going to crosspost this from dpreview with stuff i've learned since posting it in bold -- also sorry about repeating some of this and asking so many q's, just really want to be prepared for these trips!:

A couple months ago I purchased the following:
D700 + 14-24 f2.8 + 50 f1.4 + 70-200 f2.8 + 200-400 f4

This summer I will be traveling to Europe alone into 5 cities. These cities generally seem safe but I think walking around with lenses as big as those (not the 200-400) above and especially changing lenses will attract unwanted attention. I may be wrong -- this will be my first trip with DSLR so I'm not sure.

Either way it would be inconvenient to carry around and switch around, but on the other hand why get the good lenses if not going to use them on a big trip like this?

1) Would you suggest getting the Tamron 28-300 f3.5-6.3 lens as an all-purpose travel lens?
How about the 24-70 (and if not as a walk-around, what about in general)?
Or maybe I should bring 14-24 and get the 24-70 as well.

Ken Rockwell is quite opposed to the 24-70 (but his rationale is that 14-24 + 50 + 70-200 is superior, yet 24-70 might be best if you could only have 1). It seems that the D700s high iso performance should make the 28-300 more usable. It is a tradeoff, but being able to go sightseeing with just the camera/lens around the neck and no backpack would make things a lot easier.

Kind of not sure about this, but seems like the 24-70 would cover most shots pretty well. Could also do 28-300 w/ 50 since 50 is easy to carry. Confused now!

2) Would you suggest getting an SB800 or 900 flash? I anticipate sightseeing and taking photos during the day and hopefully relaxing at night, so will likely only have a P&S at night anyway.

Probably not since again it's a size issue and also won't know how to use it effectively.


Following the Europe trip I will be doing safaris (and other travel) in southern Africa where the Land Rovers are open and there are only rails on the sides.

3) I've been told that using a monopod + bean bag combination will be best. I anticipate getting another body for this trip and having the 200-400 on the monopod. How does that sound? Any suggestions for a good monopod/head?

I don't think a tripod will be possible because it would be so obstructive to other passengers as it's normally 2 per row.

Someone suggested getting a crop sensor camera to get more reach but I think 400 should be OK other than some birds.

4) Should I get the remote trigger for these safari shots?

Thinking yes for the 200-400 on monopod. Not sure about the handheld?

5) Should I get the battery pack for the safaris (there will be 24h electricity to recharge batteries)?

Probably unnecessary and should just have spare batteries

A few extra general questions:

6) Should I get filters (what type?) for the 50 and 70-200? I believe the 14-24 doesn't take any and the 200-400 came with one.

Circular polarizers for each? I remember Freakin suggested this a while back

7) Any advice for what to bring when traveling to clean lenses?

Just a special cloth?

8) I notice when I take 2 shots in succession one is usually much darker than the other, any idea why?

Something about bracketing which I've turned off

9) Any other advice?

How are you setting up your light meter for the first shot?


A lens hood is essential imo for your smaller walk-around lenses.

Has anyone ever tried to publish a calendar? I still need to take about 6-9 more good landscapes, but I am looking in to the whole process. I figure there should be some good software out there. But so far this is all I could find: http://www.digi-labs.net/samples.shtml

They want you to go through them for printing, but I don't like their print layout or spiral bound option. I just want to do one like you see in bookstore which folds in the middle.

suzz-- Assuming this 11x17 centerfold option isn't what you're looking for, I would suggest going to Kinkos. I had them make a calendar for me a few years back and they did a pretty decent job.

OK.

Thinking about possibly getting a D90 w/ 18-200 f3.5-5.6 and {35 f1.8 or 17-55 f.28} and bringing only these to Europe. Significant sacrifice but this will be a lot smaller and more versatile than a D700 w/ 24-70 f2.8. Any thoughts?

If you are not going to need fast shutter speeds in low lighting situations then the 18-200 would be perfect. Have you used the wide angle much? Take a day trip around your own city to experiment. I would't worry about a longer lens as you can crop when you get home.

I would personally take just the D700 + 24-70 to europe. (or D90 w/ 18-55 2.8 if you *really* don't want a bigger camera)

I would definitely not buy the 18-200 when you already have nice lenses. I am generally disappointed in the quality of this lens except at longer focal lengths (and even then only in bright light because f/5.6 is pretty awful to work with at lower ISO)

What about a 1.4 or 2x teleconverter? I haven't used them or read reviews, but I understand they are quite usable on f/2.8 lenses.

I wouldn't go the 18-200 f/3.5-5.6 route. If you want to trade image quality for less space/weight just get a Micro Four Thirds system.

Suzzer, I'm in the production of one (we expect to sell ~1500 copies). I believe the cost for a 12 month (13 pictures) 8.5x11 calendar is $6.15/copy. I'm pretty sure it's Print Pelican. I have the samples and it's just a basic calendar, just super cheap compared to other options we looked at. Another group did the same thing and used them (with good results I guess).

Thanks PO, I will check that out. All the example calendars I bought are 12x12. Which seems like a pretty natural size for a photo calendar to me. But I'm having a hard time finding someone online who will print that size.

Try this: http://www.adoramapix.com/products/calendars I've had really good results with regular prints from these guys.

That price is pretty brutal/aimed at people who just want one calendar of their own pics. I was hoping to print up 100 or so.

I'm grunching a lot of pages in between here but has anyone done any light painting photograhpy?

I've been messing around right now using amateur flashlights to draw or moving the camera manually. Also starting to collect funky light sources like sparklers and toy lightsabres; been told those work quite well (cool effect at least).There's some stuff on the internet but I think it's still a huge developing photography medium. I think there is an aspect of it that has yet to be discovered. Going to guess that some people don't/won't really like this as a form of photography. Anyways, it'd be cool if someone else could share some photos or techniques. I'll try to add some of my own stuff too.

Cheers.

Here are some of my attempts:



I enjoyed it, although it can be pretty frustrating.

What kind of light is that? I can't find anything that can make such thin lines.

Also I'm more making abstract lines and circles rather than just drawing. I just can't seem to draw anything good backwards.

flip horizontal?

It's an LED penlight

laser pointers work pretty well too.

how stupid would it be to buy a camera to force myself to become more active? IE, i want to get out more, and having a camera would be an incentive.

I am thinking of getting a T2i 550d. It would be my first camera.

You'll need to spend more than that to feel really guilty about not getting up before dawn to get the good light...

Hi guys,

I've decided to take the plunge and pick up a DSLR.

From what I've seen, Canon seems to be the best bang for the buck in the entry level range.

I'm particularly considering the Rebel Xsi (about 2 years old) because it's about 60% the price of the newer models ( T1i, T2i coming soon ). It also looks like it's starting to go on clearance in some stores for even less ($350ish).

The main changes seem to be:

XTi - ($???) - 10mp, Digic II chip, no live view, CF instead of SD memory, 2.5" screen
XSi - ($485) - 12mp, Digic III chip, 3.0" screen
T1i - ($750) - 15mp, Digic IV chip, can do video
T2i - ($799) - 18mp, Digic IV chip, even higher res video

* prices for body-only above from B&H Photo

They all seem to use the same sensor size, the same kit lens (if I go this route), etc. The biggest jump definitely seems to be from the XTi -> the XSi unless you want video.

Anything else I should consider in the $400-$600 range?

Models I've considered but chose not to go with:
Nikon D3000 - CCD censor instead of CMOS, can't use regular AF lenses
Nikon D5000 - CMOS, can't use regular AF lenses, kind of pricey compared to Canon
Sony A380 - off-brand, CCD sensor, etc
Canon 40D/50D - seems overpriced with features that I don't really need as a beginner

I think my plan is to buy an Xsi body when the T2i is released (hoping it will drop in price), and then buy a Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 lens, which I'm told has much better sharpness than the stock lens (though considerably more expensive - around $350 vs. $100)

Questions:
1. Any other models I should consider?
2. Is it worth it to upgrade the lens? Or would I only be looking at a marginal increase in quality at 3.5x the price.

Overall I think the XSi is the way to go. Unfortunately, the Canon EOS series were also by far the least comfortable for me to hold. I thought both the Nikon and Sony had a much more natural feel. In particular, I hated where the shutter button was on the Canon.

Also, the "action wheel" or whatever you want to call it that adjusts shutter speed/aperture size/etc while shooting seemed stiff on all models. Do these loosen up with time?

This is a major reason for me getting a camera as well.

If you read my research above, I think the XSi for the money is a much better deal, but the T2i certainly looks like a good camera too.

My guess is that if you have a fixed budget, you'd be better off with an XSi + good lens than the T2i + stock lens.

As someone said in a photography forum that I was reading: "You should think of the camera body as an accessory for your lenses, not the other way around"

Check this out: http://www.adorama.com/INKD40KR.html

Refurbished Nikon D40 for $400 w/ 18-55 f3.5-5.6. Ken Rockwell is big on this and he seems very pragmatic (though his opinions are questioned a lot ). These are also cheaper if you use Bing Cashback. Just use that and type in the model and you'll usually get a decent amount back (though it takes a month or so)- this one will only be $363 after cashback.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d40.htm

$363 looks way high for a 6mp camera that's around 5 years old. For about $50 more you can find brand new Rebel Xti / Xsi's if you keep an eye on the deal forums. These cameras have 2x the megapixels, self cleaning sensors, live view, etc.

I'd consider a D40 for maybe $200.

It's my opinion that buying a D90 is well worth the money for the extra options in lenses it affords you (no need for AF built in; you'll be able to buy lenses that are 30-40 years old for an eighth of the price of newer lenses that are the same quality/type). The D40 seems like a rip off when you consider that. I bought a D60 and somewhat regret it. The D90 is slightly higher priced, but for the improved ISO quality, functionality of old/used lenses, and movies, it's well worth it.

But, pro quality Canon bodies seem to be ~half the price of their Nikon equivalents. For that reason, I'd start with a Canon.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/08/te...y/08pogue.html

http://gizmodo.com/5155942/giz-expla...ys-more-better

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/mpmyth.htm