Hey thats an awesome picture man, that is close to the port market where they sell those crazy big artic crabs eh???? ...haha I remember that when I backpacked in seattle back in 2005... cool picture again and great color mood.
HP5, om-1 35-70mm falmouth, cornwall. Just playing with curves in PS. not finished peices too much post processing for me, might post up the ones I consider right.
I still cant tell if these are good shots though, been staring at them for a while.
Hey thats an awesome picture man, that is close to the port market where they sell those crazy big artic crabs eh???? ...haha I remember that when I backpacked in seattle back in 2005... cool picture again and great color mood.
Yep that's Pike Place Market. Picked up a ND filter the other day so I'm very interested in daytime long exposure photography, I went there because of amount of people that are always there; did a series of these over the weekend, having a lot of fun with them.
took mao out for a walk today using a d80, he loved it you should have seen his little wikkle face.
Also another from my hp5 from the river forth.
I have come to the conculsion that dslrs, are possibly the biggest cock up in camera tech ever, I mean WTF no aperture or shutter speed ring. There are buttons everywhere and they are so uncomfortable to handle as they are really front heavy. And how can my om1 which is 40 years old have a better viewfinder than modern cameras and wheres the split focusing!!?? ARgh the list goes on- foucsing is another horrible feeling with a dslr. Sorry rant over.
Chrizz: I've installed a third party split image focus screen, was about $15 shipped from china(you can pay $100+ for them as well) on my Canon 350D, also have a cheap($13?) OM adapter, so i can use a wide range of Zuiko lenses on it too! Dont think you can get glass-less adapters for nikon, but with Canon and lumix/olympus 4/3rds Zuiko lenses work quite well!
There is a huge selection of manual focus nikkor and nikon compatible AI-S lenses you could use on your N80, that will give you that smooth focus feeling, and real apeture ring. Modern AF lenses simply are no designed for manual focus, so they always feel pretty lacking.
I'm not really sure what you mean by front heavy, as that is virtually always going to depend on the lens, not body. I have a bunch of OM-1, 2, 10 and 20s here and while they feel great, I dont think you can beat the comfort level of a nice big right hand grip, especially for extended shooting, these old OMs really are far from what i would call "ergonomic". Tho the light weight of these OMs makes them far more desirable to actually use than anything from Nikon, Canon, Minolta etc from the time period. I have a Nikon F3 that is sitting on the shelf, fantastic camera that will take a beating, but even an OM-10 can match it feature wise and is much more comfortable/sane to use.
Chrizz: I've installed a third party split image focus screen, was about $15 shipped from china(you can pay $100+ for them as well) on my Canon 350D, also have a cheap($13?) OM adapter, so i can use a wide range of Zuiko lenses on it too! Dont think you can get glass-less adapters for nikon, but with Canon and lumix/olympus 4/3rds Zuiko lenses work quite well!
There is a huge selection of manual focus nikkor and nikon compatible AI-S lenses you could use on your N80, that will give you that smooth focus feeling, and real apeture ring. Modern AF lenses simply are no designed for manual focus, so they always feel pretty lacking.
I'm not really sure what you mean by front heavy, as that is virtually always going to depend on the lens, not body. I have a bunch of OM-1, 2, 10 and 20s here and while they feel great, I dont think you can beat the comfort level of a nice big right hand grip, especially for extended shooting, these old OMs really are far from what i would call "ergonomic". Tho the light weight of these OMs makes them far more desirable to actually use than anything from Nikon, Canon, Minolta etc from the time period. I have a Nikon F3 that is sitting on the shelf, fantastic camera that will take a beating, but even an OM-10 can match it feature wise and is much more comfortable/sane to use.
The thing that gets me is, why when split focusing was around 40 years ago cant they put it in as standard now? I doesnt make any sense what so ever. I was only using stock college d80's so the lens is gona be cheap and poor (18-70 i believe, and slow at 3.5-4.5). I get what your saying that modern lenses arent designed for manual focus, the entire camera feels more like a fashion accessory than a usable piece of equipment. The amount of buttons! I had a mid-life critise just wondering where the focus point button was (turns out you have to use the af button and with another hand use the d-pad, which is no mean feat).
I have never found extended use of the om-1 for long periods (3 hours plus) a chore I find them much more comfortable than dslrs I have held, if you look at where your fore finger goes for the shutter your thumb is automaticly inplace for the lever and cocking/firing. And your left hand acts as the cradle/ lens control, but with a dslr that would be impossible as its too heavy. the om1 has a pretty orgasmic cock/shutter mechanism to it you have to admit (maybe thats why I can hold it for any length of time:)).
Maybe the front heaviness came from the camera itself, which is darned heavy , and while the om1 isnt erganomic (to be fair no slr is particularly erganomic- I mean on dslrs half to time you smear your screen with nose juice) I have yet to find a viewfinder I like as much, or shutter noise.
I was real tempted to buy a canon 30d and get a om adapter but since I started deving my own c-41 and b/w the 'making' as it were of photography has grabed hold of me.
Talking of that, heres a shot form my travels xa2 kodak gold 400 deved at home
First off let say this, I've been using film and digital SLRs for about the same time(which is not long, and i am no expert) however, I feel this gives me a pretty balanced perspective on the pros/cons. I buy/sell film equipment on ebay in my spare time, so i've been forced to do quite a bit of research on various camera systems, and have no less than 25 film camera bodies in my basement currently.
Ok so, #1, focus screens have in actuality have probably been around 50+ years, BUT phasing away from them really has nothing to do with *digital* SLRs, infact it is autofocus SLRs, a trend that started roughly 25 years ago, the advent of which began the process of phasing out focus screens entirely. Its hard to find many cameras developed post 1985-1988(depending on the company, when they started their AF systems) or so that came with a focus screen(plenty of cameras were still in production then, however they were developed in late 70s-early 80s). So the notion that removing focus screens is a fairly new concept, just isn't really correct.
Basically the advent of auto focus lenses rendered made focus screens much less important, atleast to the average consumer. AF cameras with better electronic systems brought an ease of use that really widened the SLR market, not longer was this a hobby only for professionals and enthusiasts. IMO, this is generally a good thing, as lot of positives came out from it. And with the professional systems, there was still an option for swapable focus screens, much like today. I'm not trying to make the "AF is best, always!" argument here, just writing a little on the reasons the industry has gone this way, in response to you asking why(even thought i'm sure you understand and were asking rhetorically).
Now, down to comfort. The Olympus OM bodies are comfortable, and great cameras. I never meant to suggest that they were uncomfortable or unusable, however I feel a nice dSLR is *more comfortable* and more ergonomic. Lets take an OM-1 for instance. This is how I feel:
Griping the camera with your right hand is sort of akward, your fingers end up resting on the rewind knob and there really just isnt enough room to get your entire hand in here. I end up holding the camera with my fingertips more than anything. The shutter is entirely vertical, i would prefer it to be angle slightly out towards the front, more like a dSLR, this is more comfortable IMO. The cocking lever is great. Holding with your left hand is nice, there is actually quite a bit more room for the left hand on a OM body than my 350D, however my 350D is pretty cramped in general. With both systems you end up craddeling the lens with your left hand anyway, but an OM body(and most MF film bodies) are nice in that you really can get a better left hand grip on the body, if you so desire.
When it comes to lenses, first off, i think you had a better lens on you D80 you would start to get a better appreciation for AF lenses, a basic kit lens is the worst thing you can do to a dSLR system. Even something like a cheap 50mm 1.8, on a digital SLR, is an EXCELLENT pairing. I love my canon 50mm 1.8, it was dirt cheap, its fast and tack sharp. I dont really like zooms much, as they are all slow and soft, unless you're a millionare and can afford the nice ones. As far as MF lenses are concerned, I love playing with them, but I would never take them out with me somewhere when I absolutely NEED to get a shot. Now this comes down to quite a few things;
A. I am not very experienced with MF lenses, I know how to use them but am far from a expert.
B. I feel that using an MF lens is overall much slower and less accurate process, part of this is due to my crappy viewfinder on the 350D, but the majority of it is simply a limitation of the technology, and the fact that a computer can focus better/faster than I can. Overall, a MF lens on a OM body trumps a MF lens on a digital body, but a AF lens on a digital body trumps all.
MF on 350D < MF on OM < AF on 350D
Despite this, I still recognize how great it feels, and I often yearn to be able to just throw a digital sensor into an old OM body. I think that would be very fun.
When it comes to shutter speeds/aperture ring, i think the "wheel" system on modern dSLRs makes a lot of sense. The cheaper bodies that have only one "wheel" sort of suck(like my 350D, i've used a 20D with its two wheel system and its muchhhh better". However when you consider that these cameras are accurate to 1/3rd stops on the aperture and generally 3x + as many available shutter speeds, having these functions set purely mechanical would make for very bulky tools, with speeds to close together it would be damn near impossible to set it to a specific setting.
Now, when it comes to viewfinders, I pretty much agree whole-heartedly with you. To get a decent viewfinder on a dSLR body you need to spend big bucks. The viewfinder on my 350 SUCKS. It is terrible, it is small as hell and very hard to use with MF lenses even with a split image focus screen installed. I'm not entirely sure what the deal with this is, but can only speculate that it has to do with the increasingly smaller dSLR camera sizes, and the crop factor(the physical portion that is visible through the lens has decreased). Much worse than with dSLRs, when shopping for a compact P&S cameras nowadays it is virtually impossible to even find one with a viewfinder! Which really sucks when you're out on a bright day and only have a crappy LCD screen.
At the end of the day, to me, dSLRs just have far too many advantages, sure there are some aspects that seem worse, but overall the technological advantages makes a far superior tool. I love the way old film cameras "feel" and I love playing around with them, but I would simply never use them for serious work.
EQ sorry for my post ending up sounding like- film is way better than digital thats deffiantly not where I wanted it to go, I mean if I was hardcore I would develop prints and post them to everyone instead of scanning them in. And plus life is too short for those kinda arguments. One of the reasons I like to play around with film is that I only do it as a passing hobby so time and acuracy isnt a factor for me, which of course for professional work those are some of the most important.
hmm I didnt really tihnk about my post, as I do have a few film slrs that use AF one of which I can remember is the f-501, not that I tend to use it very much.
I have my d.zuiko 50mm 1.8 which is never off my om as I love it so, and at £10 I didnt go wrong.
Ahh I didnt factor in the extra shutter speeds which granted would either end up with a ring the size of a plate or you would have to magnify it, along with apertures. I think it was just the feel of the d80, I havent used many dslrs so to judge them off one of the rare times is abit unfair.
Do the canon systems differ as I was looking at the 30d's as a entrance to digital, mainly because the 20d dosent have spot metering. I believe the 20d has centre weighted, would the extra 8% metering make a big difference? bearing in mind I would have this camera for a long time (till it falls apart- hurray for student budget!)
I was just going to buy a body and get a attachment for my old lenses, would it be worth shelling out for a canon dslr compatible 50mm prime?
yearn to be able to just throw a digital sensor into an old OM body
I have been wanted this ever since the e-p1. Have it exactly the same expect put a right hand grip on it, and just a screen on the back.
Any way to keeep things on subject, a shot from the nottinghill carnival, cross processed, using xa2.- not cleaned up, I am terrible at keeps my negs dust free when they are dryinh.
Yeah i didn't mean to imply that you were... implying, that film was better than digital or anything like that, I just got a little carried away nerding out about this stuff!
When it comes to Canon dSLRs this is what you really need to know:
XXXD Series is the entry level, small uncomfortable bodies, not very good controls(all using the "single wheel" system) the only real difference between say a 350d and a 450d is the 450d does video, more mega-pixels and a bit higher iso, ergonomics and features are pretty similar, image quality is pretty similar.
XXD Series is the mid range, these are bulkier, heavier and quite a bit more comfortable. Nicer viewfinders, but really not much image quality improvement over the XXXD line, you'll get faster shutter speeds and better high ISO performance with these. I've used a 20D that i really liked, very comfortable, I believe the only real difference between the 20 and 30 is upping the MP again and probably a little better ISO yet again. I'm not certain about the metering, I don't get too caught up in metering modes as on digital it is very easy to see when your exposure is incorrect, and make the appropriate adjustments. Much more of an issue on film when you don't get instant feedback =P. I think the 50D and later models do video as well, so that would really be the only reason to consider them, i would probably opt for a 450D if video was a must, as its much more affordable.
XD Line, Pro stuff, 1D is insanely huge and bad-ass, the viewfinder is amazing, it also costs about the same as a used car. I think the 5D is a little smaller and compact, the biggest thing with this line is that it is full frame 35mm equiv, and truly a system for professionals. Insane ISO performance etc. The 7D is sort of a weird camera, as its in-between a XD and XXD camera, its a crop camera, but has more of the professional features, its sort of a baby 5D i guess.
I would probably suggest a 20D or 30D if you really think the differences between the two are a big deal. The 20D can be very affordable used.
The canon EF 50mm 1.8 Mark II is by far the best photographic investment i have ever made, and ever will make. The build quality is horrible, and you wont use this as a MF lens(But you can buy a $13 adapter for your 50mm Zuiko if that's what you want), however this thing is just awesome. There are no words to describe what an incredible value this lens is at about $100 shipped. Funny thing actually, this is one of the few lenses that I have ever seen, the resale value is insane.... People will pay more for this lens USED then they would if they just bought a new one from B&H photo. I payed $98 shipped for mine(gray market) you can get a "US Version" for $5(if anyone cares...).... Now I've seen this lens sell used for $110-120 PLUS shipping, and virtually always sell for $80-95 plus shipping on eBay. Really the only way to get one of these cheap is to find someone selling a dusty old EOS film body that happens to have one attached, but is poorly labeled as such.
So yes, I would recommend the EF 50mm 1.8 "Nifty Fifty". Despite the poor build quality, mine looks almost exactly the same as when i got it, and I've used it by far more than any other lens.
I would also recommend the first version "Mark 1" this has a metal mount, a nicer focus ring and a real distance scale, if you care for such things. It can be had for around $150 which is still a decent value.
One thing to keep in mind with the 50mm, it acts like a 80mm on a crop dSLR body, so its a bit more of a "portrait" lens than that all-purpose 50mm of a film camera, really this can be fixed by simply backing up a bit in most case. However because of this, my 2nd most-used lens is a EF 28mm(~45mm) 2.8, which was about $175 you can also pick up a 28mm 2.8 or 3.5 zuiko for about $70 or $50 respectively if you're patient with bids on ebay.
Well, first off, I'm really no pro photographer, and on a half-crappy D3000, but I'm quite fond of how this one turned out. Directly translated from Swedish, it's called 'Winter Apple'. No idea what the english name for it is
Well, first off, I'm really no pro photographer, and on a half-crappy D3000, but I'm quite fond of how this one turned out. Directly translated from Swedish, it's called 'Winter Apple'. No idea what the english name for it is
Kwramm that collection is pretty damn cool. I find it funny how they show off captured U.S. equipment, even though those are OOOLLLDD military items. It's amazing, the amount of work they put into beautifying the country, yet their citizens can afford to use most of those amazing structures/roadways. If their leaders weren't so uptight, and power crazed, they could easily draw in tourism money.
Hey HP thanks, the colour stuff is taken on my xa2 (small but real good compact) and real cheap film, kodak 400 and kodak gold which has a crazy amount of grain I had never tested them before- mistake but then it meant I didnt have to be protective over it. I just got round to cleaning up the colour film (theres about 200 shots all in all) which I developed myself and so drying marks and dust galore!
This shot was colour but turned black and white, melbourne pancake parlour
original- http://www.flickr.com/photos/screenmagic/5110820655/in/set-72157625231832794/
Thanks! It's been definitely a strange trip, but I met really very nice people who were very interested in a glimpse at the outside world, who appeared very normal, maybe except in their real (or faked?) devotion to their leaders.
It's amazing with what dignity the people endure the hardships in this country, but it's also amazing what simple things can bring some joy to their lives.
Some pics of the local nature around here, this is like an awesome oasis in the middle of a deep forest, suddenly it just opens up and there is an apple garden and stuff there from the 16th/17th century.
Replies
My favourite shot from Frankfurt.
I still cant tell if these are good shots though, been staring at them for a while.
Yep that's Pike Place Market. Picked up a ND filter the other day so I'm very interested in daytime long exposure photography, I went there because of amount of people that are always there; did a series of these over the weekend, having a lot of fun with them.
I tried some new things, bad shops on a laptop, so i have no idea how well it looks on a screen, fuck it.
Im calling this the KillingPeople fly.
from the history museum here, thought id post these as links,
http://rensedeboer.com/material/gotgoodteeth.jpg
http://rensedeboer.com/material/skeleton.jpg
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Image taken from a bar in taiwan/taipei today, a bit drunk with nothing better to do then uploading pictures
vacation shot
and something hurtful
cheers
Also another from my hp5 from the river forth.
I have come to the conculsion that dslrs, are possibly the biggest cock up in camera tech ever, I mean WTF no aperture or shutter speed ring. There are buttons everywhere and they are so uncomfortable to handle as they are really front heavy. And how can my om1 which is 40 years old have a better viewfinder than modern cameras and wheres the split focusing!!?? ARgh the list goes on- foucsing is another horrible feeling with a dslr. Sorry rant over.
There is a huge selection of manual focus nikkor and nikon compatible AI-S lenses you could use on your N80, that will give you that smooth focus feeling, and real apeture ring. Modern AF lenses simply are no designed for manual focus, so they always feel pretty lacking.
I'm not really sure what you mean by front heavy, as that is virtually always going to depend on the lens, not body. I have a bunch of OM-1, 2, 10 and 20s here and while they feel great, I dont think you can beat the comfort level of a nice big right hand grip, especially for extended shooting, these old OMs really are far from what i would call "ergonomic". Tho the light weight of these OMs makes them far more desirable to actually use than anything from Nikon, Canon, Minolta etc from the time period. I have a Nikon F3 that is sitting on the shelf, fantastic camera that will take a beating, but even an OM-10 can match it feature wise and is much more comfortable/sane to use.
The thing that gets me is, why when split focusing was around 40 years ago cant they put it in as standard now? I doesnt make any sense what so ever. I was only using stock college d80's so the lens is gona be cheap and poor (18-70 i believe, and slow at 3.5-4.5). I get what your saying that modern lenses arent designed for manual focus, the entire camera feels more like a fashion accessory than a usable piece of equipment. The amount of buttons! I had a mid-life critise just wondering where the focus point button was (turns out you have to use the af button and with another hand use the d-pad, which is no mean feat).
I have never found extended use of the om-1 for long periods (3 hours plus) a chore I find them much more comfortable than dslrs I have held, if you look at where your fore finger goes for the shutter your thumb is automaticly inplace for the lever and cocking/firing. And your left hand acts as the cradle/ lens control, but with a dslr that would be impossible as its too heavy. the om1 has a pretty orgasmic cock/shutter mechanism to it you have to admit (maybe thats why I can hold it for any length of time:)).
Maybe the front heaviness came from the camera itself, which is darned heavy , and while the om1 isnt erganomic (to be fair no slr is particularly erganomic- I mean on dslrs half to time you smear your screen with nose juice) I have yet to find a viewfinder I like as much, or shutter noise.
I was real tempted to buy a canon 30d and get a om adapter but since I started deving my own c-41 and b/w the 'making' as it were of photography has grabed hold of me.
Talking of that, heres a shot form my travels xa2 kodak gold 400 deved at home
Ok so, #1, focus screens have in actuality have probably been around 50+ years, BUT phasing away from them really has nothing to do with *digital* SLRs, infact it is autofocus SLRs, a trend that started roughly 25 years ago, the advent of which began the process of phasing out focus screens entirely. Its hard to find many cameras developed post 1985-1988(depending on the company, when they started their AF systems) or so that came with a focus screen(plenty of cameras were still in production then, however they were developed in late 70s-early 80s). So the notion that removing focus screens is a fairly new concept, just isn't really correct.
Basically the advent of auto focus lenses rendered made focus screens much less important, atleast to the average consumer. AF cameras with better electronic systems brought an ease of use that really widened the SLR market, not longer was this a hobby only for professionals and enthusiasts. IMO, this is generally a good thing, as lot of positives came out from it. And with the professional systems, there was still an option for swapable focus screens, much like today. I'm not trying to make the "AF is best, always!" argument here, just writing a little on the reasons the industry has gone this way, in response to you asking why(even thought i'm sure you understand and were asking rhetorically).
Now, down to comfort. The Olympus OM bodies are comfortable, and great cameras. I never meant to suggest that they were uncomfortable or unusable, however I feel a nice dSLR is *more comfortable* and more ergonomic. Lets take an OM-1 for instance. This is how I feel:
Griping the camera with your right hand is sort of akward, your fingers end up resting on the rewind knob and there really just isnt enough room to get your entire hand in here. I end up holding the camera with my fingertips more than anything. The shutter is entirely vertical, i would prefer it to be angle slightly out towards the front, more like a dSLR, this is more comfortable IMO. The cocking lever is great. Holding with your left hand is nice, there is actually quite a bit more room for the left hand on a OM body than my 350D, however my 350D is pretty cramped in general. With both systems you end up craddeling the lens with your left hand anyway, but an OM body(and most MF film bodies) are nice in that you really can get a better left hand grip on the body, if you so desire.
When it comes to lenses, first off, i think you had a better lens on you D80 you would start to get a better appreciation for AF lenses, a basic kit lens is the worst thing you can do to a dSLR system. Even something like a cheap 50mm 1.8, on a digital SLR, is an EXCELLENT pairing. I love my canon 50mm 1.8, it was dirt cheap, its fast and tack sharp. I dont really like zooms much, as they are all slow and soft, unless you're a millionare and can afford the nice ones. As far as MF lenses are concerned, I love playing with them, but I would never take them out with me somewhere when I absolutely NEED to get a shot. Now this comes down to quite a few things;
A. I am not very experienced with MF lenses, I know how to use them but am far from a expert.
B. I feel that using an MF lens is overall much slower and less accurate process, part of this is due to my crappy viewfinder on the 350D, but the majority of it is simply a limitation of the technology, and the fact that a computer can focus better/faster than I can. Overall, a MF lens on a OM body trumps a MF lens on a digital body, but a AF lens on a digital body trumps all.
MF on 350D < MF on OM < AF on 350D
Despite this, I still recognize how great it feels, and I often yearn to be able to just throw a digital sensor into an old OM body. I think that would be very fun.
When it comes to shutter speeds/aperture ring, i think the "wheel" system on modern dSLRs makes a lot of sense. The cheaper bodies that have only one "wheel" sort of suck(like my 350D, i've used a 20D with its two wheel system and its muchhhh better". However when you consider that these cameras are accurate to 1/3rd stops on the aperture and generally 3x + as many available shutter speeds, having these functions set purely mechanical would make for very bulky tools, with speeds to close together it would be damn near impossible to set it to a specific setting.
Now, when it comes to viewfinders, I pretty much agree whole-heartedly with you. To get a decent viewfinder on a dSLR body you need to spend big bucks. The viewfinder on my 350 SUCKS. It is terrible, it is small as hell and very hard to use with MF lenses even with a split image focus screen installed. I'm not entirely sure what the deal with this is, but can only speculate that it has to do with the increasingly smaller dSLR camera sizes, and the crop factor(the physical portion that is visible through the lens has decreased). Much worse than with dSLRs, when shopping for a compact P&S cameras nowadays it is virtually impossible to even find one with a viewfinder! Which really sucks when you're out on a bright day and only have a crappy LCD screen.
At the end of the day, to me, dSLRs just have far too many advantages, sure there are some aspects that seem worse, but overall the technological advantages makes a far superior tool. I love the way old film cameras "feel" and I love playing around with them, but I would simply never use them for serious work.
Sorry for TL;DR
hmm I didnt really tihnk about my post, as I do have a few film slrs that use AF one of which I can remember is the f-501, not that I tend to use it very much.
I have my d.zuiko 50mm 1.8 which is never off my om as I love it so, and at £10 I didnt go wrong.
Ahh I didnt factor in the extra shutter speeds which granted would either end up with a ring the size of a plate or you would have to magnify it, along with apertures. I think it was just the feel of the d80, I havent used many dslrs so to judge them off one of the rare times is abit unfair.
Do the canon systems differ as I was looking at the 30d's as a entrance to digital, mainly because the 20d dosent have spot metering. I believe the 20d has centre weighted, would the extra 8% metering make a big difference? bearing in mind I would have this camera for a long time (till it falls apart- hurray for student budget!)
I was just going to buy a body and get a attachment for my old lenses, would it be worth shelling out for a canon dslr compatible 50mm prime?
I have been wanted this ever since the e-p1. Have it exactly the same expect put a right hand grip on it, and just a screen on the back.
Any way to keeep things on subject, a shot from the nottinghill carnival, cross processed, using xa2.- not cleaned up, I am terrible at keeps my negs dust free when they are dryinh.
When it comes to Canon dSLRs this is what you really need to know:
XXXD Series is the entry level, small uncomfortable bodies, not very good controls(all using the "single wheel" system) the only real difference between say a 350d and a 450d is the 450d does video, more mega-pixels and a bit higher iso, ergonomics and features are pretty similar, image quality is pretty similar.
XXD Series is the mid range, these are bulkier, heavier and quite a bit more comfortable. Nicer viewfinders, but really not much image quality improvement over the XXXD line, you'll get faster shutter speeds and better high ISO performance with these. I've used a 20D that i really liked, very comfortable, I believe the only real difference between the 20 and 30 is upping the MP again and probably a little better ISO yet again. I'm not certain about the metering, I don't get too caught up in metering modes as on digital it is very easy to see when your exposure is incorrect, and make the appropriate adjustments. Much more of an issue on film when you don't get instant feedback =P. I think the 50D and later models do video as well, so that would really be the only reason to consider them, i would probably opt for a 450D if video was a must, as its much more affordable.
XD Line, Pro stuff, 1D is insanely huge and bad-ass, the viewfinder is amazing, it also costs about the same as a used car. I think the 5D is a little smaller and compact, the biggest thing with this line is that it is full frame 35mm equiv, and truly a system for professionals. Insane ISO performance etc. The 7D is sort of a weird camera, as its in-between a XD and XXD camera, its a crop camera, but has more of the professional features, its sort of a baby 5D i guess.
I would probably suggest a 20D or 30D if you really think the differences between the two are a big deal. The 20D can be very affordable used.
The canon EF 50mm 1.8 Mark II is by far the best photographic investment i have ever made, and ever will make. The build quality is horrible, and you wont use this as a MF lens(But you can buy a $13 adapter for your 50mm Zuiko if that's what you want), however this thing is just awesome. There are no words to describe what an incredible value this lens is at about $100 shipped. Funny thing actually, this is one of the few lenses that I have ever seen, the resale value is insane.... People will pay more for this lens USED then they would if they just bought a new one from B&H photo. I payed $98 shipped for mine(gray market) you can get a "US Version" for $5(if anyone cares...).... Now I've seen this lens sell used for $110-120 PLUS shipping, and virtually always sell for $80-95 plus shipping on eBay. Really the only way to get one of these cheap is to find someone selling a dusty old EOS film body that happens to have one attached, but is poorly labeled as such.
So yes, I would recommend the EF 50mm 1.8 "Nifty Fifty". Despite the poor build quality, mine looks almost exactly the same as when i got it, and I've used it by far more than any other lens.
I would also recommend the first version "Mark 1" this has a metal mount, a nicer focus ring and a real distance scale, if you care for such things. It can be had for around $150 which is still a decent value.
One thing to keep in mind with the 50mm, it acts like a 80mm on a crop dSLR body, so its a bit more of a "portrait" lens than that all-purpose 50mm of a film camera, really this can be fixed by simply backing up a bit in most case. However because of this, my 2nd most-used lens is a EF 28mm(~45mm) 2.8, which was about $175 you can also pick up a 28mm 2.8 or 3.5 zuiko for about $70 or $50 respectively if you're patient with bids on ebay.
Another of my favourites would be: http://www.adamfransson.com/photo/11_8_10_012.jpg
A few more from the Roller Derby on Saturday.
2x teleconverter
1.6 Canon digital crop
=
1280mm
lololol
No, unfortunately I'm lieing. THere will be no movie.
few more
not such a good pic but its an indication of the area
Ediburgh fest, one of the many laneways.
darwin mindil beach, used my glasses as a filter came out this real nice green
And HP - good colors!
chrizz1, I'm really digging the stuff your posting, you don't see digitalized stuff everyday. The grain makes it look real, even if old.
so, moar:
This shot was colour but turned black and white, melbourne pancake parlour
original- http://www.flickr.com/photos/screenmagic/5110820655/in/set-72157625231832794/
Loving those close ups rens
Thanks! It's been definitely a strange trip, but I met really very nice people who were very interested in a glimpse at the outside world, who appeared very normal, maybe except in their real (or faked?) devotion to their leaders.
It's amazing with what dignity the people endure the hardships in this country, but it's also amazing what simple things can bring some joy to their lives.
:P
Not full res but still nice, enjoy.