Old 08-28-2008, 02:06 PM   #26
lock4244
Senior Member
 
lock4244's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The City Below Vaughan
Posts: 1,048
Default

Yes, D300. I'd love to see them drop to what the D200 is going for (with a resultant drop in the D200). That way, I could get a second D200 or a D300 and use my current D200 as back-up. And no, it's not wasteful in the slightest. As stated earlier, I only shoot trains with manual lenses (and no zooms) dating to SLR days, and let me tell you, it's real annoying to shoot a train with a 180mm, then try and switch to my 85mm AND change the "Non-CPU Lens" in the menu to 85mm from 180mm! Anything at speed, forget it.

I like the D200, but am tempted by the D300, though the ISO 200 thing is annoying. I'm not sure why the D300 has a Lo1 setting that is supposed to be ISO 100. Why not just have an ISO 100? I'm pleased with the ISO 100 on my D200... I generally shoot F8 at 250 to 320, depending on the available light. It doesn't seem dark to me, but I don't generally shoot with others.

Wow, it's so easy to find ways to spend money, isn't it?!
__________________
Mike Lockwood

Insert witty comment here

Hot girl on girl action here!

More Pics Here

Last edited by lock4244; 08-28-2008 at 02:18 PM.
lock4244 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 02:27 PM   #27
WKUrailfan
Senior Member
 
WKUrailfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 230
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by milwman
Its coming to a store some time , a pro cam that you can shoot the news on Stills and Video to. send one guy out to do two jobs the way it will be. Joe its a good thing you know both! Look for more from Canon in the coming months, And on the shelves for Xmiss.
It's already happening. People like the Chicago Tribune and other large dailys are pulling frames from HD video, transmitting them for the print edition, and uploading the video online direct from the field. Pretty soon it won't be enough to know photo, or video, or writing well. You'll have to know all three in order to survive the changing undustry. Still documentary photography is dying. Sad times ahead.

The Canon G9 has quickly become "all the rage" among a good number of photojournalists for its compact size, hotshoe mount, and HD video capabilites, all in a pont-and-shoot. Canon has been sitting on this technology for some time.
WKUrailfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 08:56 PM   #28
Mike B.
Banned
 
Mike B.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,343
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lock4244

I like the D200, but am tempted by the D300, though the ISO 200 thing is annoying. I'm not sure why the D300 has a Lo1 setting that is supposed to be ISO 100. Why not just have an ISO 100? I'm pleased with the ISO 100 on my D200... I generally shoot F8 at 250 to 320, depending on the available light. It doesn't seem dark to me, but I don't generally shoot with others.
The base ISO of 200 is a GOOD thing. You'll get better results at ISO 200 than you will at 100. That means you can use a faster shutter speed and a smaller aperture. What's not to like? If you're worried about noise, all I can say is don't be.
Mike B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 09:35 PM   #29
lock4244
Senior Member
 
lock4244's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The City Below Vaughan
Posts: 1,048
Default

Mike B, I come from shooting K64. I suppose I have difficulty moving to a higer ISO based on what I learned when I started with film. Old habits die hard. I was lead to believe that the lower the ISO the less grain, but the tradeoff was poor ability to handle low light conditions, so I spent on good, big glass... F1.8 and F1.4, so I'd be able to shoot at 1/500th at the mid range F's (4.0, 5.6, 8.0, with 5.6 the most common). That low light was a problem was quickly evident shooting the low ISO. Now, almost two years into my DSLR experience, it seems I'm shooting at F8 most often. Then, as now, this is the lens I use most for railfanning.

At work, I shoot with a much higher ISO on my site/sales visits (not a pro photog, just sites and the equipment we maintain for reference and use in orienting our crews). I never look at them from a critial standpoint because they's not their purpose. I did several today at ISO 650, maybe I'll run a few through PS and see how they look... though I didn't use my good glass, just the 18-135AF toy.
__________________
Mike Lockwood

Insert witty comment here

Hot girl on girl action here!

More Pics Here
lock4244 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 09:52 PM   #30
Mike B.
Banned
 
Mike B.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,343
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lock4244
I was lead to believe that the lower the ISO the less grain, but the tradeoff was poor ability to handle low light conditions, so I spent on good, big glass... F1.8 and F1.4, so I'd be able to shoot at 1/500th at the mid range F's (4.0, 5.6, 8.0, with 5.6 the most common).
All of that is still true, but the new Nikon's skew it a bit. They have become so good at controlling noise, that you no longer need to shoot at ISO 100 to get excellent results. That's the whole point of these new camera, they allow you to shoot at a higher ISO without the drawback of noise.

Fast glass is still a good thing to have even with the new cameras. A photo is useless if it's not sharp and has poor colors. The bigger apertures are still going to be used to keep ISO lower since not all of the noise is gone, but a lot is compared to older cameras.

I guess what I'm saying is that you no longer have to depend on ISO 100. You now have some wiggle room without suffering with more noise.
Mike B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 09:56 PM   #31
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike B.
All of that is still true, but the new Nikon's skew it a bit.
OK, but let's not overdo the association with the manufacturer. Nikon may have recently caught up to Canon and perhaps exceeded it on the newest releases, but low noise on digital DSLRs is not new. Even my 20D has basically the same (lack of) noise at 200 as at 100. I would expect the 50D to do very well on noise.

For that matter, I have taken many shots at 400 and done no noise reduction.
__________________
My RP pix are here.
My Flickr pix are here.

My commentaries on rail pictures are in my blog.

RP Photo Albums:
Cabooses
Engine Details
Farm and Train
Plumes!
Railroad Details
Signal Details
Switchstand Shots
JRMDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 10:15 PM   #32
Mike B.
Banned
 
Mike B.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,343
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC
OK, but let's not overdo the association with the manufacturer. Nikon may have recently caught up to Canon and perhaps exceeded it on the newest releases, but low noise on digital DSLRs is not new. Even my 20D has basically the same (lack of) noise at 200 as at 100. I would expect the 50D to do very well on noise.

For that matter, I have taken many shots at 400 and done no noise reduction.
Low noise certainly is not new, but it is now to the point where the user no longer has to worry about noise until you get into a really high ISO. With my D80, I'm scared to go above ISO 250. I've gone above that without suffering too much, but I prefer to be safe. With the D700, I wouldn't have to worry about that at all. I'm sure that the noise at ISO 200 on the D700 is considerably less than it is on your 20D and my D80.

It's hard to justify spending $3,000 on a body alone, but I'm sure I'll do it.
Mike B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 11:04 PM   #33
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike B.
With my D80, I'm scared to go above ISO 250. I've gone above that without suffering too much, but I prefer to be safe.
I hear ya, and it is a matter of preference, but I get vexed sometimes by rhetorical excesses such as "scared" and "suffering." It is just a bit of noise! Apply noise reduction. I am pretty sure I have multiple shots on RP taken at ISO 800. It's not the big deal that lots of people seem to make it out to be.

My latest, no stellar shot and not even that clean necessarily after NR, was taken at 1600 on a 20D. I'm sure you will find some noise in it, but no problem for RP.
Image © Janusz Mrozek
PhotoID: 244556
Photograph © Janusz Mrozek
__________________
My RP pix are here.
My Flickr pix are here.

My commentaries on rail pictures are in my blog.

RP Photo Albums:
Cabooses
Engine Details
Farm and Train
Plumes!
Railroad Details
Signal Details
Switchstand Shots
JRMDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 11:12 PM   #34
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,800
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC

My latest, no stellar shot and not even that clean necessarily after NR, was taken at 1600 on a 20D. I'm sure you will find some noise in it, but no problem for RP.
Image © Janusz Mrozek
PhotoID: 244556
Photograph © Janusz Mrozek
But why ISO 1600 if you're shooting at 1/1600? Why not go ISO 800 at 1/800 or ISO 400 at 1/400? Did you really need to shoot 1/1600 to freeze people walking? It seems as though 1/400 would have sufficed for this scene.
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 11:26 PM   #35
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias
But why ISO 1600 if you're shooting at 1/1600? Why not go ISO 800 at 1/800 or ISO 400 at 1/400? Did you really need to shoot 1/1600 to freeze people walking? It seems as though 1/400 would have sufficed for this scene.
Because I was handheld, I was zooming to an unknown extent, and I don't have steady hands. I'd rather have some cushion in the system and get the shot sharp (can't correct otherwise) and suffer some noise (generally correctable). Also, I was doing adjustments on the fly - my goal was to shoot the train arriving, a shot that came out about as poorly as a shot can come out for having stood there for 10 minutes planning and taking test frames. So I changed settings quickly and went with the sure thing with ISO.

The point is not "should," the point is "could": the camera doesn't stop me from getting a shot I want just because I choose 1600 (even if erroneously).

BTW, I was surprised when I looked at the EXIF on the shot; I didn't realize the shutter speed had ended up so fast. Good to know for next time!
__________________
My RP pix are here.
My Flickr pix are here.

My commentaries on rail pictures are in my blog.

RP Photo Albums:
Cabooses
Engine Details
Farm and Train
Plumes!
Railroad Details
Signal Details
Switchstand Shots
JRMDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 11:31 PM   #36
milwman
I shoot what I like
 
milwman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Cedar Fall's, Iowa
Posts: 2,474
Send a message via Yahoo to milwman
Default

I was have trouble with night shots. Talking to the Canon rep about it and he ask me what are you processing the Raw in, I Photo, i say. Photo shop the next guy blurts out. Well you will get better and a lot less Noisy if you run the Canon soft ware, same if you have a Nikon you the Nikon soft ware. then photo shop it. I didn't know that. I mist it, or miss read it more likely.
__________________
Richard Scott Marsh I go by Scott long story

http://www.flickr.com/photos/22299476@N05/
milwman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2008, 01:16 AM   #37
Mike B.
Banned
 
Mike B.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,343
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC
I hear ya, and it is a matter of preference, but I get vexed sometimes by rhetorical excesses such as "scared" and "suffering." It is just a bit of noise! Apply noise reduction. I am pretty sure I have multiple shots on RP taken at ISO 800. It's not the big deal that lots of people seem to make it out to be.

My latest, no stellar shot and not even that clean necessarily after NR, was taken at 1600 on a 20D. I'm sure you will find some noise in it, but no problem for RP.
I'm scared that my shot will be ruined by noise. For me, that's not excessive. I've only tried to use NR a couple times, and both times the results were less then ideal. The only time I need to get my ISO above 250 is after the sun is down. I like to shoot the moon with a train and I've only really succeed once and I was using ISO 400. It helped that I was at a high elevation, but there was no sunlight. I don't know if I've ever shot above ISO 400.

Image ©
PhotoID:
Photograph ©
Mike B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2008, 09:53 PM   #38
khalucha
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Posts: 425
Default

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=558915

First test of a 50D from a Swedish Bird & Nature Photographer. I think after reading his review this could be a hot camera!
__________________
Kevin
Phoenix, Arizona

Webshot Photos

flickr stuff
khalucha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2008, 07:18 AM   #39
Watain
-_-
 
Watain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Hiltons, Virginia, USA
Posts: 953
Send a message via MSN to Watain
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike B.
Low noise certainly is not new, but it is now to the point where the user no longer has to worry about noise until you get into a really high ISO. With my D80, I'm scared to go above ISO 250. I've gone above that without suffering too much, but I prefer to be safe. With the D700, I wouldn't have to worry about that at all. I'm sure that the noise at ISO 200 on the D700 is considerably less than it is on your 20D and my D80.

It's hard to justify spending $3,000 on a body alone, but I'm sure I'll do it.
Thats the only thing I dislike about my D80, is the high ISO noise performance. Its not very good, even with the in camera noise reduction on. The highest ISO I have ever shot at for trains is 400. I probably wont do it again either. Maybe the D90 will have better high ISO performance, Im hoping. If I am ever in the market for another body Im going to go with the D300.
Watain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2008, 07:32 AM   #40
Mike B.
Banned
 
Mike B.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,343
Default

Why not get the D700? You'll likely never have to worry about noise again.
Mike B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2008, 07:59 AM   #41
trainboysd40
Senior Member
 
trainboysd40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Calgary, Alberta on the CP Laggan Subdivision
Posts: 2,048
Send a message via MSN to trainboysd40
Default

That comment right there is exactly why I chose Canon over Nikon. The D300 hadn't come out yet, and I'm not afraid to crank my shots to 800 ISO or even higher with a bit of NR.
__________________
got a D5 IIi and now he doesnt afread fo 12800 iSO
Youtube (Model Railway, Vlogs, Tutorials, and prototype)
My Website
Obligatory link to shots on RP, HERE
trainboysd40 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2008, 09:21 AM   #42
Watain
-_-
 
Watain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Hiltons, Virginia, USA
Posts: 953
Send a message via MSN to Watain
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike B.
Why not get the D700? You'll likely never have to worry about noise again.
Well that would be nice, except for the fact that Im a broke 19 year old college student. I am waiting on the D300 to drop down in price so we'll see... 2 Grand is a lot to pay for a camera body ,but I can imagine it would be worth it.
Watain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2008, 11:52 AM   #43
milwman
I shoot what I like
 
milwman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Cedar Fall's, Iowa
Posts: 2,474
Send a message via Yahoo to milwman
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lock4244
Mike B, I come from shooting K64. I suppose I have difficulty moving to a higer ISO based on what I learned when I started with film. Old habits die hard.
Don't mind me but i am butting in, you don't have K 64 in the camera. You may surprise your self with what your camera can do. Just for the hell of it go shoot at 400 iso for part of a day?
__________________
Richard Scott Marsh I go by Scott long story

http://www.flickr.com/photos/22299476@N05/
milwman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2008, 06:18 PM   #44
trainboysd40
Senior Member
 
trainboysd40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Calgary, Alberta on the CP Laggan Subdivision
Posts: 2,048
Send a message via MSN to trainboysd40
Default

If I may add something to that, I came straight from shooting 100 ISO film. I never saw a shutter speed faster than 1/500th, and when I hit that I stopped down to 1/250! I was usually found at F/2.8, 1/250 though..and rarely overexposed.
__________________
got a D5 IIi and now he doesnt afread fo 12800 iSO
Youtube (Model Railway, Vlogs, Tutorials, and prototype)
My Website
Obligatory link to shots on RP, HERE
trainboysd40 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 05:40 PM   #45
lock4244
Senior Member
 
lock4244's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The City Below Vaughan
Posts: 1,048
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by milwman
Don't mind me but i am butting in, you don't have K 64 in the camera. You may surprise your self with what your camera can do. Just for the hell of it go shoot at 400 iso for part of a day?
Hey, cut me some slack, I was shooting at ISO160 and ISO200 this past weekend... even took some shots at F11. Some indoor shots (available light, no flash) at ISO640 show some grain

I have never had a need to shoot at ISO400. When you have a $1000, F1.4 piece of glass attached to your camera, you shouldn't need to shoot at ISO400 on a sunny day with ample, good light. My 85mm at F11, with an of ISO200 is telling me 1/200th of a second. At F8, I was looking at 1/400th or 1/500th. Since I shoot at 10mph train often, this is more that acceptable at F11, and the F8 @ 500 is perfect.

I spent $$$ on faster lenses to counter the pitfalls of K64, so it seems shooting at ISO400 when I don't need to is wasteful. I have played around with shooting non-railroad subjects at a higher ISO, but I really don't like the results.
__________________
Mike Lockwood

Insert witty comment here

Hot girl on girl action here!

More Pics Here
lock4244 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 05:49 PM   #46
Darryl Rule
Senior Member
 
Darryl Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 260
Default

Noise is the sole reason I got my 1DMKIII for sports photos. I shot a game last Friday night between ISO 2000 and 3200, and there was hardly any noise in the photos. Pretty nice option to have.
__________________
View my Railpictures Photos
Darryl Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 05:58 PM   #47
Walter S
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 1,023
Send a message via AIM to Walter S
Default

Darryl do you post your sport shots anywhere? I would be interested in seeing the results.
Walter S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 06:13 PM   #48
Darryl Rule
Senior Member
 
Darryl Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 260
Default

Walter, I posted a few a couple of weeks back on miranda, I will try to find the thread. I will also try to post a few from this past Friday night. I am shooting the race in Dover in a few weeks so we will see how that goes
__________________
View my Railpictures Photos
Darryl Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 06:43 PM   #49
Walter S
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 1,023
Send a message via AIM to Walter S
Default

Dover should be nice, looks like a fairly easy track to shoot at. Do you have credentials or just shooting from tha stands?
Walter S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2008, 06:44 PM   #50
Darryl Rule
Senior Member
 
Darryl Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 260
Default

No I have credentials, usually sit on the stand coming off turn 2 right under the bridge.
__________________
View my Railpictures Photos
Darryl Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

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 On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:19 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.