cgm: tsxondubs test photoshoot
08-02-2005, 09:21 PM
#1
Wannabe TSX Owner
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Somewhere
Age: 42
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cgm: tsxondubs test photoshoot
I just got my new digital slr so I wanted to test it out with a shoot. The shots are alright but i think i can do a lot better as far as quality. not to mention i think my lens need to be calibrated cause of softness.
anywho, here they go. thanks again to david for bein a good sport and helpin me out:
anywho, here they go. thanks again to david for bein a good sport and helpin me out:
Trending Topics
MORE MORE MORE!!! 
08-03-2005, 12:52 AM
#13
tehLEGOman
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Age: 41
Posts: 9,135
Received 1,982 Likes
on
1,335 Posts
Who took those shots! Those are slick man.
08-03-2005, 06:01 AM
#18
Wannabe TSX Owner
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Somewhere
Age: 42
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Texan
I'm not seeing ANY image quality problems. Those are some good shots. What kind of camera?
What I mean by image problems is that the L's have an incredible sharpness to them...well there's supposed to and mine came out pretty soft which I think is due to the fact that it might need some calibration.
08-03-2005, 07:24 AM
#19
Instructor
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Lexington, KY
Age: 49
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i think they look great. I can image the full quality image being a little soft but the web res version looks great. Are you doing manual focus and depth of field settings?
08-03-2005, 09:08 AM
#20
Wannabe TSX Owner
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Somewhere
Age: 42
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i used auto focus at f/4 for most of these. maybe that's the prob, i think i need to learn how to use manual.
ooorrrrr, it needs calibration. i'm testing the calibration sometime this week.
ooorrrrr, it needs calibration. i'm testing the calibration sometime this week.
08-03-2005, 09:48 AM
#21
Photography Nerd
Wait a second, you bought professional grade 'L' glass and you don't know how to use manual focus? 
The calibration or back-focusing issue are being blown way out of proportion thanks to forums like dpreview.com. I find it funny how pros never have this problem but when reading the forums you'd think 1 in 5 have a problem. I'd be surprised if 1 in 10,000 actually have a problem. The quality of Canon L glass is as good as it gets for SLRs.
Set up a controlled test on a tripod switching between MF & AF, while running through f/4, f/8, f/11, f/16, and f/22 to see if you actually have a problem.
The calibration or back-focusing issue are being blown way out of proportion thanks to forums like dpreview.com. I find it funny how pros never have this problem but when reading the forums you'd think 1 in 5 have a problem. I'd be surprised if 1 in 10,000 actually have a problem. The quality of Canon L glass is as good as it gets for SLRs.
Set up a controlled test on a tripod switching between MF & AF, while running through f/4, f/8, f/11, f/16, and f/22 to see if you actually have a problem.
08-03-2005, 09:59 AM
#22
Wannabe TSX Owner
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Somewhere
Age: 42
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
chill man, i know physically how to use it. its just i never use it in photoshoots and this is my first experience with the slr and with other cameras i've had in the past it wasn't as much of a problem or more apparent than in these shots.
i don't see what's wrong with buying the right equipment right off the bat even if you're still learning
i don't see what's wrong with buying the right equipment right off the bat even if you're still learning
08-03-2005, 10:06 AM
#23
Photography Nerd
Originally Posted by leadtrum
chill man, i know physically how to use it. its just i never use it in photoshoots and this is my first experience with the slr and with other cameras i've had in the past it wasn't as much of a problem or more apparent than in these shots.
i don't see what's wrong with buying the right equipment right off the bat even if you're still learning
i don't see what's wrong with buying the right equipment right off the bat even if you're still learning
There's nothing wrong with getting the right equipment from the start, just get some experience with it before criticizing its performance.
The shots you posted look great so I wouldn't worry too much about it.
08-03-2005, 10:08 AM
#24
Wannabe TSX Owner
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Somewhere
Age: 42
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Dan Martin
Sorry that came across pretty harsh now that I've reread it.
There's nothing wrong with getting the right equipment from the start, just get some experience with it before criticizing its performance.
The shots you posted look great so I wouldn't worry too much about it.
There's nothing wrong with getting the right equipment from the start, just get some experience with it before criticizing its performance.
The shots you posted look great so I wouldn't worry too much about it.
08-03-2005, 04:50 PM
#34
Supercharged RSX-S
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Age: 41
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey Dennis, David and I know of a couple other places that would make some nice pics just incase you need to do your little calibration thingy or whatever! 
You kick ass, cant say it enough!!!!!
I should be getting something "new" here soon that I would like you to get some good shots of! I pay good
You kick ass, cant say it enough!!!!! I should be getting something "new" here soon that I would like you to get some good shots of! I pay good
08-04-2005, 11:16 PM
#36
The Designer
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: CT
Age: 45
Posts: 873
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The shots look Great.
Any other thoughts on the 350D? I was looking at it for my next purchase. Is that shorter lens good for super close macro shots or would that require a separate lens? I don't mind spending the $700 on the camera, just would like to get maybe 2 good lenses to cover most situations. Any night shots with it?
Any other thoughts on the 350D? I was looking at it for my next purchase. Is that shorter lens good for super close macro shots or would that require a separate lens? I don't mind spending the $700 on the camera, just would like to get maybe 2 good lenses to cover most situations. Any night shots with it?
Is the windshield tinted too?
08-04-2005, 11:31 PM
#38
Photography Nerd
Originally Posted by BadBadNeil
The shots look Great.
Any other thoughts on the 350D? I was looking at it for my next purchase. Is that shorter lens good for super close macro shots or would that require a separate lens? I don't mind spending the $700 on the camera, just would like to get maybe 2 good lenses to cover most situations. Any night shots with it?
Any other thoughts on the 350D? I was looking at it for my next purchase. Is that shorter lens good for super close macro shots or would that require a separate lens? I don't mind spending the $700 on the camera, just would like to get maybe 2 good lenses to cover most situations. Any night shots with it?
For macro shots, you need a macro lens. Life-size (1:1) macros only come as primes (i.e. no zoom) so they're generally not your first purchase, unless of course, you want to shoot a lot of close up shots. They do make great portrait lenses though.
The 10-22 is really wide (equiv. to a 16-35mm on a full frame body). If you're into shooting landscapes, it can give you a very interesting perspective to a scene.
Depending on what your budget is for glass, I can make some suggestions.
he's crazy
08-05-2005, 12:08 AM
#40
The Designer
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: CT
Age: 45
Posts: 873
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Dan Martin
The 350D is a great camera, I probably would have upgraded to one had they not made it so small. If you have big hands, try it out before buying. For me it was uncomfortable to the point where I cost them a sale.
For macro shots, you need a macro lens. Life-size (1:1) macros only come as primes (i.e. no zoom) so they're generally not your first purchase, unless of course, you want to shoot a lot of close up shots. They do make great portrait lenses though.
The 10-22 is really wide (equiv. to a 16-35mm on a full frame body). If you're into shooting landscapes, it can give you a very interesting perspective to a scene.
Depending on what your budget is for glass, I can make some suggestions.
For macro shots, you need a macro lens. Life-size (1:1) macros only come as primes (i.e. no zoom) so they're generally not your first purchase, unless of course, you want to shoot a lot of close up shots. They do make great portrait lenses though.
The 10-22 is really wide (equiv. to a 16-35mm on a full frame body). If you're into shooting landscapes, it can give you a very interesting perspective to a scene.
Depending on what your budget is for glass, I can make some suggestions.
My hands aren't huge but I do have long fingers, I've been using a PS G4 as my daily camera and I haven't had many issues with the size of that and that's pretty small. We have some DSLRs at work that I've tested too, but I will go to best buy and see how they feel. I did notice they are a lot smaller than the 300D.
I do like to shoot lots of closeups but what lens could I shoot closeups with and not have to get a macro lens. I think I'd like to get a single all purpose "utility" lens, perhaps a 28-200mm or do you think that is too wide of a range to get in a lens? I'd like zoom capability. Do you know the approximations of the mm range of a lens to feet in physical space in terms of a multiplier? So just as an example is 200mm = to 3x or 2.5x etc?
I think what I want is the ability to see something quickly and have the instant choice of a semi wide angle or switch to closeup with no lens changing. Recently we were at my uncle's house and 6 vultures where circling overhead. I had to pull my G4 out and it has weak telephoto capability so by the time I was zooming in and out I lost the shot where if I had the instant capability I could have been right on them or taken a shot of them against the mountain all with the same lens.
Now with my G4 I have the "macro" button capability and it allows for halfway decent closeups from about 6inches to 1ft away, would an all purpose lens allow for this or would I need a different lens with a f setting? Is there such a thing as a far distance macro lens where you can take extreme close ups at a distance of say 20ft or so? I've often seen great shots of insects, birds, etc that I couldn't get because they get spooked when you are 1ft. away from them.
I don't have a super high budget, any suggestions on a medium sized budget for an all purpose, wide angle, and macro? I like the EF-S 60mm but it's a bit steep as far as macro goes for a single purpose lens (at least for me). Also what is the deal with the macro ring lights, are those needed IYO as the normal flash is useless up close?
Phew, probably missed a few questions, I've done reading and used some SLR's including our 20D at work but not really up to par with lenses.
Thanks!