Save 69% on inPixio Photo Studio 11 Ultimate (discount applied at checkout)

Activity : All Comments

Superficial

...Read More
Profile
  • I'm sure Abode will update Adobe Camera Raw (The photoshop raw plugin) for the 40D soon. Some people have said that if you install the latest ACR plugin ( http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=3822 ), it'll work with the 40D, others have said it won't so I don't know the answer there. Use the CS3 instructions even if you have CS2.

    I'm surprised it works in Lightroom but not Photoshop. This would suggest that Adobe has the technology but hasn't implemented it into Photoshop. Perhaps they are trying to force people to buy Lightroom in addition to Photoshop.
  • It's fine on my Powerbook + 30D so it should work fine with a macbook too. It's infuriatingly slow at copying the files over though (which it does instantly at the time you take, and doesn't let you take another until it's finished).

    Unless you have a specific use for it, I can't see the point. It's certainly not more convenient. As a cable release, a Macbook is quite expensive and cumbersome :o)
  • There's no way IR (which is what most cars use for the remotes) goes through the phone, it's an urban myth. Maybe if some posh cars use a different technology it might work, but I will believe it when I see it...
  • It sounds like there's definitely something wrong somewhere. I forced Aperture to run on my aging Powerbook G4 (it was below the minimum specs) and it worked OK. A bit slow, but not the extent you're describing. Your computer should whiz through it - I played with Aperture on one of the mac pros in the Apple Store (manchester) and it worked brilliantly.
  • I think perhaps that action overcomplicates things - I don't really understand what I should be doing on each of the prompts. Although... from my brief tests, it's nothing to write home about, I've been getting much better results with the smart sharpen filter.
  • I don't think you'd notice an image quality drop from the 20D --> 400D. In fact, the extra 2 MP of the 400D might help if you've got decent lenses. It's just the handling of the 400D, feels nothing like a 20D.
  • Jessops I think do price-matching on any internet deals for dSLRs. You have to print the page off and as long as it's in stock in the UK, Jessops will match it. So you may as well do that and get it from a high street shop you can return it to if there's a problem.
  • On a 30D it is simply the file number.
  • It's fantastic as a viewer and catalogue. It even makes a good stab at displaying my Canon raw files. Then I just right click and open in Photoshop and I'm there. I find it works really well, and looks good too.
  • What about with a lens cap on? Just in case there's some light making its way in through a gap/ the viewfinder.
  • The thing to bear in mind is that any anti-shake technology will reduce any blur caused by you moving the camera slightly, but it will do nothing for your subject. I.e. If the person on stage is moving (and therefore blurred), it doesn't matter about the image stabilisation. You are much better off getting a fast lens for this.

    When compared to the compact which is probably something like f/4, the f/1.8 lens will let 5 times more light in. That's the difference between a shutter speed of 1/10th of a second which would be much too slow, and 1/50th of a second which may be acceptable.

    Similarly, the camera's sensor will be several times more sensitive for a given amount of 'noise'. E.g. you compact might do ISO200 without producing a terrible image, whereas a 400D will manage ISO1600.

    So all-in-all it could really help quite a lot.
  • If you use the 400d with something like the 50mm f/1.8 lens, and use a nice high ISO I would imagine that it would take much better low-light pics than what you've got now. The problem is that you'd lose the zoom and you'd have a bigger camera to carry around, and of course the expense!
  • If you can't find one in stock in the UK, have you considered onestop-digital? I got my lens from there for 269 inc postage and it came within three days. I understand if you'd rather have the UK warranty but for the money saved I'm happy to have the extra hassle (not suggesting there will be any though - I'm very impressed with the service).
  • The viewfinder on my 300D was full of crap. After a while I never even noticed it, but anyone else who used my camera did. You can get it cleaned, but it's not particularly cheap. I would just leave it.
  • I think it must be a case of quality control with some samples great. The only 75-300 MkIII I've used is horribly soft at the long end and not much better throughout, even stopped down. Plus f/6.3 @ 300mm isn't great and can affect the AF.
  • It'll be in the custom functions section.
  • I think with the infra-red remotes you can't do bulbs. But with the wired ones you can. Make your own wired one Wink
  • Hold the phones Mable!

    My 30D was from Jessops and it only came with a continental-style (2-pin) adapter. Seeing as I have the box here too, I'll tell you exactly what the barcode says:

    1234b013aa
    CAMERA EOS 30D BODY CIG KIT GB
    W/O EW305304
    [barcode]
  • The 50mm f/1.8 is a brilliant lens and it's definitely the one I use most, because it's sharper than any other lens I have and it's good in low light. For the money it is amazing. The main problem is that on a crop body like 300/350/400/10/20/30D it's a bit too long (81mm equivalent) for a 'standard' lens.

    If you're on a budget I think it's fantastic. But think about whether you would use a 50mm prime. If not then the money might be better spent put towards a decent zoom.
  • Be careful, because I've seen a few cons on eBay - claiming to be a Canon UK outlet. The name is a variation on CanonOutletUK, and their prices are cheap. Just be wise.
  • Sometimes if the computer has changed the files in any way (resizing or even just rotating) then they won't show up. But if they're the originals in the same place, I can't think of any reason for them not to work.
  • If you've got a 350D then there's really no point in buying a 400D, the difference is minimal. And yeah, the 30D is better than the 400D for sports (or anything, really - apart from price). It's up to you whether you want to spend the money to upgrade but unless you know what you will gain, it probably isn't worth it - you'd be better spending money on other things.
  • Yeah, WPA is better. But older wifi cards don't always support it - there's one computer on my network that can't do WPA, and that means that my router needs to be set up for WEP. Silly, but that's the way it is.
  • Yeah. Clearly with good photoshop technique and using the proper tools, you will minimise any IQ loss - I was just demonstrating a point.
  • So let me get this right:

    Canon 30D (1.6 crop) + 20mm lens
    Canon 1Ds MkII (Full Frame) + 32mm lens

    Obviously these two setups would give a very similar angle of view/composition. But depth of field would be completely different (at a given aperture)?

    That's really confusing? Is this important to anyone?
  • Take an image in Photoshop. Then attack it with curves, then flatten it and then do the 'opposite' curves (taking it back to roughly where you started), and repeat several times. You'll find that soon enough your picture will degrade into a flat grey mess before too long. Similarly if you continually adjusted the WB etc.

    When people say that Lightroom is non-destructive with jpegs, they mean this. The program keeps a backup of the original file, and it only applies changes at the end, meaning that if you change the WB a hundred times, there's no greater a drop in quality than if you change it once. But there will still be a drop as the computer decides to correct something that the camera has set in stone.

    Whereas with RAW, there has been very little processing before the picture reaches your computer, so any change in the white balance will not affect the colour depth.

    I do agree though that this argument is largely irrelevant. It totally depends on the final image, and if Centurion thinks he can't tell the difference, that's all that matters.
  • I also found that OS X (Tiger) is pretty finicky about which encryption it will use. However, I have found that it works fine with 128 bit hex WEP encryption or WPA.

    With regards to wireless security, I don't see why you shouldn't have WEP encryption + MAC filtering + SSID hidden. It's a 5 minute job if you know what you're doing, and I'm completely bomb-proof now :o)

    The problems you're having with MAC filtering (Coltranekoh), you need to make sure that your computer is in the 'allow' list before turning the mac filtering on. As you have already found out, it pays to have another computer connected by a wire though.

  • Quote:But of course I'm simply interested in good meaningful visuals rather than technically excellent crap.

    To throw that back at you, with RAW you can concentrate more on taking photos, rather than spending ages getting the white balance spot on etc.

    There's just so much scope for tweaking photos with RAW that you just can't do with jpegs. Give it a try, I think you'll be surprised.
  • If you're going to Asia, I'm assuming storage space might be at a premium. Therefore I'd probably just use jpeg as it takes up a lot less space on memory cards etc.

    For times when memory is not as important, though, I would use RAW every time. That's just me though, I like to be able to fiddle with photos.
  • A few months ago it was very fashionable to slate the Canon kit lens. Now people seem to be sticking up for it. Whilst it's not completely terrible, there are many, far better lenses. It's soft at all apertures/zooms, and it's got poor contrast and it flares badly. Whereas the 50mm f/1.8 is very sharp, has good contrast etc etc. The only problem is that it's a bit long for general use.

    But yeah, buy the Canon. Later you can upgrade the lens, and you'll be laughing. There's much more lens choice for Canons (second hand etc) and more accessories. Though if you never plan on upgrading, I'd imagine that the Samsung is a better buy, purely because the lens is supposed to be a lot better.