Ahahaha. Nikon vs Canon is always a personal choice. One necessarily isn't better then the other. I'd love Nikon stuff as much as I do my Canon, but Canon is what I have so it is what I know.


I'd LOVE a d100 though, or something along those lines.

3/2/2006 12:07:05 PM

yeah, me and a guy at work go back and forth all the time with nikon canon battles... we really can't put one above the other.

3/2/2006 12:43:12 PM

i prefer the ergonomics of nikon cameras.

3/2/2006 1:01:30 PM

I actually like the way a Nikon fits in my hand better, but once I get the battery/vertical grip for the Canon (which is not even available on Nikon cameras) it will be MUCH better.

3/2/2006 1:25:29 PM

Quote :

"battery/vertical grip for the Canon (which is not even available on Nikon cameras) "

another wrong statement by you. please edit your post

3/2/2006 1:40:34 PM

I know a battery grip isn't available for the d70 or the d50. I'd imagine some of the more professional cameras have this feature.

3/2/2006 1:41:48 PM

there are third party vertical grip for both d50 and d70. high end models have them built-in.

3/2/2006 2:07:05 PM

Yeah, I knew the higher end models have a vertical shutter release built in. However, I know NIkon doesn't make any, and DPreview lists a vertical grip as "n/a" for the d70. I didn't know 3rd party manufacturers started that.

3/2/2006 2:10:24 PM

nikon has a vertical grip for both the d100 and d200.

http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?cat=1&grp=258&productNr=25337

3/2/2006 2:20:49 PM

yeah i knew he was talking about the d50 and d70... but honestly i don't need those anyway...

3/2/2006 2:27:15 PM

i've got to BTTT this badboy, I took some shots yesterday in Queens... here are a few:




There are others peppered into this new gallery I just put together this evening:
http://www.pixelparlor.com/nyc2/

this older one contained no SLR images:
http://www.pixelparlor.com/nyc/

Thanks for lookin!

I'm definitely enjoying the intense depth that's possible with SLR, as well as the colors be much, much more vivid initially, minimizing post-shooting color correction

-ZiP!-

3/5/2006 11:41:54 PM

^haha

-ZiP!-

3/5/2006 11:47:37 PM

Good pics, Zip!

3/5/2006 11:50:37 PM

those are some really nice pics man... when you gonna send me a ticket so i can take a go at some queens pictures

3/5/2006 11:52:29 PM

thanks guys!

^you're welcome to come up and shoot, but i dont have enough spare $ to fund anyone's trip, haha

-ZiP!-

3/5/2006 11:53:54 PM

I got a d70 last christmas...its been great

3/6/2006 8:52:20 AM

Canon Rulz - had a 10D for over 2 years

http://www4.ncsu.edu/~rcbradle/spain PLUG
Check out my photos while I'm here in Spain (week 1 back up soon)

3/6/2006 2:15:28 PM

can we change the title of this thread to "ATTN: Ronny, plz post incorrect shit here"

3/6/2006 2:32:31 PM

I second PhotogRob, Canon rocks. I've had a 1d for nearly 2 years now.
http://www4.ncsu.edu/~agdowd

^^Nice website dude

3/6/2006 2:40:43 PM

^^^ great shots of europe, rob -- how much did the fisheye lens run you?

^ nice shots of the fire - turned out well!

-ZiP!-

3/7/2006 12:59:14 AM

Quote :

"VERYONE CAN CHILL OUT NOW, I HAVE ARRIVED IN THE THREAD! Good call on the d50. Just make sure to buy quality lenses. You get what you pay for, and if you cheap out on lenses it'll show. The built-in flash on that camera also sucks dick, so you might want to invest in a nice speedlight."

I think it's funny how ronny talks to us like we're his friends

3/7/2006 1:02:56 AM

I think you can lick my ballbag. I don't have a problem with anyone in this thread, and I don't believe any of them have a problem with me.



Other then you, of course.

3/7/2006 1:26:32 AM

I dont have a problem with ya Ronny, I appreciate the links to those other lenses and photography tips sites... i'm still fighting a little learning curve -- i haven't even't tried any white balancing, and i don't yet embrace much above 18-25mm, i need something super wide angle

-ZiP!-

3/7/2006 1:28:27 AM

the nikon has the 1.6x mag right

that issue always makes me a sad panda with my canon

3/7/2006 1:33:10 AM

You'll never stop learning. Pros still learn new tips/techniques every day.

And yeah, I am definitely going to invest in some nice portrait length primes before I think about a supertele or even an extended zoom.

60mm f/2.8 macro yo!


^What?

[Edited on March 7, 2006 at 1:33 AM. Reason : .]

3/7/2006 1:33:19 AM

what is 1.6x mag?

and yes, i'm not gonna get a prime until i'm sick of these first 2.

-ZiP!-

3/7/2006 1:34:15 AM

He might be referring to a 1.6 crop as opposed to a full frame, but I know some higher end Canons are ff. Not sure which Nikons. (I don't think any Nikons are ff)

[Edited on March 7, 2006 at 1:39 AM. Reason : .]

3/7/2006 1:36:53 AM

no, no full frame nikons.

1.6 magnification is ok to say though since it basically converts any lense by about 1.5. its like adding more telephoto to your picture. it would be the equiv of digital zoom except it doesn't enlarge pixels nor degrade your picture quality.

i think canon has 2 full frames.

as for super wide angle... you are lookin at some cash.

3/7/2006 1:49:08 AM

^Sort of like the same effect a teleconverter would have on a Canon?

And yeah, Canon has 2 f camers, the 5d and the MarkII I believe. Apparently they are going to start making all of them fullframe except for the extremely entry level DSLR's.

3/7/2006 1:52:35 AM

welp they didn't make the 30D full frame and that just came out in the makings...

but not really as much like a teleconverter... a teleconverter kinda takes away from sharpness due to the added amount of glass... which is normally not good... also the added glass and added length makes focusing a lot harder for a camera normally... other than that i guess it is like having a built in 1.5x teleconverter yes.

overall not very many full frame cameras and some are even smaller than the APS size frames.

3/7/2006 1:55:36 AM

the 20D's are going to be cheap soon with the release of the 30D. However, I heard from a LOT of people that the price difference between the 350D and the 20D is too big, and the 20D is hardly worth it. LOTS of complaints about overall quality with the 20D. Hopefully that'll be fixed with the 30D.

3/7/2006 1:57:37 AM

are you serious? i've heard nothing but good things about the 20D... especially with its low noise at high ISO's. i know 2 people who have it... its a great camera. and yeah the 20D is gonna go down pretty far in price and i hear that the 30D is not going to come out nearly as expensive as the 20D did. I personally think that with the 20D there, the XT is a bit overpriced. but it is atleast coming down in price now.

btw to stay on track... Zip... i hope you are taking some awesome pictures and yes the D50 has that 1.5x magnification factor so your 18-55 is a bit closer to a 28-80.... they make specialty lenses that are like 12 and such that give you much more wide angle... made for digital... but those cost duckets for real.

[Edited on March 7, 2006 at 2:05 AM. Reason : and a real gap is that between the D50 and the D70s]

3/7/2006 2:05:01 AM

extreme wide angle lenses and long/fast zooms or telephotos are MAD money.


that is why I am sticking with prime lenses until I can afford some long L glass.

3/7/2006 2:06:40 AM

can be worth it though

goodnight all

3/7/2006 2:09:23 AM

Quote :

"^^^ great shots of europe, rob -- how much did the fisheye lens run you?"

about 400 on ebay

Anybody know where to get rumormill info on the "upcoming 30D"

3/7/2006 4:14:26 AM

Quote :

"1.6 magnification is ok to say though since it basically converts any lense by about 1.5. its like adding more telephoto to your picture. it would be the equiv of digital zoom except it doesn't enlarge pixels nor degrade your picture quality."

it just sucks if you like wider shots

not errybody wants some more telephoto

3/7/2006 8:31:07 AM

^^ Rob, I've seen the Canon brochure on it. It's almost just like the 20D. The frame rate has gone up a tiny bit and theres a bigger LCD, other than that its almost exactly the same except the cost.

3/7/2006 10:02:41 AM

^^^popular photography mag

[Edited on March 7, 2006 at 10:58 AM. Reason : http://www.popphoto.com/article.asp?section_id=5&article_id=1774]

3/7/2006 10:53:56 AM

Quote :

"they make specialty lenses that are like 12 and such that give you much more wide angle... made for digital... but those cost duckets for real."

and don't you wind up with the same fisheye distortion, but not the same field of view

like, if i'm gonna have that distorted a picture, i want to have as much in the shot as possible

i'll stick with using mostly my 50mm/f1.8

i'd love to get one of the 28 or 32 mms, i forget which one canon makes

3/7/2006 11:01:34 AM

the glass corrects alot of the distortion. now you won't really need to worry about that until you get to VERY wide angles.

3/7/2006 11:03:27 AM

So I am bored at work, and looking at specs for the 30D and I REALLY want one. I've got accident protection on my xt, so I can just "break it" and get 900 bucks credit for it, and then only pay about 500 bucks for a 30D (that is, if Circuit City even plans to carry the 30d).

It looks pretty impressive, and it is bigger then the 350D (almost as big as the 5D) which is good.

3/7/2006 1:07:14 PM

DAMN! Canon introduced a EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM. I so want a 30D and one of those right now.

3/7/2006 1:56:36 PM

Yeah, it is a pretty sick lens. Should be about 1200 bucks though. Kinda pricey for anything not L.

3/7/2006 2:23:30 PM

How do you know so much about this Ronny?

3/7/2006 2:24:27 PM

it's what I like to do.

And I don't even know that much. I still feel dumb reading some things about photography by professionals.

3/7/2006 2:26:13 PM

wait

why are you extoling the virtues of a "bigger" camera?

i find that with the battery pack on my 300d, its a little too big

3/7/2006 2:44:09 PM

98

3/7/2006 2:47:22 PM

99

-ZiP!-

3/7/2006 2:47:44 PM

again

why is bigger better?

3/7/2006 2:48:04 PM

its not!

[Edited on March 7, 2006 at 2:51 PM. Reason : well not when it comes to cameras at least!]

3/7/2006 2:48:56 PM