Old 11-07-2008, 04:00 AM   #26
asis80
Senior Member
 
asis80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: PA
Posts: 1,458
Send a message via AIM to asis80
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRoadForeman
the 40D will not make you a better photographer.

-- Kevin

I don't think that's going to be any issue

Ben

PS-Yes, my head is getting bigger
__________________
Trains.
asis80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2008, 04:15 AM   #27
asis80
Senior Member
 
asis80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: PA
Posts: 1,458
Send a message via AIM to asis80
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC
For those who like techy stuff, note that 2.8 activates the extra-precise center autofocus sensor, which does something or another. Obviously I am not techy enough to remember what that is! .

The center AF point is of the cross type, which I guess makes the lens focus faster and is able to track a moving object quicker and more accurate during the continuous shot mode, so it kinda recovers from any minimal focal length and refocuses quite fast. In order for all 9 AF points to be of the cross type, a F5.6 lens or faster lens is in order. That's so you don't have to set up a scene just using the center cross type AF point, all 9 of them can be used. I believe that's where the "use all 9 AF points" comes in handy too.

Ben
__________________
Trains.
asis80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2008, 04:40 AM   #28
TheRoadForeman
Banned
 
TheRoadForeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: PA
Posts: 640
Default

Sorry Ben!! No offense please, I meant some folk DO think that the "latest and greatest" is the solution to better photos. I'm sure you understand the type of folk I mean. A cross hatched AF sensor is capable of tracking horizontal and vertical movement, the point that one was making about the f/2.8 is that it will allow more light in for the AF sensors to "see" the subject in a dim environment, plus it does allow you a more effective way to control DOF.

--Kevin
TheRoadForeman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2008, 04:56 AM   #29
asis80
Senior Member
 
asis80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: PA
Posts: 1,458
Send a message via AIM to asis80
Default

It's all good Kevin, I'm just messing I'm a jokester around these parts. Depending on my budget after christmas (The time where I make the most money and my time to decide whether or not to save money based on the economy) getting the 40D will be paired with better glass. The reason why the upgrade is I like to be somewhat up to date. Although the XTi is fairly up to date and the 50D just came out, a 40D is in the middle and all the above stated before. The continuous shot which I'm using more and more of, not only in rail photography but in my other photography (getting into sports), the bigger and brighter viewfinder, larger LCD, the way cool LCD status on top, being able to actually see ISO in the viewfinder (trust me, for someone like me who forgets to check that before i take the shot, it's a must). All the little details that I'm missing out on matters. Also the build quality and the larger size.


Ben

PS-That cross type crap confuses the crap outta me
__________________
Trains.
asis80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2008, 05:06 AM   #30
TheRoadForeman
Banned
 
TheRoadForeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: PA
Posts: 640
Talking

Ben,
It is only effective if it is dimly lit, you have a fast lens, continuous AF on and the subject is moving toward the camera. Hope that helps!!

-- Kevin
TheRoadForeman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2008, 05:33 AM   #31
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRoadForeman
Sorry Ben!! No offense please, I meant some folk DO think that the "latest and greatest" is the solution to better photos. I'm sure you understand the type of folk I mean. A cross hatched AF sensor is capable of tracking horizontal and vertical movement, the point that one was making about the f/2.8 is that it will allow more light in for the AF sensors to "see" the subject in a dim environment, plus it does allow you a more effective way to control DOF.

--Kevin
Kevin, this is true about the cross hatch and about the 2.8 allowing more light, but in addition that center sensor does "high-precision" focusing if the lens is 2.8.

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/...k/autofocus.do

I doubt it matters at all for train shooting.
__________________
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 11-07-2008, 05:35 AM   #32
asis80
Senior Member
 
asis80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: PA
Posts: 1,458
Send a message via AIM to asis80
Default

Ah! Cool, that'd be good for a fast moving train, or a fast moving car. I bet it would be good for panning too, ALTHOUGH (Because I know someone who is keen and annoyed by mistakes people make in forums) it's not moving towards you or away from you....you want exact sharpness so constant focus is a must for people like me who aren't too great at panning, so it would help.

Ben
__________________
Trains.
asis80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2008, 05:48 AM   #33
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by asis80
Ah! Cool, that'd be good for a fast moving train, or a fast moving car. I bet it would be good for panning too, ALTHOUGH (Because I know someone who is keen and annoyed by mistakes people make in forums) it's not moving towards you or away from you....you want exact sharpness so constant focus is a must for people like me who aren't too great at panning, so it would help.

Ben
I have no idea, but I have the impression that the use is just the opposite, it is for fine close-up work. Think portraiture with an 85/1.2 on a ff body. When it matters whether it is the bridge of the nose or the tip that is in focus.

Depth of field is sufficiently deep at pan-shooting distance that the additional accuracy of that sensor would be of no consequence. So I think, anyway.
__________________
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 11-07-2008, 06:01 AM   #34
asis80
Senior Member
 
asis80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: PA
Posts: 1,458
Send a message via AIM to asis80
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC

Depth of field is sufficiently deep at pan-shooting distance that the additional accuracy of that sensor would be of no consequence. So I think, anyway.


True. I therefore concede my statement......



......on the other hand close up/portrait work has always been an interest of mine that I from time to time engage in so it's a perk that I could use. This is a good reason to hang on to the nifty fifty too! 1.8 and the cross AF points would be a good match.

Ben who needs to go to bed
__________________
Trains.
asis80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2008, 02:51 PM   #35
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by asis80
True. I therefore concede my statement......
Isn't that the second concession in a week?

You need to spend more time shooting Washington PA - nice Penn Plastics shot (check your spelling in the location fields) - and less time mis-pondering factual information late at night.

Image © Ben Sutton
PhotoID: 258245
Photograph © Ben Sutton
__________________
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 11-08-2008, 03:35 PM   #36
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 asis80
After a full year of using it, it feels like a P&S with some heavy duty interchangeable lenses.
Which would explain why I didnt get the XTi.
Watain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2008, 06:43 PM   #37
asis80
Senior Member
 
asis80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: PA
Posts: 1,458
Send a message via AIM to asis80
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC
Isn't that the second concession in a week?

You need to spend more time shooting Washington PA - nice Penn Plastics shot (check your spelling in the location fields) - and less time mis-pondering factual information late at night.

Image © Ben Sutton
PhotoID: 258245
Photograph © Ben Sutton

I do need to sleep more and not process or read 15+ page reviews on equipment late at night.

Ben
__________________
Trains.
asis80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2008, 05:07 AM   #38
lock4244
Senior Member
 
lock4244's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The City Below Vaughan
Posts: 1,048
Default

I'm reading all this talk about the AF sensors... blah, blah, blah. Permit me to be a black sheep here and throw something out there... ever consider getting a manual lens? Meaning manual focus? Ok, I admit that I have no idea if your body can even accept one, and I've shoot Nikon exclusively since 1996, so I really know little about Canons.

That said, it seems to me you spend an awful lot of time agonizing about the particular properties of this AF lens or that AF lens. It seems needlessly complicated. Many great photographs have been taken with manual lenses over the years and it's almost as if the whole concept is foreign to many these days! Kinda like manual transmissions in cars (guilty there too, I drive a 5 speed), it's looked upon as an antique, yet many claim the experience is more intamate than anything automatic; you are in closer contact with the machine.

Honestly, forget what you know about manual focus. The manual ring on the AF lenses seems to me, in my admittedly limited experience, to be somewhat of an afterthought. Poor control. A real, purpose built manual lens feels much more natural, and you would be surprised how easy they are use and get totally used to. Every shot I have on RP was taken with a manual, fixed focal length lens save one... I bet I'm a pretty rare breed here. And BTW, I have really poor eyesight and have to wear contact lenses to see beyond 6" from my nose... so hyper sharp eyesight is not required.

FWIW, I'd probably avoid a maunal focus zoom lens... I think this is a real strong suit of AF unless you can pre-focus at a particular focal length and can resist the urge to follow a moving subject.

As for the original theme of a better body or better glass, I might not be so fast to dismiss a better body. In a perfect world, we'd not have to worry about a budget, so allow me to wander. When you talk about a film SLR camera, the body is not a minor consideration, rather, the combo of glass and film would be more important to picture quality. A reliable, versitle body was important, but wouldn't be a major contributor to image quality realative to the glass/film combo. With a DSLR, the body becomes critical on account that it contains the image sensor, ISO, Image quality (size, raw, etc...) and a host of other technological gizmos.

If you are satisfied with the image quality from your body, you'd be better off investing in glass so long as that glass can move with you when you eventually replace the body. If you current body won't accept the glass that higher end bodies can (bodies you'll eventually own), I think the focus should be on the glass. As you upgrade over the years, it's smart to have glass that comes with you. Seems to me with digital, the bodies have a shelf life attached to them.

Thinking about the cost of my 9 lenses vs. my one body, the cost ratio is something like 4.5 to 1 in favor of the lenses... all used but one, body bought new. Yikes!
__________________
Mike Lockwood

Insert witty comment here

Hot girl on girl action here!

More Pics Here
lock4244 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2008, 07:47 AM   #39
asis80
Senior Member
 
asis80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: PA
Posts: 1,458
Send a message via AIM to asis80
Default

Ok ok ok, okaaaaaaaaay. After all that bitching and "Bens mind is set on 40D", I'm staying with my XTi. It was either the 40D or new computer. I have an old custom built PC that bit the dust mid summer this year. Being that it was custom (Built by me, including making my own case, fiberglassing, paint, metal work, the works) I figured "Eh, I'll just replace the hard drive (what ultimately went bad) and upgrade a few parts here and there. So I dismantled it, and as I was doing this I found DYE all over the damn place. Yes, my build is water cooled. And apparantly my pump stopped working (So thats what that chirping sound was ). I thought since I heard chirping, it was the HD going bad. But no.......it was the pump. That explains the random shut downs, apparantly due to heat.

No water moving = pump isn't moving water or pump is gunked up from dye in the water clogging the system and pushing the dye out of any little crack or joint in the system.


The water didn't do any damage luckily to anything, it's just a mess in the bottom of the case. I was looking around newegg looking for a new HD (Which is slow and crappy IDE) and then I just thought, ya know. This PC is only a AMD Athlon (First AMD athlon...just an athlon). 2.0 ghz, 128 meg Nvidia graphics card, 512mb RAM (had 1 gig, apparantly a stick fried), no SATA, no sound card, no googies. It was fun while it lasted but I parted it out, and had fun smashing my HD into tiny little pieces THEN lighting it on fire, ALL RIGHT! The case was run over by a truck, literally. The water systen didnt even get flushed as I wasn't messing with permanent ink all over the place so it went straight to the trash, radiator-cpu block-water tank and all. The CPU had bent pins for some reason.


So, long story short I need a new pc. After I get all my parts, build it, hope that my AMD Athlon Quad Core 9850 Phenom doesnt have problems with my K9A2 Platinum motherboards BIOS and my SATA is recognized, I'll get better glass for my XTi. I NEED a computer. I have this laptop Jennifer gave me, but for my needs it lacks. No memory, it over heats, list goes on. Thanks baby, but Ben Ben Ben needs a PC.


So yea, I guess all I wanted to say was sticking with XTi, building me another PC ground up (maybe not the case this time and it's NOT going to be water cooled, what a god awful mess that was), and buying new glass. Any glass recommendations?

Ben
__________________
Trains.
asis80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2008, 07:57 AM   #40
asis80
Senior Member
 
asis80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: PA
Posts: 1,458
Send a message via AIM to asis80
Default

Mike that was great advice. When I go full frame (Which probably wont be for another DECADE), then I'm going to have to worry about lens compatibility. So buying glass DOES seem like the way go (As stated, that's what I have decided on now). Manual focusing........ah. I'm afraid, no lies I am afraid. I keep on trying and trying and my results are less than desirable. On things like landscapes and things like that where my object is still, im O.K. Trains and moving objects, forget about it. Can't do it, and I've tried. I can keep on trying but I honestly need a helping hand with it . And I know exactly what you mean by "feeling in control of your machine". That's why I dumped my automatic 4 speed and bought a new 5 speed Same with AF and MF. I like to go MF to get that "control" I desire.

Ben
__________________
Trains.
asis80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2008, 12:30 PM   #41
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 ottergoose
If you can do it, the 40D with 17-40L and 70-200L would be a pretty nice setup... when I can afford it that's the setup I'd like to have.
I add, the Canon TC EF 1.4 works wonders on my 70-200 F4L makes it a 98- 280 F5.6L, Still sharp to! and the AF works just as good.
__________________
Richard Scott Marsh I go by Scott long story

http://www.flickr.com/photos/22299476@N05/
milwman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2008, 03:22 PM   #42
lock4244
Senior Member
 
lock4244's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The City Below Vaughan
Posts: 1,048
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by asis80
Mike that was great advice. When I go full frame (Which probably wont be for another DECADE), then I'm going to have to worry about lens compatibility. So buying glass DOES seem like the way go (As stated, that's what I have decided on now). Manual focusing........ah. I'm afraid, no lies I am afraid. I keep on trying and trying and my results are less than desirable. On things like landscapes and things like that where my object is still, im O.K. Trains and moving objects, forget about it. Can't do it, and I've tried. I can keep on trying but I honestly need a helping hand with it . And I know exactly what you mean by "feeling in control of your machine". That's why I dumped my automatic 4 speed and bought a new 5 speed Same with AF and MF. I like to go MF to get that "control" I desire.

Ben
The key to manual focus (to me) is avoiding zooms. With a prime or telephoto, in 99% of cases the theory is you prefocus and wait. However, in reality, most of the time I'm shooting at infinity so it's always focused (infinity being the point at which everything beyond a certain distance is in focus). There really isn't any skill involved, just a bit of a learning curve. I recently replaced my damaged 50mm f2 with a 50mm f1.4. Though the f1.4 is a better lens, I find it is not yet getting the results that I get with the f2. The difference (I think) is that, besides the fact that the new one is faster, the old one hit infinity at 30ft, while the new one gets there at 20ft.

If I had to focus my lenses on a moving train, trust me, I'd have given up long ago. It's not that difficult to shoot with MF lenses, so long as you get to infinity (and beyond)... though if you're trying to manual focus with an AF lens, that could be why you have difficulty. They are not, IMHO, designed for that type of use.

For fun, below are two shots of the same train. One taken with my trusty 85mm 1.4, the other with my 18-135 AF zoom. Can you tell which is which?

Image © Mike Lockwood
PhotoID: 228961
Photograph © Mike Lockwood


Image © Mike Lockwood
PhotoID: 228960
Photograph © Mike Lockwood
__________________
Mike Lockwood

Insert witty comment here

Hot girl on girl action here!

More Pics Here

Last edited by lock4244; 11-20-2008 at 03:32 PM.
lock4244 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2008, 04:18 PM   #43
asis80
Senior Member
 
asis80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: PA
Posts: 1,458
Send a message via AIM to asis80
Default

I can't tell at all Mike, either I don't have the eye for it or this laptop screen has no sharpness what so ever..........I'd put my money on both but it's leaning towards the laptop screen. I do have a prime, the nifty fifty and no kidding was considering looking into some primes before these posts, maybe it's a path I should consider?

Ben
__________________
Trains.
asis80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2008, 07:46 PM   #44
WembYard
Senior Member
 
WembYard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Bedfordshire, UK
Posts: 646
Default

I'll take a guess, the first one is taken with the zoom lens, the second one with the 85mm.
WembYard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2008, 08:03 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 WembYard
I'll take a guess, the first one is taken with the zoom lens, the second one with the 85mm.
Correct. My guess is that the first one looks like it is 'zoomed' in while the second one doesn't have the 'tele' look to it. Am I right?

Persoanlly I think the second one looks better... probably because the 85mm is my favorite lens.
__________________
Mike Lockwood

Insert witty comment here

Hot girl on girl action here!

More Pics Here
lock4244 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2008, 08:17 PM   #46
WembYard
Senior Member
 
WembYard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Bedfordshire, UK
Posts: 646
Default

The background looks ever so slightly sharper in the second picture. My favourite lens when I was using Canon FD mount cameras was an 85mm 1.4, perhaps I ought to invest in the digital equivalent
WembYard 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 09:13 PM.


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