Red-Ringed Tupperware Party with (ineffective) Tin Foil Hats (2)

Woolburr wrote in post #3760362
I never delete files from the card...ever. Once the files are downloaded the card gets formatted.

Phew. you scared me for a minute. I thought you were going to say once the card's full, you head down to your local Wolf/Ritz camera and ask for some more digital film.

MRaiford wrote in post #3760375
Phew. you scared me for a minute. I thought you were going to say once the card's full, you head down to your local Wolf/Ritz camera and ask for some more digital film.

Isn't that what you are supposed to do?

Pete wrote in post #3760124
I ain't a hero. I'm significantly less weather sealed than my camera is. I have no intention of changing that.

Same here. Rain sucks. Cold rain sucks more.

Pete wrote in post #3760134
I'm just a realist.. If it's raining hard enough for me to run under cover, then simply by definition, there's not enough light for adequate photography....

Not to mention that you get all wet, your lens gets wet, your shoes get wet, and you shorts get wet. Wet shorts suck.

Zilly wrote in post #3760234
I think rain can often add to a picture especially when its quite hard and at an angle

Angle rain sucks more then straight down rain. That means either you fell over, or it’s windy. Windy with soaking shorts sucks.

Woolburr wrote in post #3760235
Rain is over-rated.

Agreed!!

But for those rain lovers come on up to Chicago. It has rained for over a week. The lake behind my house is overflowing, the culverts are rivers, and you can’t even go canoeing because in some places the river is so close to the bridges that you get thousands of spiders in your hair as they seem to love to live on the underside of bridges.
I don’t know about you but having wet shorts in the windy rain with a head full of spiders sucks pretty bad.

Woolburr wrote in post #3760391
Isn't that what you are supposed to do?

Heh. I've often wondered how they would react if I took one of my old 256M cards, full of pictures, sealed it in the developing envelope, turned it into the film developer's desk, turned around and asked one of the clerks for more digital film, and start complaining about how much more expensive Digital photography is than film because digital film is so very expensive. Then start whining about a 256 card not actually holding 256 pictures like it says in big bold print on the front.

WTB: Used digital film. Will offer very competitive prices.

-spam- wrote in post #3758629
Congrats

Im going to force myself to stay with the 20D as long as i can, will probably buy the new battery grip though as a just in case

Is it backward compatible?

timbernet wrote in post #3758638
Now comes the hard part...

Do I sell the 20D... or do I just lose the $700 and have two bodies... hmmm

That's a no-brainer . . .

Woolburr wrote in post #3758654
For me...that qualifies as a no brainer....2 bodies are better than one any old day!

Yup.

timbernet wrote in post #3758731
That is what I am thinking... I have needed two bodies more than once (one with the telephoto and one with the wide-angle) - so it would be worth it.

I am going to do a shake-up in the lens department... ... in a few weeks.

You know you need to! (the bodies, not the lenses - that happens on a regular basis).

-spam- wrote in post #3758885
And i was starting to think i was the only one.

I like having AF and AE lock on separate buttons and besides, ive found myself in situations where i would have walked away with no usable shots if it wasnt for AE lock.

Likewise

Lightstream wrote in post #3759947
24-70 sucks. 24-105 f/4L IS!

What have you been ingesting? The 24-105 sees less use than any of my other zooms. It's still not enough for a walk-around - the only reason I have one is because sometimes I need just a little more magnification than the 24-70 offers, at closer ranges than the 70-200 can do. If I could get a 77 mm +0.25 close-up lens for the 70-200, I'd be happy to unload the 24-105. For that matter, maybe I should get the 28-105 instead. It's not as if I want it for the wide end of things.

Woolburr wrote in post #3760353
It is now raining men who like to take pictures of rain in Claire's neighborhood...too bad Claire doesn't like the rain to shoot in!

:p

Woolburr wrote in post #3760362
I never delete files from the card...ever. Once the files are downloaded the card gets formatted.

I delete shots usually as I go along. I have a tendency to put protection on images I don't want to accidentally delete, the rest I do a "delete all" so fix more space. Then I go home and download to the computer and then format the card.

Jon wrote in post #3760458
What have you been ingesting? The 24-105 sees less use than any of my other zooms. It's still not enough for a walk-around - the only reason I have one is because sometimes I need just a little more magnification than the 24-70 offers, at closer ranges than the 70-200 can do. If I could get a 77 mm +0.25 close-up lens for the 70-200, I'd be happy to unload the 24-105. For that matter, maybe I should get the 28-105 instead. It's not as if I want it for the wide end of things.

It's my one go-everywhere-do-everything lens. Nuff said.

24-70 owners think I'm stupid. I think 24-70 owners are stupid. Never shall the twain meet.

Good Morning everyone It's raining here. It's a nice rain...soft...and the neighborhood is very quiet. After weeks of heat, this rain is most welcome. Especially since it's a work day. Now I would HATE it if it rained every weekend too!

ibdb wrote in post #3758249
TD -- you wouldn't happen to have been being a meanie head when you posted that, were you?

No really, he wasn't. When we were out shooting yesterday, he said he was on f22 and (after our trek trip) I was AMAZED and couldn't figure out what he was shooting at that aperture so I asked him.

T.D. wrote in post #3758275
Not at all. She just seemed kind of puzzled when I mentioned that I shot at f/22 today. Wanted to show her an example.

Yes, THAT ^^^^

timbernet wrote in post #3758400
Here is a Photomatix Tonemapped image from today - let me know your thoughts: http://www2.sandynet.o​rg …007-3774_5_6_tonemapp.jpg

This is beautiful. An excellent example of tonemapping! I love it

Lightstream wrote in post #3758556
I would like to do a PG and say I am not impressed at all with the newest Canon models.

uh....did I say that?? I'm sure I didn't say that....

timbernet wrote in post #3758559
... and then buy one a month later

That was LOW Scotlet!! What are you doing siding up with Yoda against me??

timbernet wrote in post #3758731
I am going to do a shake-up in the lens department... ... in a few weeks.

What are you doing lens wise? (and congrats on the 40D...actually it's upgrades really DO impress me)

Maureen Souza wrote in post #3758743
Hi all! Am off to bed but mission accomplished here with my sister. I am headed back home in the morning. I'll catch up with you all tomorrow.

Hullo Maureen. Glad that you got things worked out with your sister. That's good news!

Anybody seen Bourne Ultimatum yet ?

I saw it yesterday. I thought it was great. Action from start to finish. The ending was a little surprising.

Theres only 1 week until I am in africa I can't wait.

I think I know why I wasn't able to get good shots yesterday....these little antiphotography mischief makers were working their mischief on my composing abilities as well as sneakily poking my camera's buttons to change settings...(after all, it couldn't be ME right? :lol but at least I caught them on camera to PROVE that they were after me!

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

No, but I want to see it. Loved the first two.

tommykjensen wrote in post #3760902
Theres only 1 week until I am in africa I can't wait.

I can't wait to see your shots Tommy and I'm sure you'll have a great time on the trip!!

Claire wrote in post #3760476
:p

I delete shots usually as I go along. I have a tendency to put protection on images I don't want to accidentally delete, the rest I do a "delete all" so fix more space. Then I go home and download to the computer and then format the card.

I just finished a discussion on this with someone else...there is no way you can tell the quality of a shot by looking at the lcd on camera...media cards are cheap...get a spare card or two to carry...and do your deleting from a real computer where you can view the image at a proper size to determine if you really want to ditch it or not.

I am amazed at how many people delete photos...once it is gone...it is gone forever...sometimes even a less than perfect image can be important to someone...if nothing more than a learning tool...I frequently look at the bad ones over again...just to see what went wrong.

Permagrin wrote in post #3760911
I think I know why I wasn't able to get good shots yesterday....these little antiphotography mischief makers were working their mischief on my composing abilities as well as sneakily poking my camera's buttons to change settings...(after all, it couldn't be ME right? :lol but at least I caught them on camera to PROVE that they were after me!

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

That must be what happened.