Pretty incredible stuff. What are you shooting with?

Thanks- it's a Nikon D200 and Sigma 10-20mm lens.

I've been meaning to post in here. I currently don't have access to my files but pulled a couple I like from email.

Guess it depends on how much you're going to use it with a tripod? I'm gonna attach the lense to a tripod most of the times (not gonna use that much as a "walk-around"-lense anyway), so I'm going for the 2.8 w/o IS. Guess I'm taking a trip to NY this summer - the low $ will help me getting it for ~1/2 price than it costs here in Norway

Bought this one, and it's just amazing for portraits and for shooting in poor lighting w/o flash. Since I'm using a Digital Rebel, it equals 80 mm for full frame. (50 mm, f/1.4)

If anyone is selling an entry level slr, PM me. This thread has opened my eyes to an art form which otherwise may have taken more time for my appreciatoin.

Very good points. I actually came very close to the f/4 IS with mainly my wife in mind and the weight factor, but settled on the 2.8 because I had owned it before and really miss it.

I think she is just going to need to roi...errr...bulk up.

Plus, once I end up getting the 24-70L, I doubt I'll ever get it off her XTi, it is such a sweet lens and pretty much perfect for the shooting she does for work.

the sunset tonight was pretty sweet. i wish i had been prepared to take some photos. unfortunately i mostly just got crappy snaps. here's one of the better ones:

camera is a canon 400d (same as rebel xti i believe), courtesy of poker stars.

What does your wife do for a living?

I love my 24-70. It's a little on the heavy side, but if you get the battery grip it has good balance on your body. If she's putting i on the XTi, I'd recommend getting the grip for it.

What part of the country is this? Nice shot.

I have the cheap f/1.8 version of this lens AKA "The Nifty Fifty". It was my first prime lens and it opened up my eyes to a new experience in photography. Anyone out there with a Canon SLR, if you don't have any prime lenses, I recommend you spend $70 and get the Canon 50mm f/1.8. The construction is very cheap feeling, but for $70 it takes amazing photographs and at f/1.8 you can get really nice low light photos and small depth of field shots.

Here are a couple pics I took with the Nifty Fifty... keep in mind that I don't necessarily consider these gems by any means, but they illustrate some of the potential in a $70 lens.

I don't really care for the composition, but I do like the color saturation:



I posted this one earlier in the thread, but I'll post again:







For the shallow depth of field and slight bokeh:



Very low light plus shallow depth of field:

this is in southern finland.

here's another shot. it turned out okay at low resolution but it's quite blurry in the original size. i really would have needed a tripod to get some great shots.

She is a reporter for a relatively small newspaper. Unless it is a large event, the reporters are required to provide there own photos, which works out awesome for me because she can usually get me into events.

I was actually just talking to her last night about the grip. She seems reluctant (she has reallllly small hands), but once she see's it I'm positive she'll like it.

Well, even if she doesn't make use of the extended portion of the grip, at the very least it'll provide an additional hand hold for portrait orientation and a shutter button.

Did you say that this was a point and shoot? If you get a tripod, one other thing you could do is manual bracketing. Take three or more shots at different exposures and then use software to make a composite so that you can get a greater dynamic range. You'd have to act fast if there is any wind and the clouds are moving though.

nah its a dslr.

is there software that makes doing stuff like that easy? i'm a total noob with photoshop and all that.

So bracketing should be easier. Do you have access to Photoshop? It's pretty easy to do in it.

I've never used it, but there's this: http://www.hdrsoft.com/

Otherwise, I have only used Adobe's Camera RAW software to create HDR images.

I do, though I haven't actually tried the techniques because I didn't receive the flash until this week.

Unfortunately, the 40D I received is DOA (err 99). My wife's Rebel XT had a Err 99 just after she left to go out of town. It was fixed by taking the battery out and putting it back in, though I can't even reach her to see if it is still working. That fix isn't working for the 40D.

I never thought I'd say this, but I'm seriously considering dumping all my Canon gear and moving to Nikon. I know, variance and all that. I've used Canon's for years (P&Ss at first, 350D and 40D now) and have never had a problem until the past 4 days. But having two cameras die in a 4 day period, including one that is brand new, is not a good sign.

Do you have anything invested in lenses and other accessories?

I only have cheap lenses (the kit lens, the $80 50/1.8 and a $200 28-105 zoom). The most expensive accessories/lenses I have were both bought in the past week (580 EX and 85/1.8), so I could easily return them and get a full refund. But I'm gonna try some supposed solutions when I get home. I've always been a Canon fan and, in fact, have never owned a non-Canon camera or camcorder. So I'm willing to give them a shot.

The other bummer is my road trip. I specifically planned my vacation to go down the California coast so I can take some landscape/sunset shots. But it'll be raining the rest of the week.

I got a 40D at the end of October, and it was also DOA with err 99. I ended up sending it back to Canon and aparently it had some connection that wasn't soldered. Quality control FTW. Needless to say I was a little frustrated when it didn't work out of the box. Now that I have it back functioning, I absolutely love the camera.

I updated the firmware, I tried every combination of battery pack and lens that I had. Still have the Err 99 problem. I'm going to be returning the camera to Amazon tomorrow.

I recommend Nikon. Canon has the lead in sensor technology and some exotic lenses, but I'd take Nikon's overall quality and ergonomic advantadge at the non-pro levels (seriously, the D200 makes the D30 feel like junk, and I've found that to be the case in the near pro range since the film days).

When it comes to Canon or Nikon, you can't really go wrong. Your recommendation above does not touch on Gus' issue with the Canon. He got a dud. I have been following Canon's cameras for a while, and I haven't heard a lot of this going around with the 40d. If you like Canon, get another 40d. If you are looking for a switch, switching won't address quality control or variance in getting a dud, but it's important that you hold and operate the Nikon before you buy it, because how it feels may be a deal-breaker for you.

Not sure if this is the place to ask, but i have a question about printing pictures. I just recently got the Kodak Z712 IS, a very nice Mega Zoom Digital Camera. Thus i am going to be taking a lot more pictures and i plan on printing some. About how often/how many pictures do i have to print to make it worth it for me to get my own printer as opposed to using Walmart/Target/Some online place? I've seen digital prints for as low as .06 per print, which seems crazy cheap especially considering now you don't have to worry about bad pictures. If you guys recommend getting my own printer, what are some good options? Do i need a Kodak printer?