i love my d200

unedited photo

http://zerocoolbeans.org/bellarun.jpg

[Edited on May 4, 2007 at 4:31 PM. Reason : mod edit]

5/1/2007 10:16:46 PM

Jbaz.... which 70-200 did you end up with... i'm in the market for that same lens right now and having a hard time deciding which ones... you have some pretty nice stuff, I'm using the Xti as well... love it

5/1/2007 10:56:06 PM

^^

A few minutes in photoshop.



[Edited on May 1, 2007 at 10:56 PM. Reason : ]

5/1/2007 10:56:17 PM

yeah, that picture had no composure. Once you crop it, it becomes more interesting. Having all that negative space just made it boring, even with the dog in the middle. Middle is boring most of the time. Read up on some photography books and you can get a good eye about things. I definitely look at stuff now with the idea of taking a picture, even if I don't have a camera around.

I went for the Canon 70-200mm EF L f/4 lens. A very nice lens for about $580. For what I'm using it for, I don't need IS or the wider aperture such as f/2.8's. 4 worked great and still had enough light and shutter speed to keep the picture sharp. Although, you still have to pan because they are going 180+mph...

If I do plan on getting a new camera, I might upgrade my telephoto lens and sell the 70-200 f/4 and spring for either a longer range like 300, wider aperture and/or a long macro lens. I do plan on doing model shooting in the near future too.

5/2/2007 1:56:06 AM

That's one of the worst watermarks I've ever seen in my life.

5/2/2007 3:32:25 AM

i've been looking at the 70-200F4L, and the F2.8L, i'd love to get the 2.8, but just don't know if i could justify the cost to myself.

where are you getting your stuff from?

5/2/2007 9:29:34 AM

looks like you need to close down your aperture and get the dogs face in focus because that lens doesn't have a fast enough AF to keep up with the dog. the soft face just kills it for me.

5/2/2007 9:59:50 AM

It kills me when people have the dough to drop on a nice SLR and then shoot everything in auto. I've known 3 different people with Nikon D70s or D80s who have no clue how a camera works or how to use anything other than the auto setting. They just bought an SLR b/c it's the "in" thing to do. I met this couple and they had his and hers D80s. Neither of them had any clue about photography. What a waste of nice cameras...

5/2/2007 10:29:07 AM

a guy i work with bought a 30D and the 70-200 2.8 IS and only uses it on green square. total waste of money. he could have bought some $400 thing and gotten the same shots. plus when i asked him how he edited his photos, he had no idea what i was talking about. waste.

5/2/2007 10:52:31 AM

message_topic.aspx?topic=391741

5/2/2007 5:33:07 PM

I've got an original Canon Rebel, the 6.2mp version with some decent glass, but no L stuff yet. It really doesn't matter which camera you get (although I like Canons better b/c of the lens selection); it really boils down to the glass and the person behind it. I've seen people with pro-level cameras shoot pictures that aren't as good as my Nikon point and shoot. If you're serious about getting a DSLR, get either Canon or Nikon. Canon has more lens selection, but I feel that Nikon's kit lens is better than Canon's. Just something to consider if you're just starting out and don't want to invest a lot of money in glass.

Here are some shots from my canon. Lenses used were: Canon 10-22 f/2.8, Sigma 150 f/2.8 macro, Canon 50 f/1.8, Canon 18-55 (kit lens), Canon 28-80, and the Sigma/Canon 50 stacked for the super close up one of the fly

I've got a lot more stuff on my site: http://www.ssexton.net















[Edited on May 2, 2007 at 10:05 PM. Reason : tags]

[Edited on May 2, 2007 at 10:07 PM. Reason : tags]

[Edited on May 2, 2007 at 10:08 PM. Reason : tags]

5/2/2007 10:04:24 PM

Yeah, I'd like to stick with canon's since I've already invested in canon equipment. Might just get a 30D for the faster fps, but I'd wish they had the same features of the 30D in 10mp that's doesn't cost an arm and a leg. I'd love to get the new 1D mark III, but I can't justify spending 4500 for just the body. I don't want to skimp out on lens.

5/3/2007 12:36:03 AM

once you use a camera with a true pro-level autofocus system you won't want to go back. trust me.

5/3/2007 8:07:47 AM

^^^nice.. first two are crazy surreal

5/3/2007 8:35:34 AM

also, a big disadvantage to the 5d, besides the slow af and fps, is that being full frame some of your lenses won't work on it, and the effective focal length will be shorter on all of them. The 1D series is a 1.3 multiplier, so you have some limitations there, but it is still a MUCH better action camera. You can rent one for an event and see if you like it, then hunt up a used one. http://www.lensrentals.com/item/canon-1d-markii-n

5/3/2007 9:06:22 AM

yeah, still debating on either getting a 30D with lots of accessories, or spring for the 5D even though it doesn't have a fast fps. I'm looking for the best bang for the buck photography that I can use for anything, not only for sports, but for studio lighting. I don't have the kind of cash flow to afford two camera's. Actually, I don't have any cash flow yet...

The thing is, I don't want to get a 30D because for the price, I'd rather get a XTi for half the price and still pull out similar/decent pictures + having a larger resolution. I'm not exactly sure yet if this will be for real pro photography or a really dedicated hobby. I just don't want to be stuck with a camera that I won't use half the time or one that doesn't have the right features of when I need it.

5/3/2007 12:05:40 PM

stick with your xti and buy good glass--nothing like a 2.8 zoom. 30d is about due for a replacement. but then again, if you need the high fps, then you'll need it. i was debating for a months to buy the d200 and finally gave in. But then again my hobby pays for itself.



http://zerocoolbeans.org

d70+kit lens.

5/4/2007 1:13:39 PM

^^^^ It's called HDR, look it up. I agree though he does make good use of the effect in those images.

5/4/2007 2:01:36 PM

well the XTi isn't owned by me, its owned by my company. I might just get a 30D body for around 900 bucks for now since I can't really afford the higher Mark IIN or the new Mark III, but if I get some commission work and actually get some money for the pictures I'm currently taking, then get a Mark IIN or Mark III and either use the 30D as a backup or sell it.

I have at least 2 more event's I'm going to so I better make a decision soon.

5/4/2007 4:27:17 PM

I just went ahead and bought a 30D body for $893

5/6/2007 5:04:35 PM

^^^word, i know a little about hdr, bit but i guess i havent seen that many daylight pics done with it.

it almost looks like there are some distort and motion blur added to those first pictures though, they look nuts



[Edited on May 6, 2007 at 8:36 PM. Reason : just read bout how they actually shoot hdr might explain the blur]

5/6/2007 8:21:32 PM

Where did you get the 30D body for that price?! I've been looking for one for awhile, but just don't have the money for one at MSRP.



No motion blur added on those pics. It happened because I took probably 8 different pictures at different exposures, so the clouds would move a little in between shots. What HDR does is allow you to have one picture with properly exposed shadows/highlights without washing anything out or having it too dark

HDR w/out the clouds


[Edited on May 6, 2007 at 11:31 PM. Reason : l]

5/6/2007 11:30:26 PM

canon factory refurbished one.

5/7/2007 8:29:36 AM

Did you get it online?

5/7/2007 11:33:19 AM

Quote :

"That's one of the worst watermarks I've ever seen in my life."

Good call on the 30D though. There are too many people on here trying to peddle that d80 garbage.

5/7/2007 1:57:22 PM

who would ever consider the d80 to be in competition with a 30d? d200 would be the better comparison.

5/7/2007 2:02:29 PM

Yeah, the d200 is a damn good camera. I won't deny that.

But it seems, in looking at the other camera-related threads, that a lot of people blindly suggest the d80.

5/7/2007 3:45:35 PM

the d80 is like the entry level slr's such as the 200D, 350D or the 400D from canon (rebels)

5/7/2007 4:52:01 PM

Well, it's the summer time and money is to be made and reinvested into consumer items.

I'm looking at getting the 100-400mm EF L USM IS telephoto zoom lens for my 30D. I've read a lot of reviews and testimonials that all say it's the best bang for your buck large telephoto lens. At the same time, I might pick up another lens to cover the normal and wide angle ranges. What should I look at? I already have a 70-200mm which I'll probably sell off after I get the new lens, but I need to get either one or two more lens to cover a general range. A co-worker of mine has a 35mm f/1.2 lens but it's not a USM.

5/19/2007 7:50:55 AM

24-70 f/2.8 L
16-35 f/2.8 L


Both of them are sick lenses. I prefer the 16-35 and a 50 prime over the 24-70, but the 24-70 is a bit more versatile for most people I'd imagine.


Is your 70-200 and f/2.8 or f/4? If it is 2.8, do not sell it since the 100-400 is slow and useless in lowlight. If your 70-200 is NOT a 2.8, then sell your f/4 and buy a 70-200 f/2.8 and a 1.4x teleconverter.

5/19/2007 4:50:27 PM

it's f/4. The thing is that I will mainly use the 100-400 in outdoor daylight for motorsports so lowlight will not be an issue. It's also IS so that'll help a bit too. I honestly don't want to get the teleconverter and if I did, I would get the 2x version so it would bee 400 up top. I may get a 70-200 f/2.8 IS in the near future as well since I might be doing weddings and portraits. Need to get a nice macro lens too. Shit, while I'm at it, I might as well buy another 30D.

5/19/2007 7:20:32 PM

canon has a decent instant rebate on some of their lenses now through mid-july

5/20/2007 1:29:49 AM

yup, looking to buy 2 or 3 of them. I just did a teaball gig this weekend for a friend and ended up getting asked by like 5 other teams to take their pictures too cause they thought I was their scheduled photographer. Need to go through them and start getting some contacts down.

Also got some other gigs coming up and need to invest some serious money in some good lens for indoor/low light moving subject situations so I'm thinking of getting the 17-40 f/2.8 L lens first before I get the 100-400 (since I don't need it till August).

5/21/2007 7:11:26 PM

^The 17-40 is a f/4, not f/2.8. I'm happy with my 17-35 f/2.8...go old school and buy used and save $Texas

5/24/2007 12:26:01 AM

yeah, cept that most lens tend to keep their value, specially L. I looked online and found the cheapest 100-400 to be about 1200+shipping. It's on sale this summer for 1300 at b&h photo video store... I'd rather buy new than used for a little bit cheaper.

Thought they made 17-40 2.8... oh wells. Whats the difference between the 16-35 f/2.8L vs 16-35 f/2.8L II? I need a good wide/normal zoom lens for indoor, portrait, with some action shooting so I might look at the 24-70 f/2.8 L. Although I'm also looking at the 24-105 f/4 IS, but from what reviews I'm reading, it's not as good as the 24-70. I would like IS for low light situations and 2.8 but I guess I can't have both for a wide/normal zoom lens.

Any suggestions? Any one know anything about 40D rumored around?

5/24/2007 7:55:13 PM

So I'm looking at these lens:

canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM
canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM
canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0 L USM

canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM
...OR...
canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM


Now I can't afford getting the 70-200 and the 100-400 so I'm wondering how about using the x1.4 extender on the 70-200mm f/2.8 would work. I've tried to look for reviews on it, but most of them don't really review using the x1.4 or the x2 extender. I don't want to get the x2 for the lack of auto focus support with the 30D, that and the 2 f stop penalty. The 100-400 would be solely use for outdoor sport photography so the narrow f stop isn't of great concern to me, but the 70-200 would be more versatile since I would use it more for indoor/portrait photography. The 70-200 doesn't have the reach I wanted when I did the motorcycle race in April and not sure if the x1.4 extender would come close to the 100-400 "reach-ability". I would invest money in a 400 prime but I don't have 3+ grand to spend on one lens.

I've been looking at the 24-70 as my general all purpose lens and read a lot of good reviews about it. I'm going to pick up a 50 prime lens at the same time because of the wider aperture capabilities and better for lowlight/hand holding indoor shots. It maybe no f/1.2 L, but it's grand cheaper and still puts out respectable picture quality for being under 300. I also might pick up the 17-40 f/4 L later on to add to my lens kit for landscape/wide angled indoor shots. Don't think spending the extra money to get the 16-35 for the f/2.8 would be worth it for me currently.


I also need to get some studio equipment and have a small idea of what to get. I would be shooting a mix of portraits, product usage, and actual product photography with a 60mm macro. I would be keen on spending about $1000, but I could budget it a bit bigger since I'm trying to cover a much wider range of usability. I know I need to get a tent for product shots, but as in what lights to get for diffusing lights, like light box or using umbrella's; I don't know enough to gauge what I need. Also product usage shots would mean on-set so won't be totally in a studio environment (like outdoor/shade/office/hospital kind of settings) so possibly more for ambient soft lighting. I do have a 430ex flash light so adding multiple strobes might be an idea, but have no idea where to start.

Any help would be awesome.


Oh, I still have my 70-200 f/4 L lens, so if I do upgrade to the 2.8 IS, I'd probably sell it, so that can free me up some capital to get another lens.

[Edited on June 6, 2007 at 2:09 AM. Reason : 70-200 f/4]

6/6/2007 2:07:37 AM

I've used the 2.8IS before and it's a great lens. I'm not as familier with Canon's as i am Nikons, but the 30D is a sweet camera. The 100-400IS would be fun too. It's about time to invest in a new camera, i steal my mom's Nikon D2x's when i want to have fun, but at school i'm stuck with an old Sony f828. Probably get a nikon or canon in the next few months. So you're enjoying the 30D?

6/6/2007 8:43:57 AM

Exuberantly

I'm doing a lot of research with studio equipment and found this:
http://www.photoflexlightingschool.com/Equipment_Lessons/Soft_Boxes___Strobe/LiteDome/

There's a lot of neat info in there and might get a pair of starflash flashes for my studio setup. Plus a few other accessories with them. Not sure if I should get soft boxes or umbrella's still. Looking to be about 1000-2000 for the studio equipment.

6/6/2007 11:04:48 AM

Are you going to be traveling with them a lot? I like soft boxes, and sometimes they're easier if you're working in tight places, because umbrellas require a little more room.

6/6/2007 2:16:29 PM

What is the real differences between the lighting of using umbrella's and soft boxes? Soft box more direction soft light while umbrella's are more ambient light? Not sure about traveling yet, cause I'm going to buy a set for work first before I buy my own set for personal use (as always, I'll let my work eat the cost if turns out to be something that I don't want like XTi vs 30D ). I will be initially taking product shots in-house when plans to do a product usage shot on-scene. Personal use could vary from portraits, group shots, vehicles, product shots, and so on.

I defiantly need at least two strobes, stands, backgrounds (solid white, solid black, marble, gold), background stand, reflector panels (white, silver, gold), reflector holders, boom, and boom stand.

6/6/2007 3:35:54 PM

I don't actually have my own set, i used to assist my mom alot, she's a freelance photographer, and from what i learned, softboxes have more evenly distributed light, more consistant light based upon distance from object, and are a little more flexible when it comes to lighting different areas with different amounts of light. Umbrellas on the other hand vary in light intensity and are fine for lighting big groups of people, but for product shots and headshots soft boxes are the way to go.

-Although i've heard reflections in eyes are better if you use umbrellas because when you bounce light off a round object the light looks more natural. This effect can be eliminated usually by using multiple softboxes pointing at the subject instead of just one or 2.

[Edited on June 6, 2007 at 4:06 PM. Reason : .]

6/6/2007 4:01:31 PM

well... umbrella's are pretty cheap so I might as well get both soft boxes and umbrella's, then play with the settings. I went to Peace Camera's today and looked at all the goodies I want so I really want to buy them like now and play with them asap. Looks like 1500-1800 for the whole lighting set that I want, including some extra accessories for the 30D and while I'm at it, I'm gonna spring for the 24-70 f/2.8L and the 50 f/1.4. I think that will cover most studio lighting.

I got a couple portrait photography books and see that a few of the portrait telephoto shots are more at a narrower aperture setting so I think I'm gonna keep the 70-200 f/4 for a bit till I can afford the f/2.8. Besides, I have till July to get it for the rebate.

I really don't want to cheap out on the lighting and have to buy higher wattage ones in the near future.

6/7/2007 12:14:34 AM

Yeah good idea buying both umbrellas and s boxes. Sometimes i'm like that too. Once i know i can buy something, i want it asap so i can play around with it and figure it out.

6/7/2007 12:37:13 AM

sorry if this is off topic, but my dad recently (past year or so) has started getting interested in photography at a very entry level and just purchased a D80. I'd like to get him something for fathers day that he could use, but nothing expensive. I was thinking perhaps an accessory or beginner's book to go along with his new toy. Any ideas?

6/7/2007 1:05:19 AM

Photoshop cs3?

Or actually a tripod would be great if he doesn't already have one. Or even a monopod, those are fun.

[Edited on June 7, 2007 at 1:12 AM. Reason : .]

6/7/2007 1:11:18 AM

tripod actually sounds like a great idea, any suggestions of brand, things to look out for?

6/7/2007 1:24:40 AM

You get what you pay for.

Go for Bogen, Manfrotto, Gitzo. Those are pretty much the top of the line, for the most part. You can get a pretty solid tripod and a relatively cheap ball head for under 200 bucks.

6/7/2007 1:33:30 AM

Find out what his camera setup is or is it just kit lens? Also find out what kind of photo's he likes to take of, like flowers, people, cars, and so on. You can get a nice specialized lens for what he loves to take most of. An external flash unit is another idea as well as it's more versatile than the built-in flash. You can also get a nice photography book on what he likes to take pictures of. Look for books that offer hands-on guide as in telling you the settings and how it's setup of a picture shown in the book.

I actually just bought two photography books today, one for portraits, the other for wedding shots. Both are fantastic and tell you what kind of shots are good ideas and play around with that. Not only that but they tell you lighting setup, camera settings, even camera gear and diagrams. If you live near NCSU, go to Peace Cameras off of peace street in downtown Raleigh. They can help you a lot and they know their stuff. I was there today and looked at their lighting equipment and played with their canon lens. I had to bring my 30D in the store and "get a feel before I buy". I pretty much tested every single canon lens they had. lol


On another note, called my photography friend and he recommended me some alienbee studio lighting equipment as thats what he shoots with sometimes at school. They look pretty awesome and priced really really good. Not only that but they give 10% off discount for students. If your not a student, they have packages with some discount on accessories. Their 800 version looks good for what I would ever need and I think I'm gonna start configuring to get a 3 light setup instead. I'm pretty impressed with their 1 second recycle rate.

Anyone here have personal experience with them as well? They look well made. I wish they had some channels of distribution to sell in a retail setting so I could look at them personally.

http://www.alienbees.com/

6/7/2007 5:52:16 AM

alien bees are pretty good lights. We use White Lightning lights which are ~11 years old, have never changed the strobe bulb. 800w/s ones are good for soft boxes and general fill lights, but when you start throwing gells on the lights you want all of the power you can get. We max out 1200w/s lights @f8 with some gells we use on the background.

6/7/2007 7:42:47 AM

I think my setup is gonna be two 800's and one 1600 (as the main light). I'm gonna get some soft boxes, light panels, umbrellas and backdrops.

What are some good light meters to get. I don't want to spend an un-godly amount for some uber one just yet that can track 20+ strobes, wireless interface with the camera, syncs up with satellites in outer space and has freaking lazer beams attach to their little freaking heads... Something simple, easy and effective for both flash and normal light exposures.

I also need to get a flash bracket for when I take on the go portraits, so what are so good one's as well. I would like one that can be used with the attached battery grip and be sturdy/durable.


Also since I need to get another studio set for work, I need to figure out a way sync the strobes to the XTi since it lacks a PC port. Probably, need a hot shoe attachment piece and sync about 2-4 strobes. Don't need wireless. Wired will be fine with between 25-50 feet for the sync cords.

6/7/2007 10:22:28 PM