: [Myxomatosis] Questions on Canon DSLRs [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Myxomatosis wrote:
If you have the cash and want to spend money on CF cards, then go for the 40D...

It's not like memory costs much these days. I remember in second year of college (2003?) I bought a San Disk Extreme 256MB CF card for something like $125. Just a few months ago I bought an Extreme III 8GB for something like $140.

In terms of what is superior between CF and SD... it's generally going to be CF, but for most users the difference is going to be negligible. With the speeds and storage capacity available with current high end SD cards it's already more than enough for the average shooter and the price is comparable to equivalent CF cards.


Myxomatosis


May 27, 2008, 4:15 PM
Post #6 of 34 (9199 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 11, 2007
Posts: 1063

Re: [kriso9tails] Questions on Canon DSLRs [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

kriso9tails wrote:
Myxomatosis wrote:
If you have the cash and want to spend money on CF cards, then go for the 40D...

It's not like memory costs much these days. I remember in second year of college (2003?) I bought a San Disk Extreme 256MB CF card for something like $125. Just a few months ago I bought an Extreme III 8GB for something like $140.

In terms of what is superior between CF and SD... it's generally going to be CF, but for most users the difference is going to be negligible. With the speeds and storage capacity available with current high end SD cards it's already more than enough for the average shooter and the price is comparable to equivalent CF cards.

Yeah so true.. I got my sister a 2g SD card yesterday for $10us Laugh

I think the new 450D/XTi has SDHC ability as well, so you will probably end up updating all your cards anyway...

There is always something you need to spend money on in Photography tho... Anyone want to shout me some pocket wizards and a flash? Laugh


majid_sabet


May 27, 2008, 4:25 PM
Post #7 of 34 (9194 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 12, 2002
Posts: 8368

Re: [Myxomatosis] Questions on Canon DSLRs [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

FYI
I work for memory Co building CF and SD cards. Cheap memory card off china are not the same as name brand like Samsung, Sandisk, Micron, Lexar....

We sell our rejected low performance memory cheap to Asians. If you take digital photos, you want good memories to read and write fast. The writting speed on the cheap Asian memories are too slow or you could end up with missing bytes.

Also be aware of fake memories with larger capacities like 32 Gig or 64 Gig. The control unit inside these chips can be reprogrammed to show you 32 Gig while they are actually 8 GB. The only way you could know for sure is to load 32 GB of data in to the memory to test its true capacity.


(This post was edited by majid_sabet on May 27, 2008, 4:26 PM)


adatesman


May 27, 2008, 6:24 PM
Post #8 of 34 (9161 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 13, 2005
Posts: 3479

Post deleted by adatesman [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  

 


stymingersfink


May 27, 2008, 6:36 PM
Post #9 of 34 (9157 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 12, 2003
Posts: 7250

Re: [adatesman] Questions on Canon DSLRs [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Well, I've got a buddy who shoots both slide film and 12MP Nikon. He regularly makes scans of the slide film, the final results at poster size it's impossible to determine which camera it may have come from.

Check out some of his work:

Wanderlust Images

one of them you might recognize from a HUGE (24x36) patagonia poster a few years back:




Edit to add:

Digital is available in full frame formats for "Professionals" the problem is, they're VERY expensive for the body alone, start factoring in glass and you're lookin at 10+K to get the full deal setup if you're starting from scratch.


usa.canon.com wrote:
The Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III is an engineering tour de force which, true to the EOS-1 legacy, redefines the state of the art in no uncertain terms. An entirely new 21.1-megapixel full-frame Canon CMOS sensor delivers astounding image quality and creates new photographic possibilities. Dual "DIGIC III" Image Processors work in tandem to speed up data handling and camera operation, while further refining imaging performance. Tough, high-durability body and shutter designs, combined with the unique EOS Integrated Cleaning System, set new standards for professional dependability. Cutting-edge features-such as a large 3.0-inch LCD monitor with Live View Function, and a fast, precise 45-point AF system-make the EOS-1Ds Mark III powerful and versatile. And, of course, the EOS-1Ds Mark III is part of the unparalleled EOS System, which, with more than 50 EF lenses, 15 interchangeable focusing screens, and extensive wireless remote control and lighting accessories, is the most advanced and powerful digital photography system in the world.

Wait a minute... $7999 for the body alone? Better up that estimate to 15+KCrazy


(This post was edited by stymingersfink on May 27, 2008, 6:43 PM)


kriso9tails


May 27, 2008, 7:08 PM
Post #10 of 34 (9151 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 30, 2001
Posts: 7764

Re: [stymingersfink] Questions on Canon DSLRs [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

stymingersfink wrote:
It's kinda a mag-factor as well... on my 20D my 24-105mm lens is effectively a 38-168mm lens, due to the 1.6 crop factor. IOW, for the area of the image which is captured on the sensor, you'd need to blow it up 1.6X to get the same "negative" size as a standard 35mm negative.


It's not a magnification factor because it doesn't magnify anything. With the increased crop you are reducing the resolving power of the lens in relation to final output. I know it seems like a matter of semantics, but eventually it does become important to make the distinctions.

For most people it's never going to make a dramatically important difference. For me it has on occasion, especially in cases where I needed to capture fine detail and needed a reasonable amount of bleed, but more importantly I just prefer to call a thing what it is.
In reply to:
You probably would never notice a difference in image quality between an image shot digitally at 100ISO and a 35mm negative shot at 100ISO, though you'd need to purchase a high-dollar scanner to get that negative into photoshop. Photoshop, IME, is where the real work is done. Too bad I haven't spent the time to develop those skills yet, but a good PS tech can do more with your image than the best darkroom tech ever could... PROVIDED HE HAS THE PIXELS TO WORK WITH!

You will notice the difference in fine detail areas. You will likely end up with a granier image on film, but better definition. Of course, these days you aren't comparing film to digital anymore so much as you are comparing one digital sensor size to another, and when you start doing cost analysis versus actual benefit you have to start deciding what takes the highest priority amongst a great number of factors.

Don't forget that once you start placing images in a commercial context, what the designer places emphasis on is often not just a 'pretty image' but one that meets a set of criteria specific to the final application.


stymingersfink


May 27, 2008, 7:19 PM
Post #11 of 34 (9144 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 12, 2003
Posts: 7250

Re: [kriso9tails] Questions on Canon DSLRs [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

kriso9tails wrote:
Don't forget that once you start placing images in a commercial context, what the designer places emphasis on is often not just a 'pretty image' but one that meets a set of criteria specific to the final application.
too true.


Myxomatosis


May 27, 2008, 7:36 PM
Post #12 of 34 (9137 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 11, 2007
Posts: 1063

Re: [adatesman] Questions on Canon DSLRs [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

adatesman wrote:
Myxomatosis wrote:
Yeah so true.. I got my sister a 2g SD card yesterday for $10us Laugh

$10???? 8GB?????? Guess its been a while since I bought SD cards.... Crazy
-a.

2gig... not 8gig... Laugh


adatesman


May 27, 2008, 7:55 PM
Post #13 of 34 (9133 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 13, 2005
Posts: 3479

Post deleted by adatesman [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  

 


blondgecko
Moderator

May 27, 2008, 8:12 PM
Post #14 of 34 (9126 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 2, 2004
Posts: 7666

Re: [adatesman] Questions on Canon DSLRs [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

adatesman wrote:
Myxomatosis wrote:
2gig... not 8gig... Laugh

Sorry, was skipping around between posts... I didn't realize they were making 8gig cards and thought my 2gig ones were fairly new.Shocked

-a.

I know what you mean. I had a similar moment a few weeks ago buying a new mobile phone, when I came across the 4GB micro-SD card:




grayhghost


May 27, 2008, 8:24 PM
Post #15 of 34 (9117 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 20, 2002
Posts: 444

Re: [stymingersfink] Questions on Canon DSLRs [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

stymingersfink wrote:
Digital is available in full frame formats for "Professionals" the problem is, they're VERY expensive for the body alone, start factoring in glass and you're lookin at 10+K to get the full deal setup if you're starting from scratch.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/..._Digital_Camera.html
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/...r_Wide_Angle_EF.html

Great stuff under $3000


wes_allen


May 27, 2008, 8:28 PM
Post #16 of 34 (9115 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 29, 2002
Posts: 549

Re: [stymingersfink] Questions on Canon DSLRs [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

stymingersfink, You can get a full frame canon 5d for around 1600 or so now (new with rebates), or a little bit less used. That is full frame. You can also get a used 1ds Mark II for around $3500, and the original 1DS for the 1500 range.

And, as for the crop factors, as was mentioned, it isn't a magnifying effect, so much as a limiting what you can see effect. Can be nice for telephoto, but sucks for wide angles.

For the OP, if you are just looking to get into dslr mostly for fun, then I think an xti, xsi, or used 30d would be a great place to start. Or, a 5d as well, if you don't mind spending a little bit extra. One thing to note about mp, is that the file sizes go up, big time! So, from 8 to 12 might make a big deal on hard drive space, card space, etc.


guangzhou


May 29, 2008, 12:21 AM
Post #17 of 34 (9042 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 26, 2004
Posts: 3389

Re: [wes_allen] Questions on Canon DSLRs [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

wes_allen wrote:
stymingersfink, You can get a full frame canon 5d for around 1600 or so now (new with rebates), or a little bit less used. That is full frame. You can also get a used 1ds Mark II for around $3500, and the original 1DS for the 1500 range.

And, as for the crop factors, as was mentioned, it isn't a magnifying effect, so much as a limiting what you can see effect. Can be nice for telephoto, but sucks for wide angles.

For the OP, if you are just looking to get into dslr mostly for fun, then I think an xti, xsi, or used 30d would be a great place to start. Or, a 5d as well, if you don't mind spending a little bit extra. One thing to note about mp, is that the file sizes go up, big time! So, from 8 to 12 might make a big deal on hard drive space, card space, etc.

I agree with Wes on this one

Anyways, hadn't seen your wedding site in awhile, I like it. You've made changes since my last visit.Radical angles looks like it needs some updating, or it's not loading for me.
Check out some prices here:


(This post was edited by guangzhou on May 29, 2008, 12:25 AM)


boondock_saint


May 29, 2008, 10:29 AM
Post #18 of 34 (9005 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 6, 2005
Posts: 2157

Re: [guangzhou] Questions on Canon DSLRs [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS450D/

check that link out, it's an extremely through review of the newest 12MP Canon Rebel. look around on the rest of the website - it's probably the most comprehensive review site for digital cameras out there. I myself have a 350D (Rebel XT, 8MP) that I use with a 18-200mm f/3.5 Sigma lens and I love it. Obviously two generations later they have added nice little bells & whistles. For work I just purchased a Canon 40D and a Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 lens which is about $1200 alone.

Anway a 350D, 400D or 450D will all serve you quite well - what lens you will be using, though, is probably even more important than the choosing between those three cameras. I went for range (18-200) at the expense of speed (only f/3.5) and that works great for me when I do climbing shots outside and don't have to f*** with changing lenses. The kit lens that comes with most DSLRs is complete crap. Buy the body only and then get a decent lens that you think will suit your purpose.

-bds


Myxomatosis


May 29, 2008, 3:29 PM
Post #19 of 34 (8987 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 11, 2007
Posts: 1063

Re: [boondock_saint] Questions on Canon DSLRs [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

boondock_saint wrote:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS450D/

check that link out, it's an extremely through review of the newest 12MP Canon Rebel. look around on the rest of the website - it's probably the most comprehensive review site for digital cameras out there. I myself have a 350D (Rebel XT, 8MP) that I use with a 18-200mm f/3.5 Sigma lens and I love it. Obviously two generations later they have added nice little bells & whistles. For work I just purchased a Canon 40D and a Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 lens which is about $1200 alone.

Anway a 350D, 400D or 450D will all serve you quite well - what lens you will be using, though, is probably even more important than the choosing between those three cameras. I went for range (18-200) at the expense of speed (only f/3.5) and that works great for me when I do climbing shots outside and don't have to f*** with changing lenses. The kit lens that comes with most DSLRs is complete crap. Buy the body only and then get a decent lens that you think will suit your purpose.

-bds

I have a 400D with both kit lens (18-55 and 70-300, both the older non IS ones) and never had any problems with them. Images come up fine and I doubt you would find any difference in quality between them and the sigma.... but like he said, hes already got some EF len's :)

Its not what your using both how your using it Tongue


boondock_saint


May 30, 2008, 3:02 PM
Post #20 of 34 (8908 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 6, 2005
Posts: 2157

Re: [Myxomatosis] Questions on Canon DSLRs [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Well first of all, I like my Sigma but it's not an amazing lens by any means. This may offend you, at the least it's going to sound very snooty and elitist, but if you can't tell the difference between a kit lens and, for example, a Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM you are likely vision impaired. That, or you just haven't taken enough pictures to see how each lens performs in various duties. I've never talked to a photographer who didn't say to throw the kit lens in the trash.


blondgecko
Moderator

May 31, 2008, 4:28 PM
Post #21 of 34 (8822 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 2, 2004
Posts: 7666

Re: [boondock_saint] Questions on Canon DSLRs [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

boondock_saint wrote:
Well first of all, I like my Sigma but it's not an amazing lens by any means. This may offend you, at the least it's going to sound very snooty and elitist, but if you can't tell the difference between a kit lens and, for example, a Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM you are likely vision impaired. That, or you just haven't taken enough pictures to see how each lens performs in various duties. I've never talked to a photographer who didn't say to throw the kit lens in the trash.

Well, to be fair the 18-55 can be used to take quite nice scenic shots, at f8 or above, and you'd have to pixel-peep to tell the difference between it and any other lens. Below that, the softness is pretty horrible.


boondock_saint


Jun 1, 2008, 8:43 PM
Post #22 of 34 (8735 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 6, 2005
Posts: 2157

Re: [blondgecko] Questions on Canon DSLRs [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

and then there are also things like chromatic aberration, which good lenses correct for and cheap kit lenses don't. there are many differences between good and cheap lenses that go beyond speed and as you mentioned sharpness. and IS (image stabilization) is soooo worth it.


blondgecko
Moderator

Jun 1, 2008, 9:04 PM
Post #23 of 34 (8729 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 2, 2004
Posts: 7666

Re: [boondock_saint] Questions on Canon DSLRs [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

boondock_saint wrote:
and then there are also things like chromatic aberration, which good lenses correct for and cheap kit lenses don't. there are many differences between good and cheap lenses that go beyond speed and as you mentioned sharpness. and IS (image stabilization) is soooo worth it.

I'm not going to disagree with you on that. There's no way that I would ever go back to the kit lens from my 17-40 f4L. That said, however...

These were all taken with the kit 18-55:









It's most certainly possible to get very good results with this lens, under the right conditions. The more expensive lenses simple extend the range of conditions under which you can operate.


Canc3r


Jun 1, 2008, 10:21 PM
Post #24 of 34 (8718 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 23, 2007
Posts: 3

EOS 40D User [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

hi , I'm not a pro but I've bought a 40D about 4 months ago and I gotta say that , it's a great camera , high quality build of body , and the high speed shooting is great ( 6.5 Frames/s ) , On the other hand it's too heavy for carrying and climbing. My friends bought 400D rebel XTi and the photo quality is pretty good , but the high speed shooting is 3frames/s , also the 450D rebel XSi is good too , well check out http://www.dpreview.com for more info ! Don't forget to buy a UV filter to protect the sensor !


(This post was edited by Canc3r on Jun 2, 2008, 8:37 PM)


grayhghost


Jun 2, 2008, 9:23 AM
Post #25 of 34 (8690 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 20, 2002
Posts: 444

Re: [Canc3r] EOS 40D User [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Canc3r wrote:
Don't forget to buy a UV filter to protect the sensor !

What?

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Climbing Disciplines : Climbing Photography

 


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook