Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 17, 2006, 2:15 PM   #21
Senior Member
 
Caboose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 625
Default

speleojeff wrote:
Quote:
If anyone buys the 20D, that's fine, but it will only get more out of date. The last thing I want to do is drop $1200 on something that gets more obsolete by the day.
I can't really think of anything I've ever bought in my life that actually got newer and more up to date by the day. So you wait 3 to 4 months without taking pictures and then get the new camera and drop $1500 and guess what the next day it is one more day older and one more day closer to being obsolete. Unless you are a professonal photographer, the 20D or for that matter the original 300d digital rebel will take some pretty good pictures, and if you are a professonal you should be looking at the 1Ds anyway.
Caboose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 19, 2006, 12:28 AM   #22
Senior Member
 
Ponin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 139
Default

Wow. Peripatetic wins thread.
Ponin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 19, 2006, 2:26 AM   #23
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

*blushes*

I am a bit of an argumentative sod it's true.

But I do get it wrong at times, and have learned a lot from people here who have pointed out the error of my views.
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 21, 2006, 9:31 AM   #24
Senior Member
 
aladyforty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,964
Default

personally I think it is unwise to jump straight into the new camera as who knows what its problems may be, better to wait a few months for feedback on this new camera which would mean you could be looking at some time before get it. I have the original digital rebel and in time Id be veryhappy to get a 20D because it seems to be a great camera from what Ive heard. The rebel xt may have 8mp but I was not going to upgrade to a smaller camera that did not feel good to hold. For me lenses are the key, Im getting great shots out of my rebel that some of my friends with 20Ds cant seem to get as good a shot. I guess the old saying that the person behind the camera plays the biggest part in a good shot is true.
aladyforty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 21, 2006, 4:43 PM   #25
Senior Member
 
sjburges's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 106
Default

I don't really know the answer myself without having experimented, but there seems to be a few sites that rather strongly disagree with peripatetic about usefulness of 1/500 sync speed.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/syncspeed.htm

http://www.planetneil.com/faq/flash-sync.html

Now maybe they're written by Nikon devotees, but I feel like I learned something and the arguments are at least plausible.


sjburges is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 21, 2006, 9:47 PM   #26
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

FYI - http://www.daveblackphotography.com/...a-lighting.htm
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2006, 12:17 AM   #27
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

Firstly this has nothing at all to do with whether one is a Nikon or Canon devotee. It's a technical issue. I happen to shoot Canon, but I have no emotional attachment to the brand. I happen to think Nikons are actually a little bit "cooler". But I also think that Leica and Zeiss are cooler still and my secret desire (well secret from my wife anyway) is to own one of the coming Leica M Digitals.

Moving on...

I personally find Ken Rockwell to be a very emotional and not terribly reliable source.

With all internet sources you must consider the arguments and the general credibility of the source, unfortunately KR doesn't say much of any substance on his whole site IMO and I've read most of it. So my personal view is that I read him, but have to think harder about the arguments because I don't really trust his analysis, no matter how firmly he holds his opinions.

In that specific KR article....

He blathers on rather a lot and much of his argument is spurious IMO, but the substance of it all boils down to "you may need a more powerful flash".

The answer to the second article is that his flash is not powerful enough, so yes if you have a teenee tiny flashgun and you are shooting under those conditions he may have a point. The substance of that article also comes down to "you may need a more powerful flash."

I am willing to bet that with that particular picture even the built-in flash of just about any DSLR would cope just fine. How far do YOU think he is from the couple? So his example is an instance of the "straw man" fallacy, and also in this particular case rather dishonest. I'm willing to bet that in the picture in question he absolutely did not need to use 1/500s sync speed to get that shot.

So to summarise, amid much smoke and mirrors, both sites make the point that if you are just one stop short of light with your flash, then having a synch speed that is one stop faster will help. And remember this is where the background is very bright and the foreground needs fill flash, which is a relatively unusual situation for most photography. Though I'm sure some photographers encounter it quite often.

I think this point must be granted. You do get one extra stop.

So if you find yourself in this dilemma you have 2 options:

1. Do your flash better. Depending on the circumstances there may be different options. With wildlife or (some very special type of restricted weddings!!!) where you are far from the subject and you simply cannot get closer you should use a Better Beamer or similar.

For more normal conditions though (like ordinary weddings) you can also add extra lights, slave flashes, more powerful flashes, bigger battery packs to help with recycle time, etc.

Where possible you can simply get a little closer to the subject, though of course it's not always possible.

For indoor sports where you need excellent results then you should do something like following the technique that NHL linked to.

2. Get one of the Nikon cameras mentioned. But be aware that you're going to have to give up a lot too. (Please note that Nikon's two newest high-end models don't have 1/500s flash synch, both the D2X and the D200 have 1/250s and ISO100.)

If it were a serious issue then you would expect to see vast numbers of pro photographers dropping Canon and not using the Nikon D2X or D200, and instead using the D1 cameras and the D70! Do you see that? Perhaps I live a sheltered life, but I don't, instead what they do is follow route #1.


peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 2, 2006, 2:12 PM   #28
Senior Member
 
minutephotos.com's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 344
Default

I shoot with a digital rebel now and would love to use a 20D. However, I have found learning photography better has made my pictures better more than buying better equipment.

I have both wireless E-ttl flash and studio strobes with wireless FM transmitters/ recievers. I almost always use flash outdoors for fill. However, if I am shooting sports I use other techniques to get the shot I need. Generally I am shooting at 200+ tele. Most flashes are not going to cover that distance anyway thus an F2.8 or faster or IS lens is needed. So, If I really needed flash for sports where I may be zoomed at 200+ and shutter speeds at 500+ then I would definately use my Alien Bee 1600 with wireless triggers strastegically placed where I need them.

By the way my for the money you spend on a Canon 580EX or Nikon SB80 flash you could buy an AB800 Studio strobe with stand and umbrella. By doing so you can get flash closer to subject and get better light.



Minutephotos.com
minutephotos.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 2, 2006, 11:12 PM   #29
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 429
Default

BrianSkibinski wrote:
Quote:
You can get a used 20D for just over $900 on FM. You can have it within the week, and start learning how to use it and start taking pictures that could be worth a lot of money. Used 10Ds are still going for about $600-700, so it would make sense to me that for a couple hundred bucks you can use the 20D for 4 months before the new one comes out.

I very seriously doubt the new one will be cheaper. I also doubt that (at first) it will be the same price as the 20D. I'm guessing (purely speculative) that it will be $1699 at start, with some rebates for Christmas. First version will have some firmware bugs, and they will be fixed by summer.

So I guess the question is, can it wait, or is the current tool good enough for your use?

Where and what is FM?

And is the difference between the XT and 20 D worth the price $$$?
RP33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2006, 4:31 AM   #30
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1
Default

peripatetic wrote:
Quote:
The answer to the second article is that his flash is not powerful enough, so yes if you have a teenee tiny flashgun and you are shooting under those conditions he may have a point. The substance of that article also comes down to "you may need a more powerful flash."

I am willing to bet that with that particular picture even the built-in flash of just about any DSLR would cope just fine. How far do YOU think he is from the couple? So his example is an instance of the "straw man" fallacy, and also in this particular case rather dishonest. I'm willing to bet that in the picture in question he absolutely did not need to use 1/500s sync speed to get that shot.
Quote:
(snip)


Hi there ...

As the writer of that webpage I feel I have to reply to what amounts to a personalattack, since you call me dishonest and a liar.

You obviously didn't bother to read the page. You are dismissive without even making sure of the facts - with the clear intention of just steam-rollering over anyone else in this discussion on this particular forum.



>> The answer to the second article is that his flash is not powerful enough,...

Read the webpage again. You are missing the point entirely.



>> How far do YOU think he is from the couple?

Distance would've affected the flash exposure obviously. But my position was fixed in that I couldn't move much more forward without being intrusive and blocking the view of families. Moving forward would've solved the problem, but all of this is entirely besides the point - something you glibly try to side-step by insinuating again that I lied.

But here's the ironic thing - even if my description of the scenario is a lie (nevermind the photo illustrating the scenario) - the technique and facts explained still remain solid.

You can call it "smoke and mirrors" (which probably mean you couldn't follow the simple logic), but you can't dispute the logic. And you can'tdispute the facts presented there. If you were able to, you would've.




>> I'm willing to bet that in the picture in question he absolutely did not need to use 1/500s sync speed to get that shot.


Once again, you rant against what I wrote, and you show clearly you didn't even bother to read the page. I state explicitlywhat camera I used, and what the settingswhere.But to make it clear to you - I didn't shoot that with the D70. I didn't use 1/500th flash sync. To compensate I used additional strobes. I explain why theywere necessary .. and I use that scenario to illustrate how a higher flash sync would've helped overcome this.

By the way, you are a fool if you think a pop-up flash would've given the same results.

That webpage's entire point was to show that there is a difference in a higher sync speed - a fact which users of leaf shutters have known a long time before D-SLRs with 1/500th flash sync speed was around.



>> I think this point must be granted. You do get one extra stop.

Interesting how you twist my words around to prove ... some point .. it is unclear exactly what ... and then in the end you agree with the statement that a higher flash sync speed gives yougreater range.


But in the end, I am still mystified by thepersonalattack ? Is it because I am a faceless stranger that you can disparage in front of friends here and score some points? Or does this kind of posturing on an internet forum make you feel superior in some way?

Whatever your motivation or intention, it is distasteful.



Neil van Niekerk.







Neil van Niekerk is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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 Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:51 PM.