Digital SLRs?

[deedotceedot]

^ http://www.digitaldarrell.com/DDBlog-ShouldNikonMakeA35mmSizedSensor.asp

Explains Nikon's position on full frame vs APS/DX.

[airfrogusmc]

Interesting. I can only tell you that I have shot with both and I have yet to see fall off or edge softness on any of my images taken with FF. You can bet that at some point in the future Nikon will be changing their lenses and making a FF sensor.

[Ryan]

not exactly SLR related but is there a way for iphoto to only pick up certain cameras?

i have a canon sd400 which i want to be recognized by iphoto

and i have canon xt which i want to be used with eos utility and image browser..

[polishmike]

No. I don't think there is an option of not picking up certain camera.

You can also go to Image Capture and change the automatic settings in preferences. That way iPhoto won't open when you connect any camera but you can open it manually when you connect the sd400.

[masuerte]

I would like to further discuss this whole full frame versus current digital sensors. Is it even important to a hopefull amateur hobbyist photographer?

Canon with their full frame censors have been leading the digital photography world for years. I have a good friend thats a photo editor for the Chicago Trib and he said they've been using the big Canons for years now. The 1Ds markII which is the KING. Full frame sensor almost 17 megapixels for sports 4 frames per second sealed for shooting in severe weather situations.

I was talking to a camera rep that was telling me for Nikon to use a full frame censor they are going to have to change all of their lenses to cover the censor area. I don't know if thats true but it could explain why the haven't gone full frame yet.

That is so dissapointing because one of the biggest things to consider with an SLR is the lenses right? I heard that the bodies are much less important in the long run than the actual lenses. That going over to SLRs and potentially getting hooked on the equipment deal, it is very important that one look into the line of lenses they are buying into.

Taking a step back, it might be be a good thing that Nikon will eventually make a full frame, it might drive the costs of the D80 and current digital bodies along with their lenses down. Is that a possibility? If so, should I buy the D50 now and move up to the D80 once costs are down? What if I'm also hopefull to eventually buy the holy grail (hyped up) 18-200mm nikkor lens with vibration reduction??

[smurf]

A couple good digital camera review sites I use whenever I'm buying:

http://www.megapixel.net/html/cover.php

http://www.dcresource.com/

[Klaas]

A couple good digital camera review sites I use whenever I'm buying:

http://www.megapixel.net/html/cover.php

http://www.dcresource.com/

Don't forget http://dpreview.com/

[ayn]

mas: I don't think that claim about Nikon lenses and FF sensors had any truth in it. Their lens, the same F-mount, have been in used in 35mm film (full fucking frame) for a long long time, I've made very large enlargements in color and B&W darkrooms with 35mm slides and negatives taken with my FM2 and F4 back in my film days.

The new Nikon SLRs, especially the D80, is really really really really good. If I didn't have prior investment in Canon equipment I would probably go for Nikon right now. Canon's latest offerings have been disappointing... I sure hope they come up with something good soon... If I do more macro photography I will get the 105VR and a D80 just for that, Nikons are fucking incredible.

But it really all comes down to the eye behind the lens, equipment doesn't matter very much, I think it would be safe to say 90% of the people with the entry to "prosumer" level SLRs, such as the 400D/Rebel XTi and the 30D, will not turn better frames with the 1Ds M2, I am fucking serious... If anything, the learning curve on a full frame camera will discourage the beginners. Also, with full frame, or any 10+ MP sensors, you need absolutely perfect shooting disciplines, or the outputs will suck. IOW, the higher end cameras are not very forgiving to human errors (and cheap lenses). Say you violate the inverse rule with a 12MP SLR, you will need MAD SKILLZ in Photoshop to fix the camera shake in the full resolution output.

[sidneylo]

Good shit Ayn. It's funny because I don't know any of that shit. I really should be slapped on the wrist for not knowing jack shit.

Say you violate the inverse rule with a 12MP SLR, you will need MAD SKILLZ in Photoshop to fix the camera shake in the full resolution output.

That's the exact technical term, I believe.

[masuerte]

Ayn, thank you for... droppin' some knowledge. I have been schooled homeboy!

So D80 it is theeeeeen. In the summer of course.

Oh and I always read DPREVIEW but they frickin' reccomend both D80 and D50 as well as alot of the canons as highly reccomended. I'm asking advice in terms of cost and longetivity for someone curious about being an amateur photographer here.

[ayn]

By summer I'm sure the new Canon bodies will have dropped and the D80 prolly would've been revised... They release new cameras like twice a year now, pretty crazy. You have to decide for yourself which features you absolutely need, which would be nice to have, and what kindda photography you plan to do. If you want to shoot in the studio doing mostly portraits and fashion shoots, I don't think there is a better choice than the 5D and the 85/1.2L right now, but if you want to do macro photography, and you don't need more than 1:1 macro, then Nikon is probably a better choice. So it really all depends.

I would take DPReview's stuff with a grain of salt, they used to be okay, but their latest reviews, especially their sample pics, have been umimpressive... Their forums are even worse, most of them are just a bunch of gear heads who might own some very fancy SLRs and lenses but they don't really know how to use them. (This is a huge generalization, I am sure there are exceptional photographers there, but the noise ratio is quite high).

I like Rob Galbraith (site and forum) and The Online Photographer (not really a review site, but nice blog). Fred Miranda has pretty good lens reviews, their forums used to be great, but I think the mods pissed off most of the good photographers and now it's mediocre at best (again, I am talking about average quality of works posted there, there are still great photog's on that forum I'm sure)...

[Ryan]

I'm still kinda wondering if i should just put up the XT body up on ebay and try and go for a xti, out of pocket itd still only cost me a couple hundred in total but many people say that the jump from the xt to the xti just probably wont be worth the hassle..*shrugs*

[ayn]

unless the XTi have something you absolutely need that the XT doesn't have, then no, you are probably better off spending the money on a prime lens.

If you find a deal on the XTi it might not cost a couple hundreds to upgrade though, I remember seeing the XTi kit on Slickdeals for some crazy low prices...

[Ryan]

unless the XTi have something you absolutely need that the XT doesn't have, then no, you are probably better off spending the money on a prime lens.

If you find a deal on the XTi it might not cost a couple hundreds to upgrade though, I remember seeing the XTi kit on Slickdeals for some crazy low prices...

suggestions for a decent prime lens?

[ayn]

that depends on what lens you have currently... but 50/1.4, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 macro (only if you want macro, AF is slow as shit in low lighting conditions)...

[Ryan]

EF-S 17-85MM f4-5.6 IS USM

thats what i currently have..

[ayn]

Look at the prime lens reviews at Fred Miranda, the 50/1.4 will probably be a good choice, if you want something wide then maybe the 24/2.8 or 35/2. I have used the 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 before, the 50 quite extensively, but I've never used the 24 or the 35, only suggested them because I've heard good things about them. I actually don't own any of these 4 lenses myself.

[Ryan]

cool..thanks for the input

[equip555]

is $170 a good price for a refurbished Canon EOS Rebel K2 35mm SLR Camera with EF 28 to 90mm II USM Lens?

ANY help would be greatly appreciated!

[ayn]

I thought the title of this thread was Digital SLR, no?

[Fuuma]

that depends on what lens you have currently... but 50/1.4, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 macro (only if you want macro, AF is slow as shit in low lighting conditions)...

Those are classic choices and great suggestions, of course, although I'd qualify the 85/1.8 as mostly a portrait lense, hense something you might get limited use out of (I'm disregarding the effect of the sensor size here, sorry ). I'm going to be boring and say not to worry too much about the gear and possible upgrades and get out there and take pics with what you have. The original poster is probably not a good enough photographer to take advantage of all the camera functions and possibilities offered by his lense(s). Not that it's a bad thing, I'm not either....

So unless you're Carl or Canice or whoever is really good on the forum just shoot with what you got and don't be that fat kid of the court with the awesome shoes and the crappy jump.

[poly800rock]

just shoot with what you got and don't be that fat kid of the court with the awesome shoes and the crappy jump.

awesome....

[C0C0]

i really want the sony dslr a100 but my friend is telling me NO...but i LOVE sony products...any info?? it would be my first and i've read that it's a pretty decent dslr for beginners

[aitsuka]

does anyone know how to elminate blurry pictures?

I currently did:

1. the elbows in/exhale technique

2. Manuel setting to get a faster shutter speed

but they don't seem to help

using a 28-105 3.5-4.5 II USM Canon on a XT

[ayn]

assuming your were asking about blurry pics due to camera shakes, then the very basic is the inverse rule (with crop factor correction)... shutter speed should be the inverse of the focal length x crop factor... if you use the 105mm end of your lens on your XT, you need to be at least 1/168 of a second... (because 105 x 1.6 = 168). you can also increase the ISO, with the XT you can afford using higher ISO settings...

if you've done everything to eliminate most of the camera shakes (tripod, mirror lockup, timer or remote or shutter cable), and you are still not happy with your pictures at full resolution, that is because of the 28-105.

all consumer grade zoom lenses are not good enough for any of the modern D-SLR sensor, that's why I recommended prime lens in my above posts. I understand the fat kid with nice basketball shoes thing, I've seen and I know a lot of gear heads like that with pro lenses and bodies and can't shoot shit. I recommended consumer grade primes because they are affordable and of great quality. Primes also force you to focus on compositions over zooming in and out, which should help a lot for beginners.

I went with the 20D because I thought I could reuse my consumer grade zooms from my 35mm days, i was wrong. All the pics I took with my old lenses sucked (i had a 28-105 and a 100-300), the sensor pretty much outresolved the lenses... So I sold all of them on eBay and got new lenses...

[ayn]

i really want the sony dslr a100 but my friend is telling me NO...but i LOVE sony products...any info?? it would be my first and i've read that it's a pretty decent dslr for beginners

Your friends are right. I would not recommend that camera. It's plasticy, AF is dog slow, and very noisy. Sony products suck in general...

[aitsuka]

assuming your were asking about blurry pics due to camera shakes, then the very basic is the inverse rule (with crop factor correction)... shutter speed should be the inverse of the focal length x crop factor... if you use the 105mm end of your lens on your XT, you need to be at least 1/168 of a second... (because 105 x 1.6 = 168). you can also increase the ISO, with the XT you can afford using higher ISO settings...

if you've done everything to eliminate most of the camera shakes (tripod, second curtain sync, timer or remote or shutter cable), and you are still not happy with your pictures at full resolution, that is because of the 28-105.

all consumer grade zoom lenses are not good enough for any of the modern D-SLR sensor, that's why I recommended prime lens in my above posts. I understand the fat kid with nice basketball shoes thing, I've seen and I know a lot of gear heads like that with pro lenses and bodies and can't shoot shit. I recommended consumer grade primes because they are affordable and of great quality. Primes also force you to focus on compositions over zooming in and out, which should help a lot for beginners.

I went with the 20D because I thought I could reuse my consumer grade zooms from my 35mm days, i was wrong. All the pics I took with my old lenses sucked (i had a 28-105 and a 100-300), the sensor pretty much outresolved the lenses... So I sold all of them on eBay and got new lenses...

will a IS stabilizer solve my problems also? lol

I am definitely thinking about a L prime lens at a deeper context now...

[ayn]

Consumer grade IS lenses suck too, I would avoid those if I were you.

You don't really need L prime unless you have money to burn, at the consumer vs pro prime lenses level is where Fuuma's comment comes into play. You most likely will not be able to realize the differences between say a 85/1.8 and a 85/1.2L. If anything, the weight and size difference will put you off, the extra f-stop is not gonna buy you much good, especially when you can just crank up the ISO with you XT. The super shallow DoF will kill a lot of your shots. Say if you are silly enough to shoot at f/1.2, it is almost impossible to get the focus right, the old "focus and then recompose" discipline will not work, as the depth of focus will be in millimeters, literally, so by simple trigonometry focus-and-recompose will not work. I've seen people with these crazy L-primes turning shit pictures way too often on a few photography forums, it's sad.

[lithiumsys]

My D1H is pretty much gone intill 2008 or so. But luckily I have a birthday coming up in 2-3 weeks, so I'll hint towards a camera.

Anyone know of a low to mid priced DSLR I could ask for? I think I want to go the Nikon route again, but I'm open to all brands for the most part.

[aubrgene]

does anyone know how to elminate blurry pictures?

I currently did:

1. the elbows in/exhale technique

2. Manuel setting to get a faster shutter speed

but they don't seem to help

using a 28-105 3.5-4.5 II USM Canon on a XT

Use a tripod.