Tuesday, May 20, 2008

Crystal & Groomsmen



Sorry short on time this morning, another one from the wedding.... Thanks again Crystal & Joe!

Canon 40D
17-55 f2.8 IS
f8 1/200 Sec @ ISO 100

6 comments:

Strangetastes said...

It looks like they are about to do a one-two-three with the bride into the water. By the way, how do you like the 40D? The prices for the body only have gotten semi-reasonable and I'm considering it.

thirdrail said...

I work at a camera store so I get to try A LOT of cameras out... Right now I'm shooting with both the 20D & the 40D. I LOVE my 20D, and the 40D has a lot of great features, but I'm still not totally sold on it. The 40D has some querks....The auto white balance is horrible (not much of an issue for me as I shoot RAW 99% of the time, but still annoying), you cannot get to 100 ISO in all of the shooting modes (which is REALLY annoying), and when you switch between modes all of your settings don't follow (i.e. RAW). If I didn't have thousands invested in Canon glass I'd be shooting a D300 right now.

BTW, how was your first Cubs game at Wrigley? I've been meaning to get over to your blog to check out the photos.

Strangetastes said...

I'm glad I asked you the question. I do have thousands invested in Canon glass. My everyday camera is a 5D (love it!). I also have a 20D. I sometimes carry both, with my 100-400 IS L on the 20D to squeeze out more telephoto effect and the 24-105 L on the 5D. I have not been satisfied with the sharpness of the 20D at longer telephoto(even though I also shoot 99% raw) and I was thinking about investing in a better second camera body, depending on what's in the piggy bank. From what you tell me, I may be better off staying as is.

Strangetastes said...

By the way, would you have any other suggestions on the camera body question?

Strangetastes said...

I should learn to collect all my thoughts at one time. The game at Wrigley was a blast. It's so much more pleasant to watch a baseball game there than deafening, blinding, hyper-commercialized Busch III.

thirdrail said...

Sorry it took me a couple days to respond...Life's been cRaZy!!You're right the 100-400 isn't the sharpest on the long end, but you might also be the victim of defraction if you are stopping down too far to get that DOF (more likely with telephotos then normals). There is a great article HERE if you wanna check it out. It talks alot about pixel sizes (the 5D has a WAY bigger pixel then the 20D, even though the 20 has less MPixels). Very interesting if you are into all that tech stuff... it even hbas a great calculator to help visualize & plan for the sharpest possible photo. As for the 40D... it will only get WORSE as the pixels are even more tightly packed on the sensor.