Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Foo Off-Topic chit chat with no general subject.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 08-15-12, 11:48 PM   #1
patentcad
Peloton Dog
Thread Starter
 
patentcad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Chester, NY
Bikes: 2013 Scott Foil, 2014 Scott Addict, 2008 Cervelo P3 (TT), 2015 Scott Scale 700SL MTB
Posts: 59,433
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Pcad upgrades his DSLR

It has been a few years. This will be my third, all Canons. I am going from my Rebel XTi to a Rebel T3i. More megapixels (18 vs. 10) but the features I really like are the extended ISO range (for dim light shooting) and the flip around LCD screen on the back. I use this for work every day, so we get our money's worth out of them.



Also bought the updated Speedlite 430EX II flash:



I have long lenses, just gotta add a 10-20mm wide angle zoom and I'm all set.
patentcad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-12, 12:00 AM   #2
Allen
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 4,752
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Very nice.
Allen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-12, 12:09 AM   #3
patentcad
Peloton Dog
Thread Starter
 
patentcad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Chester, NY
Bikes: 2013 Scott Foil, 2014 Scott Addict, 2008 Cervelo P3 (TT), 2015 Scott Scale 700SL MTB
Posts: 59,433
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Just added this, Canon 10-22mm wide angle zoom (that's a 1.6 factor, so it's really like a 16-35mm w.a. zoom).



My older gear becomes a nice Xmas bonus for my assistant, I gave him my old camera, this will be a significant upgrade for him too.
patentcad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-12, 12:13 AM   #4
patentcad
Peloton Dog
Thread Starter
 
patentcad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Chester, NY
Bikes: 2013 Scott Foil, 2014 Scott Addict, 2008 Cervelo P3 (TT), 2015 Scott Scale 700SL MTB
Posts: 59,433
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Yeah, the Rebel stuff is one click shy of pro gear, but it really does 98% of what the $2000+ camera bodies do. You get WAY better shots out of digital SLRs than you do from point and shoots, iPhone cameras, etc. The bounce flash capabilities of the shoe mounted units is HUGE in many situations.

We shoot product stuff all day long here for drawing reference, we also do actual photography that winds up being submitted to the US Patent & TM Office. We've been using digital photography here every day for well over ten years, I bought a very early digital camera, it was always so usable for our needs here. I think my first digital camera was a Kodak, c. 1999 or something and maybe it was 2-3 mega pixels or something like that.

I've been into photography for 40 years, I started back in high school with a Konica 35 mm SLR, I used to soup my own film and do b&w darkroom work in my bathroom when I was 14 years old. So I use this gear for work, but I also love to take pictures. Now with digital and Photoshop it's a whole new world. I don't miss the smell of photo lab chemicals or film or any of that crap at all. This is SO much better.

Film has superior dynamic range, but that's more of an issue for landscape photographers, and the hard core pros and hobbists I know have workarounds for all that now. A friend of mine who is a nationally known landscape photographer has pretty much given up on the large format Hasselblads and view cameras in favor of a Canon EOS 5D Mark III 22 megapixel full frame DSLR. He's out in the field all the time, so it really has lightened up his load compared to all the gear he used to schlep around up and down mountains and through the woods and jungles around the world.

Last edited by patentcad; 08-16-12 at 12:18 AM.
patentcad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-12, 12:32 AM   #5
spock
Peripheral Visionary
 
spock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Jax, FL
Bikes:
Posts: 1,158
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
^
Only problem with digital is that it doesn't look like film and it can't be done in photoshop (not even close). Other than that it's alright I guess. It sure is convenient.
spock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-12, 12:58 AM   #6
patentcad
Peloton Dog
Thread Starter
 
patentcad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Chester, NY
Bikes: 2013 Scott Foil, 2014 Scott Addict, 2008 Cervelo P3 (TT), 2015 Scott Scale 700SL MTB
Posts: 59,433
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by spock View Post
^
Only problem with digital is that it doesn't look like film and it can't be done in photoshop (not even close). Other than that it's alright I guess. It sure is convenient.
I really have no idea what this even means except for VERY esoteric concerns. I've been shooting film and then digital every day professionally for 20 years, and I don't get your meaning. If you're talking dynamic exposure range, maybe. That impacts VERY little photography. Regardless, film is done. When the hardest core pro landscape photo guy I know is going digital, the fat lady has sung.
patentcad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-12, 06:08 AM   #7
patentcad
Peloton Dog
Thread Starter
 
patentcad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Chester, NY
Bikes: 2013 Scott Foil, 2014 Scott Addict, 2008 Cervelo P3 (TT), 2015 Scott Scale 700SL MTB
Posts: 59,433
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
So I've basically bought a new digital SLR every 5 years or so for a decade. This is the third round. Each one has been a significant improvement in capabilities and features. All EOS, I've been a Canon guy for over 30 years.

I'll have the standard 18-55mm zoom, the 10-22mm zoom (multiply all focal lengths by 1.6 because of the chip this camera uses, those two zooms are effectively 28m-85mm and 16mm - 35 mm zooms) and a 28-200mm zoom (Canon no longer makes that, great lens) and a 75-300 mm zoom (effectively a super telephoto zoom, 120mm- 480mm) plus a shoe mounted flash in the 430EX. That's a useful flash unit, not quite what you'd use for shooting weddings or as a pro photo journalist, but way better than the built in flash and good for my needs, gives me some bounce flash capability.
patentcad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-12, 06:23 AM   #8
chris.....
Banned.
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Illinois
Bikes: Cannondale Caad4, Schwinn moab
Posts: 2
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by patentcad View Post
So I've basically bought a new digital SLR every 5 years or so for a decade. This is the third round. Each one has been a significant improvement in capabilities and features. All EOS, I've been a Canon guy for over 30 years.

I'll have the standard 18-55mm zoom, the 10-22mm zoom (multiply all focal lengths by 1.6 because of the chip this camera uses, those two zooms are effectively 28m-85mm and 16mm - 35 mm zooms) and a 28-200mm zoom (Canon no longer makes that, great lens) and a 75-300 mm zoom (effectively a super telephoto zoom, 120mm- 480mm) plus a shoe mounted flash in the 430EX. That's a useful flash unit, not quite what you'd use for shooting weddings or as a pro photo journalist, but way better than the built in flash and good for my needs, gives me some bounce flash capability.
I've been a Canon guy since 1979 when I started working for them as a camera repair technician in London. My first DSLR was a 30D I now have a 50D. My next upgrade will be a full frame. As far as not being as good as film, that's like using down tube shifters.
chris..... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-12, 06:29 AM   #9
patentcad
Peloton Dog
Thread Starter
 
patentcad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Chester, NY
Bikes: 2013 Scott Foil, 2014 Scott Addict, 2008 Cervelo P3 (TT), 2015 Scott Scale 700SL MTB
Posts: 59,433
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
I'm still waiting for some real clarification on this 'not as good as film' comment. Honestly, digital seems superior to film in most respects, you do give up exposure latitude, and of course to really match the resolution of a Hasselblad, I'm not sure how many megapixels you might need, more than 20 I'd think. But at some point that becomes less relevant than things like digital noise, etc. Suffice it to say that 18 mp is more resolution than I'll ever require for my needs/wants.

I'll do some research on resolution, curious how many megapixels would equal a view camera. 50? 100? You'd need a lotta pixels for that.
patentcad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-12, 06:30 AM   #10
patentcad
Peloton Dog
Thread Starter
 
patentcad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Chester, NY
Bikes: 2013 Scott Foil, 2014 Scott Addict, 2008 Cervelo P3 (TT), 2015 Scott Scale 700SL MTB
Posts: 59,433
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Here is Wikipedia's take on film vs. digital.
patentcad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-12, 06:33 AM   #11
patentcad
Peloton Dog
Thread Starter
 
patentcad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Chester, NY
Bikes: 2013 Scott Foil, 2014 Scott Addict, 2008 Cervelo P3 (TT), 2015 Scott Scale 700SL MTB
Posts: 59,433
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
It appears that to match 35mm film resolution requires 5mp-16 mp depending on film speed, but larger formats would require 50-200 mp for equivalency. I do believe companies like Hasselblad make digital backs that have very high resolution chips that attempt to give you that many pixels.
patentcad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-12, 07:23 AM   #12
chris.....
Banned.
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Illinois
Bikes: Cannondale Caad4, Schwinn moab
Posts: 2
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by patentcad View Post
It appears that to match 35mm film resolution requires 5mp-16 mp depending on film speed, but larger formats would require 50-200 mp for equivalency. I do believe companies like Hasselblad make digital backs that have very high resolution chips that attempt to give you that many pixels.
I think people like to romanticize about the past. I can't see any practical reason to use film. I work in commercial printing, so in the past we would scan transparencies or prints. I do not miss those days.
chris..... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-12, 07:27 AM   #13
spock
Peripheral Visionary
 
spock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Jax, FL
Bikes:
Posts: 1,158
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by patentcad View Post
I'm still waiting for some real clarification on this 'not as good as film' comment. Honestly, digital seems superior to film in most respects, you do give up exposure latitude, and of course to really match the resolution of a Hasselblad, I'm not sure how many megapixels you might need, more than 20 I'd think. But at some point that becomes less relevant than things like digital noise, etc. Suffice it to say that 18 mp is more resolution than I'll ever require for my needs/wants.

I'll do some research on resolution, curious how many megapixels would equal a view camera. 50? 100? You'd need a lotta pixels for that.
It's the tones, color detail, DOF, I don't know how to explain it really, but it's there... Here is some YT vids that compare some of it....



(There is higher video detail to choose from on youtube)

But really, whatever rocks your boat, man... To say that film is over tho', is complete nonsense... It's never gonna be as popular as it was in the 90's, although it has regained some of the fans in the past few years... Truth is, they are two completely different mediums and processes and digital will never fully replace film and what it does.

Last edited by spock; 08-16-12 at 07:41 AM.
spock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-12, 07:47 AM   #14
Allen
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 4,752
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by patentcad View Post
It appears that to match 35mm film resolution requires 5mp-16 mp depending on film speed, but larger formats would require 50-200 mp for equivalency. I do believe companies like Hasselblad make digital backs that have very high resolution chips that attempt to give you that many pixels.
The back on my Hasselblad is a 50mp.
I still think I get better image quality from film however.
Allen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-12, 07:55 AM   #15
chris.....
Banned.
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Illinois
Bikes: Cannondale Caad4, Schwinn moab
Posts: 2
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by spock View Post
It's the tones, color detail, DOF, I don't know how to explain it really, but it's there... Here is some YT vids that compare some of it....



(There is higher video detail to choose from on youtube)

But really, whatever rocks your boat, man... To say that film is over tho', is complete nonsense... It's never gonna be as popular as it was in the 90's, although it has regained some of the fans in the past few years... Truth is, they are two completely different mediums and processes and digital will never fully replace film and what it does.
That guy belongs in Portlandia
chris..... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-12, 08:16 AM   #16
patentcad
Peloton Dog
Thread Starter
 
patentcad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Chester, NY
Bikes: 2013 Scott Foil, 2014 Scott Addict, 2008 Cervelo P3 (TT), 2015 Scott Scale 700SL MTB
Posts: 59,433
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Analog film hippies.
patentcad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-12, 08:25 AM   #17
chris.....
Banned.
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Illinois
Bikes: Cannondale Caad4, Schwinn moab
Posts: 2
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by patentcad View Post
Analog film hippies.
Probably wears skinny jaens and rides a fixie
chris..... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-12, 08:43 AM   #18
Allen
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 4,752
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris..... View Post
I think people like to romanticize about the past. I can't see any practical reason to use film. I work in commercial printing, so in the past we would scan transparencies or prints. I do not miss those days.
It depends on the purpose of the final print.
For instance, I could not have made this print without film, it's four feet tall and printed on tissue paper.

Sorry about the glare, this print is behind glass.
Allen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-12, 08:45 AM   #19
patentcad
Peloton Dog
Thread Starter
 
patentcad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Chester, NY
Bikes: 2013 Scott Foil, 2014 Scott Addict, 2008 Cervelo P3 (TT), 2015 Scott Scale 700SL MTB
Posts: 59,433
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
I'm sure there are applications where film is superior. They are unusual. They are rare. They will not be enough to forstall the eventual extinction of the analog photographic process. I could be wrong about that of course, but I'd be surprised if that stuff is still around in ten years.
patentcad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-12, 08:50 AM   #20
Shimagnolo
Senior Member
 
Shimagnolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Zang's Spur, CO
Bikes:
Posts: 7,433
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 58 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by patentcad View Post
I'm sure there are applications where film is superior. They are unusual. They are rare. They will not be enough to forstall the eventual extinction of the analog photographic process.
There used to be an analog photographic process?
Shimagnolo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-12, 08:53 AM   #21
nondes 
Northern Rider
 
nondes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Bikes: 1999 Litespeed Tuscany 105, 2007 Marin Palisades Trail, 2006 Burley Duet tandem
Posts: 426
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Telephoto is so much easier on modern DSLRs with the crop factor, high ISO (for higher shutter speeds) and image stabilization - an advantatge of my Pentax is that the IS is right there in the body of the camera and not dependent on the lens.
nondes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-12, 08:54 AM   #22
Allen
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 4,752
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by patentcad View Post
I'm sure there are applications where film is superior. They are unusual. They are rare. They will not be enough to forstall the eventual extinction of the analog photographic process. I could be wrong about that of course, but I'd be surprised if that stuff is still around in ten years.
Film will be around for a very long time.
It is regulated to the fine art niche though. Alternative process printing has made a huge resurgence in recent years for instance.
Allen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-12, 08:55 AM   #23
himespau 
Senior Member
 
himespau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Louisville, KY
Bikes:
Posts: 9,422
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 25 Post(s)
I definitely feel I got better pictures with $40 my point and shoot film camera with decent film (say, fuji 1600 ISO) than I get with my moderately decent point and shoot digital camera (one of those 18X zoom 10 MP panasonic cameras that make a big deal about their Leica lenses) in anything but the brightest of outdoor light (zoom excluded of course). But that's a different level than SLR/dSLR business.
himespau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-12, 08:57 AM   #24
himespau 
Senior Member
 
himespau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Louisville, KY
Bikes:
Posts: 9,422
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 25 Post(s)
Oh and as a scientist who uses x-ray film at least weekly to measure chemiluminesence and 32P radiation, some film will be around for a long time even if it's just our odd pursuits.
himespau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-12, 09:02 AM   #25
Allen
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 4,752
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by nondes View Post
Telephoto is so much easier on modern DSLRs with the crop factor, high ISO (for higher shutter speeds) and image stabilization - an advantatge of my Pentax is that the IS is right there in the body of the camera and not dependent on the lens.
Film is still faster than digital. Ilford 3200 can be pushed to 6400 or 12800 ISO for instance. Image stabilization is neither digital or analog, that's built into the lens or body and has nothing to do with image capture medium. And the crop factor is a misnomer.
Allen is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:01 AM.