| » Forum Index » Problems and solutions » Topic: cameras |
|
Posted on 26/05/05 00:27:08 AM |
|
Einstein D Kid
Teen Trickster Posts: 281 Reply  |
Re: cameras
I've always wondered about taking a picture 4 times, but each time moving the camera slightly so that the pixels represent different real locations, and then combining them to make a picture 4 time the size. I've come to the conclusion that it would generate an image that is 4 times the resolution, but blured by 2 pixels. Does that make sense? _________________ If you lend someone 20$ and never see them again... It's money well spent |
Posted on 26/05/05 01:25:33 AM |
|
trinityofone
Guest Reply |
Re: cameras
I think I see what you mean. Taking a photo of a quarter of an object each time and putting them together like a panoramic image? _________________ It must be Thursday, I never could get the hang of Thursdays |
Posted on 26/05/05 02:12:31 AM |
|
Atomicfog
Virtual Visualizer Posts: 238 Reply  |
Re: cameras
http://www.tawbaware.com/maxlyons/gigapixel.htm Your refering to that right? I want the full picture, but the huge strip is cool. _________________ -Atomic |
Posted on 26/05/05 12:36:00 PM |
|
Paul McFadden
Dream Decryptor Posts: 138 Reply  |
Re: cameras
Thats amazing !!!! _________________ |
Posted on 01/06/05 03:22:33 AM |
|
eventer
*** Posts: 165 Reply  |
Re: cameras
just an update.... I went to a couple of photography shops and handled the 20D and the Rebel XT. The Rebel XT is a great size, it's small and light and does pretty much what the 20D does, but it only comes in plastic. I was talked into the 20D by a salesperson who told me that the body (magnesium alloy) and the seals are sturdier in the 20D - because of my lifestyle I am leaning towards the 20D (need to save a bit more money for that one). So....looks like the 20D - any hints or tutorials on lens? |
Posted on 01/06/05 06:44:45 AM |
|
TC
* Posts: 6 Reply |
Re: cameras
If I were to get a digital SLR right now, I would definitely go with the 20d. However, I've decided not to go that route because I'm convinced that the full frame sensors are going to start coming out soon, so I'd rather save my money and get one when they do. |
Posted on 01/06/05 1:19:02 PM |
|
eventer
*** Posts: 165 Reply |
Re: cameras
Eh??? Please explain TC - I am a beginner SLR person. I am willing to wait a bit if you think it's worth it. |
Posted on 01/06/05 5:59:35 PM |
|
trinityofone
Guest Reply |
Re: cameras
Surely, the only reason for having a full-frame sensor would be for compatibility with older lenses? I look at photography with the full WYSIWYG mentality, if I can see it through the viewfinder, I'll take the shot  _________________ A happy-go-lucky chap, always dressed in black |
Posted on 01/06/05 7:25:39 PM |
|
TC
* Posts: 6 Reply |
Re: cameras
Well, the full frame sensor has two big benefits (for me.) Firstly, as David says, it's more compatible with older lenses. If you have non-digital specific lenses, you don't have to multiply the focal length by 1.5. So yes, while it turns a 400mm into a 600mm, it also turns my nice 24mm into a 36mm. I use my wide angle far to much for that to be acceptable. Secondly, a full frame sensor means that the senor is the same size as a 35mm negative. You can only shove so many megapixels into a sensor before you start to get quality degredation and noise. 8 megapixels in a 2/3 inch won't look as good as 6 megapixels in a full frame sensor. Now then, the 20d is a GREAT camera, and Canon has struck gold with their CMOS sensors. I've coveted that camera for a long time, and if I had the money, I would probably pick it up. But since I'll have to do some saving, might as well save up for what I REALLY want. If you do go with the 20d, do yourself a favor, don't get the les that it comes with. Get the upgraded lens, or they've got a great 50mm 1.4, which is what I would get as my first lens. |
Posted on 01/06/05 10:02:22 PM |
|
mj
Guest Reply |
Re: cameras
I own a Canon 20d and it will shoot circles around the Rebel. If you carry the camera by the neck strap (I cannot stand a camera around my neck) the metal body is worth it's weight in gold. You may also invest in the semi-ridgid case. It is somewhat cumbersome but keeps the dings away. It does present a problem for begining camera buffs. The instruction book that comes with the camera is ok, but does not tell you why you would use the features of the camera. Most people want to shoot in RAW. Very nice except there are 5 RAW settings and if you are not familiar with how to expose a negative (I used negative because that is exactly what it is) your photos will not come out as you thought they would. Then there are 7 automatic settings to deal with. If that is not enough you have to deal with whitebalance, ISO Auto exposure (3 settings) as well as photography rules for making great photos, ie: always leave detail in the black areas, the 1/3 rule, composition ect ect, Having owned my own photo studio my suggestions to you, if you are serious about buying the 20d, are as follows: If you do not have the finances at the present time. 1. Hold on to the camera you have and get into an instructor led photography class for digital camera. You can ask question about things that you do not understand. The instructor does not have to be present as long as you can get answers to your questions. I understand that there are many online courses. 2. If you have the finances get the basic camera to begin with. TC, is correct in a way about the lens that comes with the camera. The 18 to 55mm is a great starter. Once you have some knowledge about how and what you will be shooting you can make an informed decision about lens selections. I am using the 18 to 55 for my all round lens and have a 55 to 135 for zoom. I don't have a lot of use for a zoom. 3. Do not ever think that Photoshop will make you a great photographer. Photoshop turns average photos into better than average. Learn how to compose and capture. Learn to *SEE* the light and how to expose for it. Ok, off my soap box. Don't let me discourage you with my rantings but I would rather you understand what you are getting into before you spend a lot of money and decide that you were not a photographer in the first place, when in fact with a little training you could become a great photographer. _________________ -Never met a PS'er I didn't like- Will Rogers |
Posted on 01/06/05 10:43:26 PM |
|
mj
Guest Reply |
Re: cameras
Here are a couple of places to visit. Here for instruction: http://photoworkshop.com/ This is an exellent forum as well as camera reviews Here _________________ -Never met a PS'er I didn't like- Will Rogers |
Posted on 01/06/05 11:24:03 PM |
|
eventer
*** Posts: 165 Reply |
Re: cameras
That's great advice MJ, thank you. I am up to the ears reading about digital photography and digital cameras. I have had 3 p & s since digital cameras came out, and I still love the one I am using (Fuji 6800zoom). I am keen to take a photography course next winter, in the summer I can barely get time to play with my computer. Much of my personal enjoyment and fascination with Photoshop is the fact that it has so much 'depth' - so much to learn, so much you can do. I want the same kind of depth in a camera. I want 'lots to learn' and I don't want to find myself restricted once I learn. My Fuji has always taken great photos but now I want to experiment with lens, depth of field, aperture settings etc. and I can't do that with my present camera. It's wonderful to have your advice - please see below what I am considering 20D 75-300 usm 3 lens 17-40 f/4 L usm lens |
Posted on 01/06/05 11:28:33 PM |
|
mj
Guest Reply |
Re: cameras
Np, Eventer, just remember to see the light and expose for same.  _________________ -Never met a PS'er I didn't like- Will Rogers |
Posted on 02/06/05 02:47:56 AM |
|
TC
* Posts: 6 Reply |
Re: cameras
Just as a general suggestion, if your new to photography, I would suggest starting on film. It makes you learn a lot about equivalency of exposure, and things like that. I think you learn far more when shooting film, then switching to digital really allows you to explore the medium. That's just a personal opinion though. As MJ said, the baiscs of composition and what makes a good photograph are important to know, regardless of the capture method. |
Posted on 02/06/05 08:34:35 AM |
|
Steve Caplin
Administrator Posts: 7023 Reply  |
Re: cameras
Film? Film??? Shame on you! I won't have such talk in here. Go wash your mouth out with silver iodide. Seriously, I know it's tempting to advise others to follow the learning route you took yourself, but in this case I don't think it's appropriate. Eventer wants a new digital camera, and a digital camera she should have. Surely she can learn the intricacies of speed, ISO and aperture settings more quickly when she sees the results instantly? And, moreover, learn the settings appropriate to her camera? Eventer, the 20D is a great camera, but are you sure it's worth paying the extra over the cost of a 350D? If it were me, I'd seriously consider spending the cash on lenses. Remember that when using digital, as has been pointed out here, you multiply the length of a lens by 1.5 - this is because the CCD chip is smaller than a 35mm film frame, so only captures a portion of the area. Your 70-300 will benefit from this, of course, but the 17-40 will really have a maximum wide-angle setting of about 24. Does this make sense? I recently bought a 12-24 Sigma lens, and (after the initial horror of the price) it has proved to be fantastic. It captures a wide angle view with no fisheye distortion whatever, and is great for taking indoor photos in low light. I bought it for taking interior shots of rooms - for the backgrounds in my montages - and now I'd be lost without it. So what I'm saying is: buy the cheaper camera, and make sure you get the best lenses. That way you'll get the pictures you want. |
Posted on 02/06/05 4:23:10 PM |
|
julie
* Posts: 35 Reply |
Re: cameras
I know I learned far more about photography in the last year with my 10D than in the years of owning a film SLR. I was never disciplined enough to take notes so I never got a good feel for which aperture and focal lengths would produce just what I wanted. With digital I can just look at the EXIF information
I think the instant gratification of digital also helps the learning process - sometimes I lost interest waiting for the prints to come back. (Errr, back when the Earth's crust was still cooling and 1hr photolabs didn't exist....) Also, I was too cheap to send my photos out to good labs so the little details between slightly different exposures were lost in the automated printing machines. Anyway, I feel a little guilty now - I've been on a photo frenzy lately and haven't engaged in the Friday Challenges (that will change this weekend  ).
As for the 1.6 crop factor on the 350D and the 20D, I think it's here to stay and full frame sensors will remain in the Pro cameras (and at Pro prices). Canon is creating a new line of lenses, the EF-S, which fit on the Rebels and the 20D (alas, not my 10D). The 10-22mm seems to be getting good reviews. To get that wide, I use my fisheye which I've become very fond of. |
Posted on 03/06/05 2:38:22 PM |
|
eventer
*** Posts: 165 Reply |
Re: cameras
I have absolutely no interest in film at all, my passion is computers and computer related images - I hope that's not a terrible thing to say to a photographer, but I absolutely love my digital camera and I most certainly do all my learning by taking 100 photos and checking the exif (which my fuji does give me, it's just doesn't let me customise the settings). I have fiddled around with using the different settings for 'odd' shots and had lots of fun but now I know how to use it inside out and it can't do any more fun things than I have already experimented with. I was absolutely sure I was going for the 350D because of price and being able to use the money to buy fun accessories but the salesman did a real number on me in terms of the bodywork on the cameras. My fuji is also metal and has been really reliable. I have not had a digital with a plastic body, it makes me nervous. I am not looking at going on "camera trips" much, I am looking at hauling it with me everywhere I go and taking photos when I get time and inspiration. I am worried that the plastic body will not stand up to my lifestyle. Otherwise I would DEFINITELY go for the Rebel. Am I reading too much into the ruggedness factor? The 20d has an alloy body on a steel chassis and the salesman said the seals were better, particularily if I foresaw myself being in dusty environments, which I do. I get your point about the 17-40. I will talk more to them about the lens. I can't go to Ottawa this weekend (20 little pony clubbers coming for a clinic  ) but maybe Monday......... This is sooooo exciting, almost like a new computer.
So.....keep throwing the advice my way folks, I AM taking it all in and it's a HUGE help. |
Posted on 03/06/05 2:52:49 PM |
|
Steve Caplin
Administrator Posts: 7023 Reply |
Re: cameras
The 300D seems very rugged to me. I've dropped it, banged it about, and it just keeps on working. So no problems here! Salesmen will always try to sell you something more expensive. The 350 is a great product for a really great price! But I don't know about the dust issue, it never really occurred to me. I'm sure whichever you decide, you'll really enjoy. |
Posted on 03/06/05 2:53:49 PM |
|
trinityofone
Guest Reply |
Re: cameras
Don't be fooled, the Rebels may be plastic bodied but they're not fragile. I read an article on Canon's site where they were talking about ruggedness testing - this involved swinging it against a wall and noting the results. They are more resiliant than you might think. Saying this, Newby on Pixeladdiction did have concerns about his when he put a large lens on (and we are talking large), he said it caused a bit of creaking but that's a lens like sports photographers use and probably weighs as much as the photographer! I can't comment on the seals but dust is a problem however you look at it - changing lenses makes the camera vulnerable and there are various gaps where particles can get in, regardless of how careful you are. _________________ A happy-go-lucky chap, always dressed in black |
Posted on 03/06/05 3:45:27 PM |
|
eventer
*** Posts: 165 Reply |
Re: cameras
OK, so the one thing I thought I had made my mind up on for sure was the camera - now I am back at the beginning 
My original choice was the 350D - I was only looking at the 20D because of ruggedness. I always assumed it was more camera than I needed (need and want being two seperate items). Back to dpreview to look at them both again. |
| page: 1 2 3 4 last |