General Photography Chat

[Aleks]

any lens is good for city photography and landscapes! some are just better than others. and they fit different situations better.

i would stick with the stock lens (18-55mm). you could get a 3rd brand lens, but they lose value pretty quickly and can be defective more often. the stock lens is cheap, good for the camera, and you can sell it for a good price when you want to upgrade, or keep it as a backup lens.

[ue]

Originally Posted by CRE8IVEDESTRUCTION

Quick question. I was thinking of purchasing a Canon T2i pretty soon. Im going to mainly do city photography and landscapes. What lenses should I use and if so which do you recommend? Thanks guys!

18-55 and 55-250 for Canon is what I recommend (same for Nikon, except it's 55-200 for Nikon). You'll probably eventually want something wider than 18mm though. The Tokina 11-16 is good, and I believe they make it for Canon too (why wouldn't they?).

You're going to love the wide angle of 20mm and less for architecture shots. Most photos it seems of buildings are wide angle. Why are they good? Well, they get to include the entire building (especially tall ones) into one shot up close. This up closeness and including the whole building forms wide angle which gives a nice artistic warp and curve to things (this is dramatified with a fisheye).

But a tele (like the 55-250) has it's charms. Like in dramatic views (where wide angle can also be nice) you can get close in on details of mountains, maybe a river, different buildings close together in a skyline, etc. It's also great for doing candid street photography of people on the street and perfect for getting little urban details like repetition of windows, contrast of facades, textures like wood or concrete or grass, and it's great for getting shallow depth of field (where the thing that you are focusing most on is the only thing actually in focus...be it a face, nose, tiny slice of sidewalk, one lampost of 10 in repeating pattern, etc.).

[Doady]

If you use a full frame body, the Canon TSE 24mm is great for photos for buildings: wide angle and removes a lot of distortion.

BTW, I have a question about Lightroom: how is sharpening in Lightroom compared to the Smart Sharpen filter? I personally love Smart Sharpening, it is world of difference compared to Unsharp Mask and High Pass. But I never tried Lightroom's sharpening yet.

[Ayreonaut]

A couple days ago I bought a Sigma 10-20. I'm pretty happy with it so far, similar build quality to the Canon 10-22, but $300 less.

[Aleks]

i dont use smart sharp. it seems like it'd be more accurate. maybe someone with more photoshop experience like iamhydrogen or someformofhuman know. lightroom sharpening is enough for me, plus clarity adds more sharpness.

as for fullframe, i wish! a d700 would be wonderful!

[vid]

ROLLOVER PARTY!

[HomeInMyShoes]

^Way to go vid.

Agreed with Aleks. A D700 would be nice.

[sentinel]

Hey all - so, based on my post from a few weeks ago, I ended up buying the Canon Rebel XS - it's the most basic body that Canon currently offers, but for a beginner like myself I think it's perfect. I've already had some great experiences with it and am learning quite a bit already about compositions, lighting, etc. My question is about a specific EF lens that I'm thinking of purchasing: the EF 17-40mm f/4L USM has been recommended to me by a few other photog friends - would this be appropriate for both 1.) interior, wide-angled shots, primarily for interior arch. projects, and 2.) landscape photos? I'm hoping that this lens can accomplish both tasks, instead of having to purchase two separate ones.

Please feel free to suggest other comparable lenses that would potentially be a better option - thanks!

[Doady]

Originally Posted by sentinel

Hey all - so, based on my post from a few weeks ago, I ended up buying the Canon Rebel XS - it's the most basic body that Canon currently offers, but for a beginner like myself I think it's perfect. I've already had some great experiences with it and am learning quite a bit already about compositions, lighting, etc. My question is about a specific EF lens that I'm thinking of purchasing: the EF 17-40mm f/4L USM has been recommended to me by a few other photog friends - would this be appropriate for both 1.) interior, wide-angled shots, primarily for interior arch. projects, and 2.) landscape photos? I'm hoping that this lens can accomplish both tasks, instead of having to purchase two separate ones.

Please feel free to suggest other comparable lenses that would potentially be a better option - thanks!

17-40 isn't nearly wide enough for interior architecture unless you use a full frame body. On the Rebel, that's only like 26mm equivalent at wide angle. You will want something like 20mm. It is kind of a waste too, buying a specialty ultra-wide angle lens and not being able to take advantage of its ultra-wide capability. Perhaps you should stick with EF-S.

Just to give an idea, here are shots I took recently at 19mm:

[M II A II R II K]

• Video Link

[ue]

We really need to give the 3d thing a rest. There's even a google streetview thing for this. Really, shoving it down consumers throats won't work.

[Ramsayfarian]

Free webanair on CS5:
http://www.photoshopuser.com/cs5/live

[Doady]

Originally Posted by edmontonenthusiast

We really need to give the 3d thing a rest. There's even a google streetview thing for this. Really, shoving it down consumers throats won't work.

I think it kind of cool but personally I will try to master the 2D first before think about moving to 3D...

BTW, anyone use their own naming convention for files? I ask because I notice vid's names are not very descriptive... I just use default names from my camera which are PMDDXXXX, where

P is fixed
M is month 1-9, A-C
DD is day 01-30
XXXX is the sequence, 0001-9999

It is a pretty sensible and informative file naming convention and makes it easy and to find photos and it is not necessarry to rename. So I name my backup DVDs in a similar way. Unless of course you never backup your files, which I think you should.

[Aleks]

hmm... what software do you guys use for printing?

before today i had used the default windows photo viewer, but blacks came out... wayyy to black! and the picture wasn't as sharp as i wanted it to be.

then i tried printing from lightroom, and once again, it failed. the picture came out wayyy to dull. i tried playing around with the settings, but all i did was waste my ink.

then today i decided to try something different. i dont use the windows photo viewer, but picassa's instead (although i still use the windows folders, which for some odd reason i find easier to understand than picassa, but thats another topic), so i decided to print out of picassa instead. i will say, that picassa by far has offered the best results for me. pictures come out the same way they look on the screen. they're sharp in places that need to be sharp, and not in places that dont. colors are perfect, not to dull, not too saturated, not overexposed, not too much contrast, just the way i wanted them to be.

so what software do you guys print out of?

[HomeInMyShoes]

^None. As you said, it's a waste of ink. Calibrating images to your monitor is one thing, calibrating that back into the printer through another program is a whole lot of frustration in my opinion. Glad Picassa worked pretty well for you.

I take it to the camera store I trust if it's important. I tried Snapfish the other day which is an HP thing through flickr and it was reasonable. Seemed better than the quick-stop-Walmarty places, but probably not as good as the store you trust in my opinion. I'd need to really give it some struggle with images to give them a fair opinion. Overall it seemed the oranges were a little too orange. Maybe an overall Kodak look instead of Fuji.

I also don't print much. If I really liked holding images, I'd probably go back to the old Minolta X-700 and use film.

[flar]

I can't speak to the printing issue, except to say I've never managed to get prints I'm happy with. Generally, I rarely print anything except little 4x6's from Shoppers Drug Mart.


**************



On a different topic: Does anyone have experience with the Nikon 16-85 VR lens?

[Doady]

Originally Posted by Aleks

hmm... what software do you guys use for printing?

before today i had used the default windows photo viewer, but blacks came out... wayyy to black! and the picture wasn't as sharp as i wanted it to be.

then i tried printing from lightroom, and once again, it failed. the picture came out wayyy to dull. i tried playing around with the settings, but all i did was waste my ink.

then today i decided to try something different. i dont use the windows photo viewer, but picassa's instead (although i still use the windows folders, which for some odd reason i find easier to understand than picassa, but thats another topic), so i decided to print out of picassa instead. i will say, that picassa by far has offered the best results for me. pictures come out the same way they look on the screen. they're sharp in places that need to be sharp, and not in places that dont. colors are perfect, not to dull, not too saturated, not overexposed, not too much contrast, just the way i wanted them to be.

so what software do you guys print out of?

What printer do you use? What is your monitor? Is your monitor calibrated? Or at least have proper gamma and colour settings?

It doesn't matter what software you use. All that matters is the printer driver settings, such as the correct paper. The paper settings should match the actual paper you use, as it sets the ICC profile that used to the correct one.

Alternatively, if you use Lightroom or Photoshop and check "Photoshop Manages Colours" in the print settings which would disable the printer driver colour settings and allow you to select an ICC profile that is specific to the paper and the printer that you use. I can't stress this enough: ICC profiles are specific to the printer AND to the paper.

For example, when I printed on Ilford Galerie Pearl paper on my Canon ip4600, I had to go to the Ilford website and download the ICC profile for Ilford Galerie Pearl for the Canon ip4600 and use that ICC profile when printing in Photoshop, letting Photoshop manage colours, which allowed me to get accurate prints with that paper on my printer.

If you have a monitor calibration device, you can use it to create your own ICC profiles for any paper and printer combination, instead relying on ICC profiles from printer or paper manufacturers.

Hope this helps.

[SouthByMidwest]

This is kind of out of left field considering we're talking printers, but I'm looking at making the jump to DSLR. Looking for something entry level, maybe $550-ish (USD) tops. I have a little experience with my sister's Canon EOS Rebel XSi and I like the feel of it - took to it right away. Been rocking a Nikon Coolpix L4 with which I post photos here, and I'm getting a bit better and it's getting a bit tired.

I do not need the newest, cutting edge equipment. Sure as hell don't have it now. I don't even know what having the newest, cutting edge equipment is like. I just need to get a "real" camera for once.

[ue]

I've already discussed this with you, but...

You could probably get a good deal on the Nikon D40 for around 300-350 somewhere with the 18-55 lens, then spend an additional 200-250 on the Nikkor 55-200mm VR telephoto lens and hit around your limit.

Adorama has it for 379. http://www.adorama.com/Als/ProductPa...%20382219.html

There's also the Nikon D60, Nikon D3000 (newer, updated D40/60 essentially) and the Canon XS and XSi.

[hammersklavier]

So I overloaded my SD card last weekend and fried it and/or my old camera. Ergo no new pictures on it...I got a new camera!

I ain't got the cash to go around buying four-figure equipment like water, so I settled for a decent upgrade in the $100-$150 price range, and got a nice black Fuji to work with for a whiles. Given what I could coax out of that Argus thing, I think it'll be a good relationship, heh.


My late Argus


My Fuji