General Photography Chat - Page 31

Ramsayfarian · #**601** Posted **Mar 19, 2010, 8:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by toyota74

Just say "one" has a lightroom trial and got a serial on the net
will "one" have lightroom(full version) for good or can it be
tracked by adobe??

Of course it can be tracked. However Adobe doesn't seem to bother with Lightroom. With CS4 they constantly checking serial numbers. All that happens is that you get a pop-up window saying that you're using an invalid serial # and a request to enter a correct one.

Adobe is nice enough to allow you to continue your current session, but you will be denied access next time to run CS4.

One work around is download Little Snitch and block your computer from accessing www.activate.adobe.com

sentinel · #**602** Posted **Mar 19, 2010, 8:35 PM**

Hey guys, I need some advice for a new camera purchase - I'm in the market for an 'entry-level' DSLR and have done some research so far and have narrowed it down to three seemingly excellent options. This camera will act primarily as a work-related item, for example, on Monday I will be photographing a newly completed interior space I worked on and want to have some photos of a higher quality/composition level than what I can currently do with my point-and-shoot (excellent Lumix camera as it is - I am a pretty ok photographer myself and feel I can pull off something nice with a nicer camera). This isn't to say that the camera won't be used for other cityscape/landscape/family etc. type stuff, but still primarily for work.

I've got it down to:

1.) Canon Rebel XSi, 12.2Mp (my preferred choice I guess)
2.) Nikon D3000 10.2Mp
3.) Canon Rebel XTi 10.1Mp

Any thoughts? Any advice is appeciated..

Ramsayfarian · #**603** Posted **Mar 19, 2010, 9:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sentinel

Hey guys, I need some advice for a new camera purchase - I'm in the market for an 'entry-level' DSLR and have done some research so far and have narrowed it down to three seemingly excellent options. This camera will act primarily as a work-related item, for example, on Monday I will be photographing a newly completed interior space I worked on and want to have some photos of a higher quality/composition level than what I can currently do with my point-and-shoot (excellent Lumix camera as it is - I am a pretty ok photographer myself and feel I can pull off something nice with a nicer camera). This isn't to say that the camera won't be used for other cityscape/landscape/family etc. type stuff, but still primarily for work.

I've got it down to:

1.) Canon Rebel XSi, 12.2Mp (my preferred choice I guess)
2.) Nikon D3000 10.2Mp
3.) Canon Rebel XTi 10.1Mp

Any thoughts? Any advice is appeciated..

If you think you might want to record video with your DSLR and you have an extra $200-$300, I'd bump things up a bit and get Canon's Ti1 or their new Ti2. Both will do Hi-def video. I'm not sure if Nikon has an entry level DSLR that has video.

ue · #**604** Posted **Mar 19, 2010, 9:40 PM**

^d5000.

sentinel · #**605** Posted **Mar 19, 2010, 10:34 PM**

^^Video isn't a concern at the time being, nor do I expect or need a camera for such - still photography will be the primary purpose.

Ramsayfarian · #**606** Posted **Mar 20, 2010, 4:40 AM**

I am so happy for RAW. Took close to a hundred shots outside today with by WB sent to incandescent. I'm also happy that LR let's you fix the WB on one photo and apply it to the rest them.

Aleks · #**607** Posted **Mar 20, 2010, 4:51 AM**

i LOVE raw! best thing everrrr!

except it takes like 306564687 gigabytes each picture!

as for the adobe thing, yes they can track it. lightroom 3 is a beta version so it's free, and better than lightroom 2 in my opinion.

Aleks · #**608** Posted **Mar 21, 2010, 10:10 AM**

this is off topic, but since we talked about it here before, wth!

well, i finally got my computer to run faster! by tweaking graphic settings, minimizing the number of startup programs, updating A LOT, moving things, and who knows what, i finally got it! before my computer used to run at 50-60% ram WITHOUT any apps open (lightroom, photoshop, sketchup, brower, etc...) and i got it down to 30-35% (again w/o any visible apps open). plus upgrading software, graphic stuff and other things it makes it run even faster!

my programs run much much faster now and i can transfer my photos in seconds of 2 minutes instead of 3-6.

Ramsayfarian · #**609** Posted **Mar 21, 2010, 3:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aleks

i LOVE raw! best thing everrrr!

except it takes like 306564687 gigabytes each picture!

as for the adobe thing, yes they can track it. lightroom 3 is a beta version so it's free, and better than lightroom 2 in my opinion.

I'm a big fan of RAW. LR 3 is a lot better than 2, I think I'll buy 3 when it is released.

Doady · #**610** Posted **Mar 21, 2010, 5:09 PM**

Even with RAW I try to set the proper white balance. It just looks better. No matter how much I adjust I can never get white balance exactly right in RAW. And of course, Adobe Camera RAW produces slightly different colours than JPEG engine to begin with, even with the exact same white balance setting.

The main problem though is the softness with certain camera models. With my current Olympus C7070 is not so much a problem, but with my older C5060 the Adobe RAW conversion has extremely subpar detail. It is appallingly bad. These cameras are very slow also, and RAW takes 6-7 seconds to save to the memory card.

Despite these problem, I have been shooting RAW a lot more lately. IMO, the main strength of shooting RAW is to correct chromatic aberrations and preserve highlight detail. But these are not always an issue.

Even though I am using RAW more often, I don't think I will try out Lightroom. I am used to the adjustment layers, and don't really care about speed considering the low volume of photos I process.

Ramsayfarian · #**611** Posted **Mar 21, 2010, 6:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doady

Even with RAW I try to set the proper white balance. It just looks better. No matter how much I adjust I can never get white balance exactly right in RAW. And of course, Adobe Camera RAW produces slightly different colours than JPEG engine to begin with, even with the exact same white balance setting.

The main problem though is the softness with certain camera models. With my current Olympus C7070 is not so much a problem, but with my older C5060 the Adobe RAW conversion has extremely subpar detail. It is appallingly bad. These cameras are very slow also, and RAW takes 6-7 seconds to save to the memory card.

Despite these problem, I have been shooting RAW a lot more lately. IMO, the main strength of shooting RAW is to correct chromatic aberrations and preserve highlight detail. But these are not always an issue.

Even though I am using RAW more often, I don't think I will try out Lightroom. I am used to the adjustment layers, and don't really care about speed considering the low volume of photos I process.

I don't anyone who doesn't try to for the correct WB whilst shooting. There are time though,and I just did it, where one is in a rush and forgets to check the WB and shoots a ton of shots before they realize their mistake. It's nice to have the ability to save those shots.

Six - seven seconds is pretty slow, have you tried a faster memory card?

toyota74 · #**612** Posted **Mar 21, 2010, 8:51 PM**

I need a wide angle lense....I bought the Nikkor 18-200mm
and it has served me well being out and about.BUT ive have
being losing out on some good shots because of the distortion
at 18mm and usually have to go up to 25mm which means I lose
the extra foreground and sky in some shots...Id like something
between 10 and 20+mm,I have a d70...any ideas people.

Aleks · #**613** Posted **Mar 21, 2010, 9:32 PM**

Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 AMAZING lens. sharp, focuses fast, great for dim lighting (i imagine ireland has very dim days), great contrast and colors. Negatives, not much zoom range and can be between 600 and 700 US dollars. But even with the very limited zoom, it's still pretty awesome. Besides, when you get a wide angle, what's the point of zoom? The whole point is to get... a wide shot. I just wish they made a 10mm f/2.8 prime (that's not a fish eye). Would it even be possible to get as fast as 1.4 on a wide angle?

The sigma has more range, but it's also slower. Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6. The positives, more range, and cheaper (around 450 US dollars).

everyone keeps telling me to keep my 18-105vr because it's such a great lens (for the price), but idk. ever since i got the tokina i noticed that with the 18-105 pictures look very... dull! the contrast and colors don't come out as vibrant. plus that (extremely) annoying distortion. I'll wait to get the Tamron...

ue · #**614** Posted **Mar 21, 2010, 9:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by toyota74

I need a wide angle lense....I bought the Nikkor 18-200mm
and it has served me well being out and about.BUT ive have
being losing out on some good shots because of the distortion
at 18mm and usually have to go up to 25mm which means I lose
the extra foreground and sky in some shots...Id like something
between 10 and 20+mm,I have a d70...any ideas people.

sigma 10-20mm

toyota74 · #**615** Posted **Mar 21, 2010, 10:06 PM**

You imagined right Alex....seems like the 11-16 may be better
and suited to architecture .....for me the wide angle will be for landscape
and I think I will need that little bit of zoom....Ill suss out the Sigma
for now ...Ta@Alex and EE.

BTW. IS there tiny distortion in these lenses??

toyota74 · #**616** Posted **Mar 21, 2010, 11:25 PM**

Read some reviews on both seems Tokina is winning.

Ramsayfarian · #**617** Posted **Mar 22, 2010, 12:52 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by toyota74

Read some reviews on both seems Tokina is winning.

Have you checked dpreview.com ? If they've reviewed those lenses, they'll have sample pics.

toyota74 · #**618** Posted **Mar 22, 2010, 4:53 PM**

Had a look at dpreview and linked on to Lenstip..
tokina is slightly ahead of sigma plus I also
looked to Ken Rockwell...Nikkor and Tamron
are ruled out for the mo........still not sure

HomeInMyShoes · #**619** Posted **Mar 22, 2010, 5:13 PM**

^The Tokina 12-24mm has served me well. Not as a good an F-stop as on the 11-16mm as mentioned, but a bit more range on it.

toyota74 · #**620** Posted **Mar 22, 2010, 6:09 PM**

@HIMS....if you were given the choice which
would you pick...