SLR photography

[Banshee]

I've decided to go back to film to learn SLR photography.

I've been researching some and will probably go with the Canon Rebel Ti www.canoneos.com

I'm looking for suggestions on lenses, film, etc.

Any good review/help sites?

[Dakota]

Why not snag a used EOS D30? Then you'll have the best of both worlds at well under $1,000.

As for review sites for analog cameras, I Googled
this (http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=35mm+camera+review) and it looks like there some good stuff there.

Also, if you insist on using film, I'd consider a used camera. KEH is supposed to be awesome with used stuff. Several of the other sites: B&H, etc also deal in used equipment.

When it comes to lenses, the first thing to consider is your budget, then make your choices from there.

[Indy]

Originally posted by Dakota
Why not snag a used EOS D30? Then you'll have the best of both worlds at well under $1,000.

As for review sites for analog cameras, I Googled
this (http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=35mm+camera+review) and it looks like there some good stuff there.

Also, if you insist on using film, I'd consider a used camera. KEH is supposed to be awesome with used stuff. Several of the other sites: B&H, etc also deal in used equipment.

When it comes to lenses, the first thing to consider is your budget, then make your choices from there.

I tell you what, the camera I used when I first got into photography was the Pentax K1000....great little manual SLR camera that took some really nice pictures. I took this picture about 15 years ago with it when I was stationed out at Patuxent River, MD...this picture is overlooking the St. Mary's river right at sunset...

http://mywebpages.comcast.net/indyost/sunset.jpg

[Banshee]

Originally posted by Dakota
Why not snag a used EOS D30? Then you'll have the best of both worlds at well under $1,000.
.

I'd love to go digital over film, still too much $$ though

I found a pretty nice deal on ebay. Rebel Ti + Sigma 28-80mm Lens and a Sigma 70-300mm Lens for $380

[Dakota]

That's not a bad deal. Then at least — when you can afford it — when you get a dSLR, you have two lenses to start! ;)

[Banshee]

Any recommendations for film scanners?

[Dakota]

I have the HP S20 and it does an awesome job. I have not used any others.

[Banshee]

Originally posted by Dakota
I have the HP S20 and it does an awesome job. I have not used any others.

Oh really? I was just looking at that one.

Have any samples?

I would love to get the Nikon 8000 but it's $2500 :p

[Dakota]

Yup. That Nikon is sweet. AT that price you could have a 10D and some toys to go with it. Here are some samples from my S20:

The first photo is scanned from a 3x5 photo. The others are all scanned from slides except for the last one which was scanned from film. Obviously these are not full size as the scanner scans at a max of 2400dpi which equates to 3000x2000 sized photos. Let me know if you have any other questions on this scanner.

http://racefamily.racinglines.com/MiscPhotos/EYEOFGOD_1024x821.jpg

http://racefamily.racinglines.com/MiscPhotos/Gagliardo.jpg

http://racefamily.racinglines.com/MiscPhotos/PEBBLE%20BEACH%20DRIFTWOOD_postprocessed.jpg

http://racefamily.racinglines.com/MiscPhotos/SAN%20LORENZO%20SUNSET.jpg

http://racefamily.racinglines.com/MiscPhotos/SANTACRUZGREY_800x640.jpg

http://racefamily.racinglines.com/MiscPhotos/THECARTWHEEL_800x640.jpg

http://racefamily.racinglines.com/MiscPhotos/grist_mill.jpg

NOTE: Photos edited out to preserve bandwidth. Click on links to see photos.

[Banshee]

Very nice. A bit grainy but I can deal with that.

[Dakota]

Yup. That's the drawback to most film scanners. With a little creative post-processing however, most of that will go away and produce an excellent 8x10.

[Banshee]

Which do you think is better/would give me better results...

Scanning the actual photos on a flatbed or scanning the negs with the film scanner?

The photos will be resized down to 600xwhatever for use on my site.

[Dakota]

Always scan the negs if you can. Scanning a photo is like making a copy of a copy. It'll work okay and I've made some awesome scans off of photos, but I prefer to scan the original neg/slide. BTW: The HP S20 does awesome on scanning photos too.

[Dakota]

BTW: I have an Epson 1650 flatbed scanner too. It does slides and film, though I have never used it for that.

[Banshee]

I finally made the purchase woo

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2933583416

I also researched some other film scanners and decided to go with the Minolta Scan Dual III http://www.ephotozine.com/equipment/tests/testdetail.cfm?test_id=167

[Dakota]

Congrats Banshee!! Looks like a sweet film setup. BTW: I also have that Sigma 70-300. Pretty good little lens. A little slow on the focusing, but it produces some sharp pics.

That scanner looks awesome! 2800 dpi!! Ought to produce some sharp digi-pics and USB2 also.

Hope to see some pics soon here.

[Banshee]

Yeah, I know the lenses aren't the best but I thought they would be ok to start out with for an SLR n00b ;)

I can't wait to test this thing out over at Cedar Point.

[Banshee]

Well, I changed my mind again. :p

I decided to just go for it and get the best

Nikon Coolscan IV ED
http://www.nikonusa.com/usa_product/product.jsp?cat=7&grp=701&productNr=9236

That Digital ICE3 is pretty damn amazing

[Dakota]

Dang! Now you're very close to have been able to acquire a used D60. Back when the guys shot film at the race tracks, most of them used the Nikon scanners. They are very nice. I'm looking forward to seeing some shots from that setup. Very good choices there.

[Banshee]

Originally posted by Dakota
Dang! Now you're very close to have been able to acquire a used D60.


Heh I dunno about that, like the camera, I found some good deals on ebay. No way i'm paying full retail price.

[Dakota]

Originally posted by Banshee
Heh I dunno about that, like the camera, I found some good deals on ebay. No way i'm paying full retail price.

D60's can be had now for about $1100-$1200 in excellent condition all day long. The price has dipped now closer to $1100, but I have still seen some $1200 buys.

[Banshee]

Are lens hoods really necessary?

[Dakota]

Originally posted by Banshee
Are lens hoods really necessary?

IMO, yes. They help protect the oh-so-precious surface of your front lens element and also help prevent lens flare. I use them on all my lenses, unless using the built-in flash, which is rare.

[Banshee]

Alright, guess i'll use 'em. I got my stuff today.

Just waiting for my 15 rolls of Kodak High Definiton film so I can start shooting :D

Ebay is great, $90 worth of film for $30 shipped.

[Dakota]

Originally posted by Banshee
Alright, guess i'll use 'em. I got my stuff today.

Just waiting for my 15 rolls of Kodak High Definiton film so I can start shooting :D

Ebay is great, $90 worth of film for $30 shipped.

You get the scanner yet? I'm really looking forward to seeing some shots from this setup. You ended up with a super-fine film setup!!

[Banshee]

Originally posted by Dakota
You get the scanner yet? I'm really looking forward to seeing some shots from this setup. You ended up with a super-fine film setup!!

I'll have it in a few days.

I went back with the Minolta though. After all the extras I was buying, it ended up being the better choice (cheaper, heh).

[Dakota]

Ahhh okay. I think the Minolta will do a fine job. It does cost a few pennies for two N's, and I, O and a K.

[poptom]

I recommend spending the extra bucks for Digital Ice.

A high resolution scan will show up more tiny scratches and dust specks than you would ever want to deal with.

[Banshee]

Well, it's a tough choice.

I found a refurb Nikon Coolscan IV ED for $399 but the IV ED is two years old.

Nikon - 3.6 dynamic range
Minolta - 4.8 dynamic range

Nikon - 12 bits A/D Conversion:
Minolta - 16 bits A/D Conversion

Nikon - 2,900 dpi
Minolta - 2,820 dpi

Nikon - ICE, ROC, GEM
Minolta - none

Nikon - $400 (refurb)
Minolta - $300 (new)

Though it seems that the Nikon has better image quality and less grain.

[YARDofSTUF]

What does SLR stand for :)

[poptom]

Originally posted by YARDofSTUF
What does SLR stand for :)
Single lens reflex.

When you look in the viewfinder, you are actually looking through the lens itself so you can acurately compose your picture.

[Banshee]

Looking for a good every day lens. Would this be a good choice? http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2937573845&category=4687

[Dakota]

Yes. The 28-80/90 lenses are pretty much stock lenses. This is the updated model so the USM is silent and fast. Once you get stuck on Canon glass, it's hard to settle for anything less.

The next best bang for the buck if you want to kick things up a notch is to get the 28-135IS USM lens. That's what I have for my base lens and it's pretty sweet. Substantially more money however.

This 28-80 would be my first choice if I did not have the 28-135. It's an excellent lens.

[poptom]

I'm not familiar with this particular lens but 28-80 is a really useful focal range. :nod:

[Banshee]

Does IS actually make a difference and is it worth the extra money?

[Dakota]

Yes it does make a difference. It can save you about a full stop. I have not tested it to its limits fully, but I was doing full night shots with a monopod at Christmas last year and had very few tossers due to camera shake. I was shooting both lights and a live Nativity scene...Well hey! Those should still be online somewhere...Let's see...

Ahh yeah, here they are! (http://racefamily.racinglines.com/D60/ChristmasLights2002/index.htm)

[poptom]

OK. I'll be the adversary here and argue in favor of the 28-80 for your applications.

1. It is much smaller.
2. It is much lighter.
3. It is far less complicated mechanically and optically.

28-80 will probably cover about everything you want to shoot and you may rarely feel the need for 135.

Image stabilization would be great for long lenses but it sounds to me like overkill for a short tele.

The best way to judge what will work best for you is to visit a camera store and try looking through the different lenses. If you develop a good rapport with a store you should be able to borrow a lens for a week or a weekend.

Whatever you get, it's up to you to create great images and you will learn to work within the constraints of the equipment you have.

[Banshee]

It's 28-105, not 80 ;)

What is the difference between these lenses and which is the better choice?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2937573845&category=4687

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2937144256&category=4687

It looks like the less expensive one is the newest version according to Canon's site (www.canoneos.com).

[Dakota]

Well.....

1. It is much smaller.

It is somewhat smaller, but the 135 is not a large lens.

2. It is much lighter.

See answer to #1. Both are fairly small lenses, The 28-80 weighs abour .5 lbs and the 135 weighs in at whopping (grin) 1.1 lbs. I have the 135 on my large 10D and I can shoot that all day no problem.

3. It is far less complicated mechanically and optically.

Mechanically yes. Optically no. It does have the gyro in it and yeah, I guess someday it will eventually wear out. You can get a 7 year extended warranty for $19.95.

The biggest difference here is in cost. You can get a 28-80 for $90 where the 28-135 is about $385. There is where the largest difference is.

One of the biggest questions is will you use the IS feature much? Some people leave it on all the time. That's just silly as most of the time it is not needed. However, it is nice to have when it's needed and can save a shot. Especially when using a film camera because you cannot change your ISO speed on the fly like with a digital camera. However, that little gyro and extra 55mm of lens is kinda pricey.

[Dakota]

And, I just bought the 28-80 USM II for my wife's D60. With shipping, UV filter and hood it's $132.80. :)

[Banshee]

I bought the 28-135 IS

I plan on doing a lot of night shots so that's what I decided to go with

[poptom]

Nice.

I presume you have a fast normal lens as well.