-= T2i / 550D users UNITE! (1) =-

rich_cooper wrote in post #11257952
how many images do you get at large jpeg with a 4gb and 8gb cards ?

im getting a 550D this afternoon and am needing new cards as my 400D was CF

Also will class 4 be ok for photos ?

For large JPEG only (no raw), a 4GB card will hold ~570 shots; 8GB ~1140. See p 72 of the user manual.

Class 4 is fine for still photos.

Class 4 is fine for single stills, but once you get into bursts a faster card will help.

I'm selling my shoes. Here's the pic

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

ploo wrote in post #11256804
I need some advice on a wide lens that would suit my intended uses the most

Hi Ploo and welcome to the start of a long road! I use a Sigma 12-24 on a FF camera and read that the 8-16 (for crop only) is even better. Even though the 10-22 is very wide, you'll be amazed how much wider 8 is.

Reading the lenses you bought to start, I was very surprised you chose two with so much overlap. I'd certainly get rid of one of them - can't advise which as I've never used EF-S lenses. If you want a longer zoom I can strongly recommend the 100-400L, which will also work on a FF camera if you move to that in due course.

One lens I feel tempted to get is the Sigma 50-500 OS, which sounds a superb lens. I wouldn't have that as well as my 100-400L though.

It's useful to remember what lenses constituted a "standard" setup back in film days. That was a 28mm, a 50mm and a 135mm. To achieve those effective focal lengths on your 1.6 crop camera that would be 17, 31 and 84. Think about that - many people never used lenses outside those three, and indeed many others just had a single lens of 45-50mm.

There's a lot of information in these pages. In most cases there are no 'right" or "wrong" answers, only opinions. Browse and learn!

One from Halloween

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/chan84/51639093​01/

Peter2516 wrote in post #11257465
...Question...In Manual Mode shooting I noticed that the exposure compensate in my camera is in -2 when I press the shutter is that normal? So when Iif I want to shoot Manual mode you have to utilize the flash or my 430ex II, is that the default setting? I tried to bring it to 0 it won't let me.

Peter, this is a common problem, don't worry, its just an issue of understanding how to read that gizmo with the -2 -1 0 +1 +2.

The thing is that the camera uses the same gizmo to display two different things:
- on modes on which the camera sets one or more settings (P, Av, Tv) that gizmo displays Exposure Compensation. That is, you are telling the camera meter to rise or lower the exposure that the meter 'thinks' is the correct exposure. For a normal picture, you probably won't dial any EVs (like your marina pictures), but, if you know the meter will be 'fooled' by something like a bright background or very dark areas in the picture, you dial in EV accordingly, as you saw on your porch pictures.

- on manual mode (M) that gizmo only displays what the meter is measuring as a correct light according to what you have set for your camera. So... lets say you are taking an outdoor picture in M and you have set ISO 100, f5.6 and shutter speed at 1/250th. If you half press the shutter button, that gizmo will show you what he 'thinks' of your exposure... so it could be on -1 or -1 2/3ths or on +2/3ths for instance. You CANNOT adjust the exposure by trying to move the EVs, you need to adjust your settings (in other words, in M mode, that gizmo is merely informational not a user movable needle). Therefore, if its at -1, for instance, you need to achieve one full stop of light... so, you either need to set ISO to 200, OR set the shutter at 1/125th, OR set the f to 4.0. Any of these will brighten the image by one stop and the meter will read 0. Of course, the same applies for the meter 'thinking' than it did for the other modes: if you believe your meter is wrong (because there is a light on your scene, etc.) you would set the settings so that the needle shows this bias you desire. For instance, if you would like to achieve a +2EVs setting on the previous case, you'd need to further increase 2 stops of light, so you could use a combination of settings and set it to ISO200, 1/125th and f4.0 all at the same time. The meter will read +2 when you half press the shutter.

Does this make any sense? Its hard to explain, maybe someone has a better approach (or better English ).

Rafa.

RafaPolit wrote in post #11257078
Ploo!

Let me be the first to welcome you here!!! It seems to me that you know exactly what you are doing and your images very much show it... whether one is fond of the monochrome image look or not, no one can deny you have achieved very pleasant, moody, and captivating images! The second I actually like the original better as it has a bit more texture to it, but that exit sign is probably best left out as you did on the edit! Regardless of critique, you have 'the eye'.

You have also done your research extremely well!! First of all, I fully agree on your lens sell-out plan: keep the 55-250, sell the 75-300. The 50 f1.4 is an extremely well regarded lens, since I believe the f1.8 is fantastic, I'm sure you'll just love the f1.4, but, you are right, it is too long for indoor shooting unless you plan on extreme closeups all the time! If I had nothing but money to spend, I'd agree with you on the 35L, that's the one to have! Just keep on saving .

For ultra-wide indoors, you are more or less into deep waters. Since you need to multiply by 1.6x even the Ultra wide 17-40 (there are very few ultra wide non EF-S in the Canon lineup) is not wide enough. I'm afraid that if you need wider, the EF-S 10-22 (which is one of the most loved lenses in this forum) is your only alternative! (within Canon, I'll let the others suggest Sigmas and Tamrons, I know nothing of those). The other option is to settle for a nice intermediate and go with the EF-S 15-85. The quality of this lens doesn't cease to amaze me on this forums. You gain a little extra wide and a more considerable reach, and gain USM and a lot of quality.

If low light is your thing, the 17-55 f2.8 is another well cherished and sought-after lens.

I believe you can't go wrong with any of this lenses. If, EF-S is really a concern... then, your best bet is the 17-40 f4L which is really nice on a full frame if you have definite plans of going that way.

I'm sure others will have other takes and other brands as well. Good luck, and please, keep sharing,

Best regards,
Rafa.

Rafa,

Thank you for the kind comments. I will look into those lenses, and yes the EF-S 10-22 was already on my radar. When I take a step back, I think it may be more important to get a lens that I can use fully right now, even if it is EF-S, because who knows when I will actually move to full-frame. At this rate, I certainly won't be able to afford it for a couple years, and those couple years' worth of shots that I captured would be worth much more than the relatively small hassle of selling a crop-bodied lens...I will do more research on those lenses and report back, thank you for your help. I have many more photos I am eager to share as soon as I figure out a way to have a usable computer. When you imply some are not always a fan of the monochromatic look, do you have advice on another route to post-process that first photo? I don't have a conscious "workflow," instead I just adjust settings and go with what looks the best to my eye. I'm sure that once I read and learn more I'll be better able to express the final look I had in mind.

Peter2516 wrote in post #11257081
same scene diff set
shutter - 1''5, f - 3.5,iso 100, ev - +1 first photo
shutter - 2, f - 4.5, iso 100, ev - +2 2nd photo

Peter, I know you are just getting started and there are a million variable to keep in mind, but perhaps you could try shooting at a higher ISO in such low light, up to 800/1600 and see what kind of shutter speed you would need then, it may reduce the stress of handholding a long shutter and turn out better images? Apologies if I misunderstood what you were trying to do, I am just as new as you!

edlarom wrote in post #11257409
f2.5
1/100sec.
50mm 1.8
ISO 100

This wasn't a planed shot. I was walking around work and snapping off pics. Actually maybe I should of had it @ 1/200. I'm just learning what all these terms mean and how everything works together. I've been reading constantly for the last 6-7 weeks. I never knew what F stop and aperture were before.

If this was shot in RAW, were you able to pull down any of the overexposed areas in your photo editing program? I am sure that you tried but I thought the general theory of ETTR was to overexpose and pull down in post-processing, excuse me if I am wrong as I am very new to this as well. Other than the exposure I think that is a great shot of a visually interesting scene, clearing of the table would have added to its professional look as well. Keep sharing!

wigloc wrote in post #11257803
What you think of this shot?

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/wigiloco/516402​0114/

I like this photo a lot because you get a sense of wondering what is beyond the door, what if you shot from a different perspective, e.g. the camera very near the floor, as it would elongate the shadow cast on the floor, which to me is one of the most interesting parts of the composition, while cutting out the darkened out ceiling which doesn't contribute nearly as much? Just some thoughts, of course it's easy to critique from a keyboard and much harder to think of while shooting on the fly. I enjoy your photos very much.

rich_cooper wrote in post #11257952
how many images do you get at large jpeg with a 4gb and 8gb cards ?

im getting a 550D this afternoon and am needing new cards as my 400D was CF

Also will class 4 be ok for photos ?

Might I suggest a 16GB card, even? There is a transcend class 10 16GB SDHC card available on Amazon for ~25-30 that is a great value for the money, I just ordered one myself. The rest of my memory cards are all Sandisk Ultra II or Extreme, keep in mind different companies use their "class #" classification differently, as the Sandisks are comparably lower classes but maintain similar real speeds. From my limited knowledge, Sandisk is a trusted brand that is generally regarded as worth the premium, Transcend seems to be well regarded for a more value-minded card. Depends on how critical your photos are...which is also why I recommend the larger size, while a smaller size will help limit you at first and force you to think a composition though before firing the shutter, a large card is nice when you're at an important event (e.g. wedding, concert) that you want to capture for which you could never go back and re-shoot. I once ran out of disk space at a once-in-a-lifetime concert and since then I have always tried to have plenty of memory on-hand to avoid that in the future. Just some thoughts.

peterbj7 wrote in post #11258755
Hi Ploo and welcome to the start of a long road! I use a Sigma 12-24 on a FF camera and read that the 8-16 (for crop only) is even better. Even though the 10-22 is very wide, you'll be amazed how much wider 8 is.

Reading the lenses you bought to start, I was very surprised you chose two with so much overlap. I'd certainly get rid of one of them - can't advise which as I've never used EF-S lenses. If you want a longer zoom I can strongly recommend the 100-400L, which will also work on a FF camera if you move to that in due course.

One lens I feel tempted to get is the Sigma 50-500 OS, which sounds a superb lens. I wouldn't have that as well as my 100-400L though.

It's useful to remember what lenses constituted a "standard" setup back in film days. That was a 28mm, a 50mm and a 135mm. To achieve those effective focal lengths on your 1.6 crop camera that would be 17, 31 and 84. Think about that - many people never used lenses outside those three, and indeed many others just had a single lens of 45-50mm.

There's a lot of information in these pages. In most cases there are no 'right" or "wrong" answers, only opinions. Browse and learn!

Thank you for the input on lenses, and I agree, 28/50/135mm equivalent is what I would go for in the ideal world. I'm not big on superzooms right now as I am comfortable framing a shot with positioning myself, and I'd rather not compromise IQ and lens speed at this point while on a limited budget the 12-24 and 8-16 sound very interesting and I will look into them. How does one test a particular copy of their own lens to see if it's sharp and focuses properly?

Finally, regarding the kit lenses, they were a package deal that I purchased with the intention of selling unused to decrease the package cost. I am selling the 75-300 asap and was going to sell the 55-250 as well, but apparently it performs reasonably well and I may keep it around until I get better quality glass with that much reach. I suspect it isn't fast enough to catch live motorsports, though

RogerC11 wrote in post #11258829
One from Halloween

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/chan84/51639093​01/

I like this photo, but perhaps including more of the reflection would give it more depth? Just a brief thought, I'm certainly no expert. Please keep sharing!

wigloc wrote in post #11257803

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/wigiloco/516402​0114/

Wigloc, the image has a powerful feeling. But I agree with Ploo on the fact that there is too much space on the upper section, and I end up wanting more of the streak of light on the bottom. Where I disagree with Ploo is in the fixing method ... if you get lower and closer to the floor, the shadow will actually get smaller my approach would be to get the camera higher above the ground but tilt it downwards! If you still have access to the place, try both and let us know

Rafa.

RogerC11 wrote in post #11258829

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/chan84/51639093​01/

Nice capture... I'm always fascinated by the translucency of objects (ears, fruit, rise walls, etc.) and when it shows on the subject, I always like the picture

Rafa.

ploo wrote in post #11259102
...When you imply some are not always a fan of the monochromatic look, do you have advice on another route to post-process that first photo?

Ploo, this is, as peterbj7 said, only opinion... no 'right' or 'wrong. For my particular taste, the original image has a very pleasant and warm color on the walls which is nicely contrasted with the skin tones of the couple frame-right, and the skin tones are well balanced. All this colors are in the same color-spectrum and compliment each other nicely, its not a case of strong colors outside the palette. If that were the case, a monochrome approach will suit my taste.

In your edit, I feel that by unifying the walls with the paintings and even with the skin tones, you have lost part of the depth of the image and made it a bit single-dimensioned, and, the skin tones are now a bit too dark-reddish.

Of course, the gain is that you have a very moody and evocative image that almost seems a tinted black and white picture, and the old lanterns and overall decoration seem to support that look.

That's just my impressions, but I like what you did very much all the same

Rafa.

ploo wrote in post #11259102
How does one test a particular copy of their own lens to see if it's sharp and focuses properly?

This is a key question to which I don't know the answer. If these pages are anything to go by, it's depressingly common to buy gear (both bodies and lenses) that is in some way defective. For me that's a major concern, as I live in a country that looks to the USA for most purchases, AND which has insanely crippling import duties, so I have to travel to the USA to buy any camera gear. If when I get back I find something's wrong with it I have to make another trip, and air fares down here are very high. It's often cheaper just to throw the malfunctioning gear away, even though it may have a full guarantee. If any US camera dealer would test gear before collection (but after purchase) that would help me immeasurably, but every one I've asked has refused.

My own experience has been pretty good. The LCD panel on top of my 5D started to fail after a week but was still usable, fortunate as it was over a year before I was able to take it to a Canon service center. Nothing wrong with any of the rest of the gear I bought. I did have doubts over the focussing of my 24-105L but I now think I was mistaken.

Otherwise I assume that a lens is working properly unless I see repeated signs of poor images. Then I would try some tests, as rigorous as I could make them, to try to ascertain whether there was indeed a problem.

@Peterbj7, we are on the same boat regarding equipment and the impossibility of having anything checked under any kind of guarantee or by anyone with good knowledge altogether. That's why I liked my recent used purchase... there was someone who actually used and tested the equipment before me, so, if I trust it's in the condition the seller is giving it, used equipment may be a 'safer' bet, quite remarkably

@Ploo,

Here's how some test their lenses for sharpness and correct focus:
http://focustestchart.​com/chart.html

Some people will tell you that you will not be shooting test charts and to go out there and test the lenses under real shooting conditions. I believe using both methods is best ... the charts give you a good idea of what to expect and the field tests confirm what the charts probably showed.

Rafa.

Thank you guys for comments! Yes I still have access to that place. I've been there like 20 times Old abandoned shipyard. I will try to take photo from down and somehow different angles too.

RafaPolit wrote in post #11259076
Peter, this is a common problem, don't worry, its just an issue of understanding how to read that gizmo with the -2 -1 0 +1 +2.

The thing is that the camera uses the same gizmo to display two different things:
- on modes on which the camera sets one or more settings (P, Av, Tv) that gizmo displays Exposure Compensation. That is, you are telling the camera meter to rise or lower the exposure that the meter 'thinks' is the correct exposure. For a normal picture, you probably won't dial any EVs (like your marina pictures), but, if you know the meter will be 'fooled' by something like a bright background or very dark areas in the picture, you dial in EV accordingly, as you saw on your porch pictures.

- on manual mode (M) that gizmo only displays what the meter is measuring as a correct light according to what you have set for your camera. So... lets say you are taking an outdoor picture in M and you have set ISO 100, f5.6 and shutter speed at 1/250th. If you half press the shutter button, that gizmo will show you what he 'thinks' of your exposure... so it could be on -1 or -1 2/3ths or on +2/3ths for instance. You CANNOT adjust the exposure by trying to move the EVs, you need to adjust your settings (in other words, in M mode, that gizmo is merely informational not a user movable needle). Therefore, if its at -1, for instance, you need to achieve one full stop of light... so, you either need to set ISO to 200, OR set the shutter at 1/125th, OR set the f to 4.0. Any of these will brighten the image by one stop and the meter will read 0. Of course, the same applies for the meter 'thinking' than it did for the other modes: if you believe your meter is wrong (because there is a light on your scene, etc.) you would set the settings so that the needle shows this bias you desire. For instance, if you would like to achieve a +2EVs setting on the previous case, you'd need to further increase 2 stops of light, so you could use a combination of settings and set it to ISO200, 1/125th and f4.0 all at the same time. The meter will read +2 when you half press the shutter.

Does this make any sense? Its hard to explain, maybe someone has a better approach (or better English ).

Rafa.

Thanks Rafa it does make a lot of sense and well explained to a newbie like me, Now I fully understand I was inside my hometheater and master bedroom when I noticed that -2 in M mode, it is dark and in my bedroom is not too bright either. I will check that combo setting later and see if it does move, I was just alarmed why I can not move it to the center (0) while the other Creative Mode they are all in 0 (center) accept for the M mode. Thanks again.

Peter

Peter, bear in mind that that was in no way a recipe of settings... for indoor, it more likely ISO 1600, f3.5, 1/8th!

Rafa.