New Camera!

[Jack Michaud]

I know there's some fellow digital camera geeks lurking about here. Landed a new job last week so I went out and finally got a DSLR, which I've been wanting for years. Picked up the Canon 30D with 17-85IS-USM lens. Really thrilled with it so far. Can't wait to get it on the slopes and put the 5fps continuous drive to work.

I don't really have a point here, just wanted to gab about cameras while I'm now a "short timer" at my soon to be ex-job. Yeehaw!

[Derf]

I'm not a camera geek (yet...), but congrats on the new job! You're a mechanical engineer I think? What kind of job (if you don't mind me asking)?

[Jack Michaud]

Thanks! Actually, I have a bachelor's in ME, but I've been a software developer for the past 5 years and am almost done with a master's in CS. New job is programming for a company in the health care industry. Although there is a distinct possibility I could go back to engineering someday if all the stars align.

[skatha]

I know there's some fellow digital camera geeks lurking about here. Landed a new job last week so I went out and finally got a DSLR, which I've been wanting for years. Picked up the Canon 30D with 17-85IS-USM lens. Really thrilled with it so far. Can't wait to get it on the slopes and put the 5fps continuous drive to work.

I don't really have a point here, just wanted to gab about cameras while I'm now a "short timer" at my soon to be ex-job. Yeehaw!

I love those self-presents for really big accomplishments, like quitting a job...
You really are a shopaholic, Jack....
Congrats on the DSLR-I've looked at the Canon, too, but the price tag's still a bit too high for an item that will probably turn out to be a snapshot taker for all my best intentions.....

[Jack Michaud]

What can I say, I am a gearhead. Boards, cameras, motorcyles, home theater....

there was considerable sticker-shock, but photography is a quasi-serious hobby of mine and the camera will be put to good use. The kids are only going to be young once, may as well have the best possible pictures of them!

Here's a sample...

http://www.cs.usm.maine.edu/~gmichaud/teddym.jpg

[patmoore]

Good move on the DSLR Jack!

The rapid response and the 5fps will be great. I'm envious!

Best of luck with the new position. I'm getting laid off next week after 13 years with the same company. I wish they had waited another half dozen years and then I could afford to retire.

Pat

[Jack Michaud]

Sorry to hear that Pat!

[carvedog]

Nice shot. Is that mud or poo :rolleyes: on his hands. Love the 1,000 yard stare.

Nice work on the cam. I am a Nikon guy 3 digis, five film bodies and a Hasselblad, but a lot of photog friends here are really happy with the Canon.

Good luck with the new job.

[Steve Dold]

Good choice of cameras Jack. For a minute I thought you had purchased a D30 which is a 3 MP from a few years ago (still a great camera). I bought a 10D about two years ago and love it, the ergonomics and ease of operation are great, but what really impresses me is the lack of noise that shows up as speckles in blue sky. I can jack up the ISO setting to 400 and it's still acceptable for almost everything I do. I'm sure the 30D is at least as good.

The IS lenses are awesome, they even come in handy for things you might not expect, like indoors where a flash is not allowed (like a museum).

[Jack Michaud]

Nice shot. Is that mud or poo :rolleyes: on his hands. Love the 1,000 yard stare.

Nice work on the cam. I am a Nikon guy 3 digis, five film bodies and a Hasselblad, but a lot of photog friends here are really happy with the Canon.

Thanks, yes that's my son, with MUD on his hands.

Bob Jenney is a Nikon guy, so I have already been given my ration of crap! :)

[eastcoasticerider]

Nice thread.....Are many of you camera guys shooting and using the RAW mode much. It seems like thats going to become the industry standardd soon....Adobe and Apple are working together?......

[patmoore]

That's a great shot of your son Jack. It wasn't until I got my newest Olympus that I could get that effect of a soft focus in the background. Here's an example I shot of my wife at Yellowstone about six weeks ago.

http://i3.tinypic.com/w8n9qh.jpg
I'm using an Olympus C-770 and have been pretty happy with the results but I can't stand the slow response time when shooting action shots. If I'm firing off rapid fire shots I have the added disadvantage of losing my view briefly because its true Through The Lens and writing to the disk blocks the view momentarily. When following the action, I use an older model of Olympus that has the fixed viewer like the old rangefinder cameras.

My wife has the non-digital Canon Rebel and I understand the digital version will accept her lenses. Tempting to get one but I guess I should worry about securing employment first.

[Jack Michaud]

Nice thread.....Are many of you camera guys shooting and using the RAW mode much.

My 30D came bundled with some pretty nice software, including a RAW viewer/editer/converter, so I'm going to get into it. Up to now I've been turned off by the extra post-processing time required, but the Canon software is pretty straightforward and works well.

My understanding of working in RAW so far is that it basically allows you to change "camera settings" after the fact - most significantly white balance, sharpening, and color tones. The benefit here is that you get to work on the image <i>before</i> any JPEG compression is applied. As the guy in the camera shop said, when you shoot in RAW, you're shooting negatives. When you shoot in JPEG, you're shooting slides.

[Jack Michaud]

That's a great shot of your son Jack. It wasn't until I got my newest Olympus that I could get that effect of a soft focus in the background. Here's an example I shot of my wife at Yellowstone about six weeks ago.


Thanks. Nice shot, looks like it will be a real winner after some Photoshopping.


I'm using an Olympus C-770 and have been pretty happy with the results but I can't stand the slow response time when shooting action shots.

Are you prefocusing? If you do that, the response should be almost instant.


My wife has the non-digital Canon Rebel and I understand the digital version will accept her lenses. Tempting to get one but I guess I should worry about securing employment first.

Yes, the Digital Rebel will accept all Canon lenses. The Rebel has really come down in price.

[skatha]

No....a buffalo at Yellowstone :eek:

Actually, we saw so many of them last summer, I couldn't wait to eat some buffalo burgers....

How well do any of these adapt to a visual back of a telescope.....and yes, I do know that they make CCD cameras for astronomical purposes....it's just that's all you can use them(CCD's) for, plus, you need a computer to recontruct the images

[Jack Michaud]

Apparantly there are widely available adapters called "T-mounts" that allow you to attach a DSLR to a telescope. Then if you want to get really serious, Canon makes the 20Da which is a 20D modified for astrophotography.

Go here, and then click the link for the 20Da:
http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=139&modelid=10464

[patmoore]

No....a buffalo at Yellowstone :eek:

The Park Ranger corrected me when I called it a buffalo. I'm told they're bison. Anyhow, you don't want to get too close to them:

http://i3.tinypic.com/wgul4g.jpg

Once in a while I can time a sports shot right. This was taken at the CT Senior Games this year:

http://i3.tinypic.com/wgulh3.jpg

I really would like to get a DSLR. Only so many toys I can justify at one time.

[skatha]

Apparantly there are widely available adapters called "T-mounts" that allow you to attach a DSLR to a telescope. Then if you want to get really serious, Canon makes the 20Da which is a 20D modified for astrophotography.

Go here, and then click the link for the 20Da:
http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=139&modelid=10464
The T-mounts are model specific--I had one for a Nikon-the ex- took it with him :angryfire
I have one for the mechanical Pentax my husband has....they don't sell the Techpan film anymore-the one you could "hype" in a gas chamber up to 3200.....
Thanks for the link, Jack...


Bison-smison.......they are good on a bun......

[mirror70]

I have a 30D, too. Great camera. Just make sure you get a multi-GB CF card for when you shoot sequences. My 1GB card has proven to be far too small for shooting at 5fps.

<img src="http://www.cf-cars.com/images/pano%20thumb.jpg">
<img src="http://www.cf-cars.com/images/loaf/Pat%20sequence%20thumb.jpg">

[Donek]

Jack,

Congrats on the new job and the cool toy. I looked at that body before I bought my Nikon. If lenses were interchangable from both branks, I'd be looking at a Canon body next. Both make great equipment. The Nikon chips provide the added zoom, but the Canon's give you more wide angle. It just depends on what you want to get out of the Camera. Here's a couple photos I've taken in the last week. Summer time... Time to go shoot photos all day long.
<br>These two were busy for over an hour.<br>http://donek.smugmug.com/photos/66878652-M.jpg<br>
These baby Great Horned Owls live in a tree about 2 miles from my house.<br> http://donek.smugmug.com/photos/66881733-M.jpg
<br>Bar Lake and some trees. Here's where a Canon would come in handy or a super wide angle other than my fish eye.<br> http://donek.smugmug.com/photos/66882708-M.jpg

[mirror70]

No cameras in that price range are full-frame. The Nikons (D70/D70s) and D200 are both 1.5:1, while the Canons (D20/D30) are both 1.6:1. So, with the same length lens, the Nikons actually provide marginally wider angle shots.

Both companies make great cameras. The Nikon lenses are superior but the Canon bodies are better than those from Nikon. The general way to pick between the two companies is if you already have Nikon glass, get a Nikon body; if you already have Canon glass, get a Canon body. If you have neither, decide which feature set you'd like since they don't completely overlap.

I went with the Canon because I wanted faster continuous shooting and both my brother and a friend have Canons so I could borrow their lenses.


That last pic is really neat, btw. Love the fish-eye effect. What lens did you use for that?

[Gecko]

those owls are amazing, here a few from today, the puppy is Muji our new German Shorthair and the riverfront is the RI/CT border looking at RI. I like architecture in B&W

[Donek]

No cameras in that price range are full-frame. The Nikons (D70/D70s) and D200 are both 1.5:1, while the Canons (D20/D30) are both 1.6:1. So, with the same length lens, the Nikons actually provide marginally wider angle shots.

Both companies make great cameras. The Nikon lenses are superior but the Canon bodies are better than those from Nikon. The general way to pick between the two companies is if you already have Nikon glass, get a Nikon body; if you already have Canon glass, get a Canon body. If you have neither, decide which feature set you'd like since they don't completely overlap.

I went with the Canon because I wanted faster continuous shooting and both my brother and a friend have Canons so I could borrow their lenses.


That last pic is really neat, btw. Love the fish-eye effect. What lens did you use for that?

Interesting. I usually read the debates over the two and it's pretty common to hear complaints that Nikon doesn't make a camera with a full size chip, so I assumed (what an @$$) that all the Canons had full size chips. I think I read quite a bit about complaints that the Nikon digital glass will never work with a full size chip, so your comment that their lenses are better is interesting. I know from experience that I find my Nikkor lenses produce crisper images than the one Sigma lense I have. However, since I switched from Photoshop Elements to Nikon Capture that seems to be much less of a problem.

The lense inventory as a motivator to buy specific bodies is a pretty strong one though. That's probably why I never pay much attention to the actual specs on Canon bodies. I'd considered buying a D200 this summer, but I think I'm going to invest in more lenses instead. I haven't had a need for more resolution yet, but would really like a macro lense and a super wide angle. I have a D2H, so I've got plenty of speed. The 8fps is the reason I chose the Nikon over the Canon. It was substantially more expensive though.

The Fish Eye is the Nikkor 10.5mm. This shot of Mooner was with the same lense.
<br>http://donek.smugmug.com/photos/26214848-L-1.jpg

[mirror70]

$-wise, the Canon-equivalent of the D2H would be either the 5D or the 1D Mk2. The 5D has a full-frame chip and is a pretty awesome body. The 1D Mk2 isn't full frame, but has a feature set which is very close to the D2H (including 8.5fps shooting). The two companies both make excellent gear with products positioned pretty evenly. It's a lot like BMW and Audi: both are great cars that are priced and perform the same, so you can't really go wrong with either.

One thing I do prefer with the Nikons over the Canons is the control setup. The two wheels on the Nikons are much easier to operate than the two on the Canon. I really liked the controls on the D70 and am not particularly impressed with those on my 30D. I also like the removable screen protector on the Nikons, which the Canons completely lack (they don't even have a place to attach one).

Oh, and damn - that's another excellent shot. I think you've just forced me to add a lens like that to my bag.

[Gecko]

I was a diehard Canon fan for years until I had a EOS620 die on a crime scene shoot in the middle of the night. I switched to Nikon shortly afterwards and first thing I noticed was the location of the controls was more natural for me. Mind you this was with film cameras but Nikon doesn't change their layout(ok excluding the F4)pick up a nikon and you know where everything is on every nikon. I now have too many Nikon lenses to change back (love my 12-24) but I doubt I will since I will live without technology for convenience. Something I read a few years ago, is that true duplication of film/chrome won't be reached until camera's reach the 18-20MP range. Canon is 16MP, Kodak is at what 14MP Nikon and 12MP but that's the top end and those are both slow and expensive. Memory limits are a bigger issue than camera speed I know I slam into the write buffer with a 6MP D70 and it's worse with bigger cameras. While the speed of the cameras and CCD's (floveon/CMOS/Whatever) is increasing even the fastest most expensive compact flash card will be hard pressed to keep up with BIG file sizes

[mirror70]

A 3MP CCD actually has a tighter grain than 35mm film. A 6 or 8MP camera far exceeds the detail that 35mm can capture. Slide film is another story. Where the chips currently lag behind film is in dynamic range, but that gap gets closer every day and can mostly be hidden with just a little bit of work in post.

Write speed is a bit of a bottleneck, but it's pretty easy to overcome just by adding a buffer. If you stick to JPEG, the 30D (8MP) will shoot at 5fps full-res for 6 seconds, and a D2H (4MP) will do 8fps for 5 seconds. Nikon's successor to the D70/D70s will likely be similar.

[Gecko]

yes digital has equaled film as long as the final image stays below the 8x10/11x14 threshold and you don't zoom too much. This is because most Photo printers (Noritsu/Fuji/etc) print at roughly 300dpi. The problems arise when you want bigger photos or you want to zoom in. Either option requires a computer to make up information to fill in when simple magnification of a negative has the resolution to acheive. I have spent enough time printing images from a 30MP striper camera (recon) to see this. Film has more silver grains per square inch than most cameras have pixels it just isn't used so most people discount it. As a side note I got to spend 2 weeks in Wakayama Jp at the Noritsu factory playing with photo processors; the current hot setup in Japan is an Epson 7 color clearcoat printer mated to a Noritsu RIP'er (Rastor Image Processor). It prints and almost the same speed as a wet mini lab and has no nasty chemicals to upset the EPA (don't get me started) quality is a bit better than wet process but the color space is larger than set process and looks "wrong" to a lot of people

why would anyone want to use JPEG??? JPEG is an output file type not a storage file type. Too many artifacts, too limited a choice of postshoot options most important too much of a chace of doing permanant damage to the original.

[Maciek]

Thanks! Actually, I have a bachelor's in ME, but I've been a software developer for the past 5 years and am almost done with a master's in CS. New job is programming for a company in the health care industry. Although there is a distinct possibility I could go back to engineering someday if all the stars align.


Yes. I bet you will go back;)... the same as I dropped my MSEE for work in CS (currently IT development consultant on team in Goldman Sachs). I had a lot of fun with designing some electronics, but those times are gone and only few in the world are doing this seriously (and if there is a new idea then you will get a copy next day for 10 cents designed and manufactured in Asia in volumes expressed in tones rather than pieces).

Congratulations for your MSCS. Good luck with it too. The competition is tight and cheap these days. If you are pursuing doctorate then it might be way to go, but as far as engineering... well I do not know. I do not think I would give a shot at CS degree... especially if I have working expereince in it for last almost 15 years. It is just enough to study CS (and I mean CS literature rather than "XML for Dummies" like books) literature on my own They do not seem to look much at degree if someone has "a few feet long" resume with numerous projects. You are a very brave man so once again good luck.

I also wish you good luck with the new camera. If I decide to sell my telephoto SLR lens for Canon I know whom to offer ;) I go "small formats" these days as a tired guy. An old Canon A-85 with a few inexpensive lens converters and some stuff together with a good specialized photo instruction book is good enough for me even for nice underwater photography. I had hard time to find a photo lab to get satisfying prints for corrections and profiles I used (and Walmart in my area was the best quality after running the same simple tester picture I have designed with Photoshop). 5fps is a good result, but do not expect good color tones when giving to printing service (they do not know what they are doing in most places to degree that I had to show them my non-corrected printout from one of my printers to prove their accusations being plain stupid!)

[Jack Michaud]

Thanks Maciek.... I think? When I got my old job (the one I just left, the one I had for 5.5 years) I had no professional programming experience and no degree in CS, just a few classes under my belt and my own aptitude that someone recognized. So I went to work and took classes part time. Without the degree, I'd probably be stuck at my old job, or I'd be taking a lesser position with any new company. With the degree, now I can write my own ticket. No regrets. CS job market in Maine is looking bright for now.

Anyway, back to cameras...

Sean, thanks, and great shots. Did you have to manually focus on the owls? My camera would have autofocused on the tree branches in front of them I'm sure. Yes, as Mirror says, only the high-buck Canons are full frame, though I've heard rumors of a $1500 full-frame Canon body "just around the corner". Who knows. I couldn't wait, the kids are growing too fast.

Mirror70, I wholeheartedly disagree that a 3mp ccd beats film for resolution. I've read that you'd have to go to about 20 megapixels to equal the resolution in a 35mm frame of film, and numerous articles about how film still beats digital. Not that I care, I'm totally converted, but let's be honest.

Canon vs. Nikon - I've heard all kinds of contradicting arguments - Canon lenses are better and Nikon bodies are better, and vice versa. I think whatever camera you're most comfortable operating will give you more consistent results. For me, that's Canon.

JPEG - yes, I have recently seen the light of RAW. Storage is cheap compared to the pricelessness of memories.

And to be fair to child #2:
http://www.cs.usm.maine.edu/~gmichaud/dory.jpg (400k)

[carvedog]

that Canon bodies are better than Nikon. Whats up with that?
I know so many people that have broken Canon cameras. I have had around 15 different camera bodies from Nikon and consider them to be some of the toughest, best engineered products that I have ever used.
?????????????
I know you are speaking your opinion but this would start a war on some forums I am on. BTW I sell Guiness posters in my shop.




Both companies make great cameras. The Nikon lenses are superior but the Canon bodies are better than those from Nikon. The general way to pick between the two companies is if you already have Nikon glass, get a Nikon body; if you already have Canon glass, get a Canon body. If you have neither, decide which feature set you'd like since they don't completely overlap.

[Jack Michaud]

Don't have a clue why you would say that Canon bodies are better than Nikon. Whats up with that?
I know so many people that have broken Canon cameras. I have had around 15 different camera bodies from Nikon and consider them to be some of the toughest, best engineered products that I have ever used.

Mirror can't say that Canon bodies are better but you get to say that Nikon bodies are better?

[carvedog]

Mirror can't say that Canon bodies are better but you get to say that Nikon bodies are better?

Not trying to get into a pissing match here. I.....consider them to be.....


is the key statement that I made.
Mirror said Nikon lenses are better. Canon bodies are better (Sorry I am paraphrasing this as I don't know how to multi paste and quote here.) as if that is an accepted fact.

I don't know that either fact is accepted. Canon certainly seems to have some fine optics and Dave Stoecklein, one of the most famous Canon shooters in the world lives right here in town, and is a convert from Nikon to Canon.

I just don't like opinions being expressed as fact. That's all. My opinion is that the Canon may not be as durable, based on personal and anecdotal evidence from friends and colleagues. I certainly don't wish that on anyone, and hope that you have years of great service from your camera Jack.

[Jack Michaud]

fair enough. I don't like opinions being passed off as fact either. :)

[Donek]

Not trying to get into a pissing match here. I.....consider them to be.....


is the key statement that I made.
Mirror said Nikon lenses are better. Canon bodies are better (Sorry I am paraphrasing this as I don't know how to multi paste and quote here.) as if that is an accepted fact.

I don't know that either fact is accepted. Canon certainly seems to have some fine optics and Dave Stoecklein, one of the most famous Canon shooters in the world lives right here in town, and is a convert from Nikon to Canon.

I just don't like opinions being expressed as fact. That's all. My opinion is that the Canon may not be as durable, based on personal and anecdotal evidence from friends and colleagues. I certainly don't wish that on anyone, and hope that you have years of great service from your camera Jack.

Better is such a subjective term. I always try to avoid it, because everyone has a different scale upon which they measure things. Since we're on a snowboard forum, lets look at base material. One person might say that P-tex 4000 Electra is the best material on the planet because it's really fast (when tuned properly). Another rider might say that Durasurf 2001 is the best because its super tough and performs very admirably without any wax. I think the best thing here is not to argue better, but look at peoples criteria and try to assess what's most important to you as a buyer. Optics, rugged design, speed in a race course, all mountain performance when you're not near your tuning equipment. I've said it many times, every engineering choice has consequences. Nobody really has the right to claim best, just best for these circumstances.

[Gecko]

my experience with canon and nikon products as a camera repairman (I've still got my nikon repair certification) is that Canon is about 2 years ahead of Nikon in terms of lens technology. Nikons bodies tend to be a bit more durable in the midrange camera's (low end pro stuff) and about the same for entry level and the expensive pro gear. I like the fact that all of nikon's lenses are useable in modern cameras, though with some limitations(I still use my manual 180mm2.8ED) and excluding the lenses over 300mm nikon lenses seem more durable...all the fast lenses over 300mm that I have worked on from both nikon and canon look to be similar quality. Canon lenses do focus faster though. I'm the lone Nikon guy in the family with the rest being folks i convinced to go Canon before I had issues. Now I have tooo much nikon gear to switch back

[Donek]

Had to share a couple more shots. I went to purchase my macro lense yesterday. They don't have the new VR 105mm in yet, so my sales guy lent me a 60mm until they come in. It really pays to establish a relationship with sales people. I won't even go to the camera store anymore unless the guy I work with is there. Anyway, I went on a miniature safary this morning playing with the new lense and got these.
<br>
A couple of regular chatty Cathy's
http://donek.smugmug.com/photos/67450828-L.jpg
<br>
Not quite the tail gate party I was anticipating. This guy was dining on the back of my Pickup.
http://donek.smugmug.com/photos/67450832-L.jpg

[Jack Michaud]

Amazing macros. And gross - I am a friggin' little girl when it comes to bugs. Especially if they go "crunch" when squashed, I think I'm going to hurl.

I agree about having a relationship with a camera shop. I bit the bullet and paid about a $250 premium to buy locally, but now I've got a support crew!

As long as we're sharing...
http://www.cs.usm.maine.edu/~gmichaud/dory.jpg

[patmoore]

One of the biggest frustrations I have in shooting multiple FPS is that I lose sight of the subject while the camera writes the data to the disk. Even though I can shoot at 2 FPS with my Olympus C770, it's useless if I'm following the action. Holding it stationary works obviously. The viewfinder is "through the lens". My older Olympus D490 has the old rangefinder type of viewer so that the view is unimpeded while shooting sequential shots.

I've been looking at Canon's new DSLRs. Are you able to maintain a constant view of your subject while shooting the 5 fps?

I understand that my wife's non-digital Rebel's lenses will work on the DSLRs?

Thanks for the guidance.

[Gecko]

except for the time that the mirror is up and the shutter is open you will be able to see your subject shooting at multiple frames per second on all SLR's Digital or otherwise. That is the beauty of an SLR

[patmoore]

Thanks Gecko,

Now I just need to convince the child bride that I need yet another camera!

[Jack Michaud]

I haven't had the camera long enough to try the continuous shooting modes, but I imagine if I have a problem with losing sight of the subject I'll try keeping both eyes open.

Yes, all the lenses made for your brand of choice will work on a DSLR. For example, all Canon EF lenses work on all Canon film and digital SLRs. However Canon EF-S lenses only work on digitals.

[Steve Dold]

Have you guys had to clean your sensors yet? I'm amazed at how much stuff finds its way in there, especially now that I have a couple of lenses and I'm switching them all the time (usually outdoors). It usually doesn't show up until I take outdoor pics showing lots of sky, with a small lens opening. A friend of mind typed up some instructions on sensor cleaning if you want to do it yourself, I've used the "swab and methanol" method a couple of times with good luck (so far):

Curt's sensor cleaning instructions (http://www.cleaningdigitalcameras.com/index.html)

[carvedog]

Steve,
I change lenses a lot. Less now that I have two digi bodies.
Always point the camera down when changing lenses this helps. I also bought a kit from this guy

http://www.pbase.com/copperhill/ccd_cleaning

many references and I have to say that last summer when I was shooting a lot commercially I would clean every two weeks with great results.

I meticulously never rewiped an area with the same tissue so as not to scratch the low pass filter.

:o

[Gecko]

contrary to popular belief the ability to keep both eyes open while shooting a camera or for that matter a gun is not an easy thing to do...I was crappy at it until I spent a year shooting a pistol competively. Not to say that I'm any good shooting a pistol but I can now shoot a pistol and a camera with both eyes open. I spent 3 years teaching the same lessons that I learned to my junior sailors on the ship.

Cleaning your CCD...while i was on the Kitty Hawk I had 17 Navy owned DSLR's (plus another 8-10 personal camera's) to maintain and clean :eek: On average I cleaned 1-2 camera's a day (aircraft carriers are dirty places). I have tried all of the methods listed at that sight. I always started with light air while holding the body opening down then tried a vacume and if that didn't work only then did I resort to using a Sensor Swab and Eclipse fluid. It works great but even though I have camera repair training and a Nikon Certification I don't like putting anything on the CCD filter if I don't have to.

[Steve Dold]

I didn't know the Navy had so much photography going on. That's how my friend Fargo got into it, he was a Navy photographer and when he got out he started Micro-Tools selling repair supplies.

The older my 10D gets, the less I mind cleaning it. I think my subconcious wants me to screw it up so I can get something with a full size sensor.

Carvedog, I'll try to remember to point the body down, I keep forgetting that, thanks :o

[patmoore]

http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20060526a3.html

[freecarver]

Although I just have a Sony H1 I think That I can shoot some nice photo's.
Here is one of my daughter.

[eastcoasticerider]

Im really impressed with those close ups.....I have a new iMac on order withh a 20 inch screen .Im thinking of running Apples Aperture since the new intel macs will not run Adobe Photoshop CS2 at top speed .(interpolates all non native software).....anybody out there a mac wizard?.....I can get the teacher discount so it will only run me $149. Aperture seems mor efull features fo rthe pro -photographer than Photoshop Bridge CS2........??? :biggthump :biggthump :biggthump :biggthump

[boostertwo]

Interesting thread and nice pics. I've worked with 8fps motor drives and haven't found them as useful for photosequencing as sometimes the key move falls between the frames. So far, I've had better results with 30 fps digital video, which gives more frames per second, but at significantly lower resolution than a DSLR.

<img src="http://i6.tinypic.com/121wqo1.jpg" border="0" alt="Justin Reiter, A-Basin, CO.">

Has anyone yet made the jump to HD video yet?

[Jack Michaud]

Interesting thread and nice pics. I've worked with 8fps motor drives and haven't found them as useful for photosequencing as sometimes the key move falls between the frames. So far, I've had better results with 30 fps digital video, which gives more frames per second, but at significantly lower resolution than a DSLR.

Has anyone yet made the jump to HD video yet?

Your sequences are clearly the best around for instructional purposes. However try to make a 20x30" poster out of one of the frames! I'll "settle" for my little 5fps 30D. ;)

Haven't made the jump to HD video yet - just got a TV though, so I'll be itching to. It's utter BS that the HD video cams are priced at such a premium - HD doesn't even require a 2mp sensor, which has been around for what, 7-8 years?

[snow|3oarder]

Thanks Maciek.... I think? When I got my old job (the one I just left, the one I had for 5.5 years) I had no professional programming experience and no degree in CS, just a few classes under my belt and my own aptitude that someone recognized. So I went to work and took classes part time. Without the degree, I'd probably be stuck at my old job, or I'd be taking a lesser position with any new company. With the degree, now I can write my own ticket. No regrets. CS job market in Maine is looking bright for now.


Youre a good writer Jack, you could always be a patent attorney lol. :) Too bad it usually requires living close to a big city.

[patmoore]

BestBuy had a Sony HD camcorder out of the box for $1500 the other day but I'm still waiting for prices of the inbox ones to drop. I've had a 52" HD TV for two years and absolutely love it!

I just bought an RCA DVD burner that skips commercials with an HD interface for
$129 from www.woot.com (you should check woot everyday for the deal of the day). I guess the theory is that you can watch standard DVDs in HD. I added an optional HDMI cable but I can't really tell the difference. Probably my configuration.

Back to the original topic. Jack, I was looking at your camera at the store and showed it to the wife. We agreed it probably makes sense for me to find a job before buying any more toys.... I really do want that camera. Is anyone hiring???

[Gecko]

My wife came in from walking the puppy to tell me that there was an incredible electric stom on the way...I ran up to our balcony which faces SW and set up for about 45 minutes of shooting. I ended up with about 18 useable images and I didn't get wet :biggthump

[patmoore]

That is a beautiful shot!

[Gecko]

That is a beautiful shot!

thanks, I learned to do those 17 years ago in school but with film then. Digital cameras record much more than film ever did at least in the way of color. I finally have a good place to shoot weather/sunset/landscapes from in my roof/balcony and I so love to do that kind of photography.

[eastcoasticerider]

HEY!!!Whats the trick to get tmy monitor to match what comes off the photo printer?...My photos look great on the screen of my iMac but they print out quite a BIT DARKER ON MY EPSON???? WHATS UP WITH THAT? ANY COMMENTS????or similar experiences?

[Gecko]

there used to be software to calibrate a printer to a monitor but I can't remember what it was. Now though the best bet is to insure that you are using Adobe colorspace on your computer and learn to "know" what looks right. Of course right now I really miss the Noritsu 621 which was as close to a WYSIWYG photo printer as I have ever seen in my 17 years as a photographer

[Donek]

HEY!!!Whats the trick to get tmy monitor to match what comes off the photo printer?...My photos look great on the screen of my iMac but they print out quite a BIT DARKER ON MY EPSON???? WHATS UP WITH THAT? ANY COMMENTS????or similar experiences?

Monitor calibration may be necessary. There are a number of devices out ther for doing so. There are usually adds for them in the photo magazines, but a google search will probably yield some results. Most important is probably your color space you're shooting in. sRGB will give you better results typically. Once you're sure you're in sRGB you can do a bit of manual color calibration of your own if you're on a budget. Print a color swatch on your printer and then try to match the colors on your screen to those printed using the controls on your monitor. You can probably get a lot closer this way. My monitor is very close, but I do so much printing that I'm able to make mental adjustments for the small inconsistencies.

Another speed tip for your machine is color quality on your display settings (windows users). It's tempting to use the highest quality, but most monitors will show such a small difference between 16 bit and 32 bit that it's not worth the extra processor time to bother. I set all my machines to 16 bit and they run dramatically faster.

[Jack Michaud]

Back to the original topic. Jack, I was looking at your camera at the store and showed it to the wife. We agreed it probably makes sense for me to find a job before buying any more toys.... I really do want that camera. Is anyone hiring???

I am loving the camera. However don't despair. By the time you can buy, there just might exist the rumored $1500 Canon with a full frame sensor. Even if not, there is always <i>something</i> "better" coming along. Canon critics think the successor to the 30D will come sooner rather than later because the 30D wasn't a major upgrade to the 20D.


Monitor calibration - if you have Photoshop, run the Adobe Gamma program. It helps.

[patmoore]

I am loving the camera. However don't despair. By the time you can buy, there just might exist the rumored $1500 Canon with a full frame sensor. Even if not, there is always <i>something</i> "better" coming along. Canon critics think the successor to the 30D will come sooner rather than later because the 30D wasn't a major upgrade to the 20D.Thanks, Jack. My knowledge is pretty limited here. If I understand things correctly, today's DLSRs have an APS-C format 23.4 x 16.7 mm as opposed to the traditional 35mm (24 x 36 mm?). If I were to get one of Canon's DLSRs offered today I was told I'd be able to use the telephoto lens from my wife's Rebel film camera. Is that not the case? If I can use it, will there be problems with distortion? I really appreciate the guidance.

[Jack Michaud]

Thanks, Jack. My knowledge is pretty limited here. If I understand things correctly, today's DLSRs have an APS-C format 23.4 x 16.7 mm as opposed to the traditional 35mm (24 x 36 mm?). If I were to get one of Canon's DLSRs offered today I was told I'd be able to use the telephoto lens from my wife's Rebel film camera. Is that not the case? If I can use it, will there be problems with distortion? I really appreciate the guidance.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Canon/

Canon's pro DSLR's are full frame - the 1D and 1Ds. But nevermind, unless you want to be a full-time pro photog. Then there's the first "affordable" (*ahem*) full framed 5D which sells for a cool 3 large for the body only. The 30D ($1400) and 20D (on clearance) have 22.5 x 15mm sized sensors, not sure if that's APS-C or not.

ALL Canon DSLRs, including the Digital Rebel ($700?) accept ALL Canon EF lenses. So yes, your existing lenses will work. The D-Rebel, 20D, and 30D also accept the EF-S line of lenses which are built especially for these reduced-frame cameras. These sensors produce a 1.6 crop factor. That is, if you have a 100-400mm zoom lens, when you use it with one of these cameras it effectively becomes a 160-640mm lens. On the 5D and up, there is no crop factor. The crop factor is not a bad thing, it just means you have to do a little math when selecting lenses. I bought the EF-S 17-85mm IS USM with my 30D. So effectively that's 27.2-136. Canon built that lens to provide a "digital" equivalent to their popular EF 28-135mm IS USM. I like that it can go wide when I want. Here's a pic I took at the wide end:

http://www.cs.usm.maine.edu/~gmichaud/yes_polar.JPG

anyway, get it?

[patmoore]

That clears it up.

Much obliged!

[Maciek]

Your sequences are clearly the best around for instructional purposes. However try to make a 20x30" poster out of one of the frames! I'll "settle" for my little 5fps 30D. ;)

Haven't made the jump to HD video yet - just got a TV though, so I'll be itching to. It's utter BS that the HD video cams are priced at such a premium - HD doesn't even require a 2mp sensor, which has been around for what, 7-8 years?


Jack,

How many posters did you make with your photos?

I tell you what. You can find some of pictures we do compose from number of weird material (from pros) in color magazines that you can buy in your favorite news stand or Barnes & Noble. Trust me that unless you really intend to do that professionally for a studio you are unlikely even notice that need for extereme resolutions.
Personally I have found that 4megapixels with Canon digic is good enough for most of letter sized pictures and I can show them on wall of my appartment including the same macro as Sean took... only with PowerShot A85... just for fun of showing how far you could push amateur camera if you know what you are doing and how (yes I own close-up converters even for this camera and cost is... $30-$50)... but I also own more advanced Canon equipment including serious lenses.

Also if you notice posters are not precise so you cannot look at them from close distance. The angular resolution of human eye is limited... so pheripherial vision. If a person wants to see picture then the person usually does not watch it scanning inch by inch. Now from farhter distance to see complete picture a person does not notice that it is made up of dot patterns.

[Jack Michaud]

I agree that 4-5mp is "enough" for 95% of photographic uses. Heck, I even made a few very pleasing 8x10s out of pictures I had taken with my 4mp Canon S45, but that I had cropped from horizontal (landscape) to vertical (portrait) size. That's only 1704x1363 pixels, or 2.3mp. The only "need" for someone to have a 7 or 8mp point-n-shoot is to be able to use the digital zoom, and to say "mine is bigger".

A DSLR however, shouldn't have too low a pixel count because the sensor is physically much larger. So in order to have a good pixel pitch on a larger sensor, naturally the mp's rise. However even at 8.2mp (3504 x 2336), you're below 200dpi on any print larger than 17" x 11".

But my original point was only that you simply can't make even a good 4x6" print from a frame of video, which before HD was 640x480 pixels. I like that next winter I'll be able to just hold down the shutter button for someone's entire turn, get a good sequence, and make a poster out of the "money shot".

In the 3 months I've owned the camera I haven't made any posters yet, but I've got a few 11x14s that are absolutely stunning, and flawless.

[boostertwo]

But my original point was only that you simply can't make even a good 4x6" print from a frame of video, which before HD was 640x480 pixels.One way I've found to bump up the resolution from video footage and get results suitable for making larger prints is to use an image-resizing program like Genuine Fractals (http://www.ononesoftware.com/detail.php?prodLine_id=2). While the results are by no means as tack-sharp as those from a XXMP DSLR, they are passable for many print jobs.

<img src="http://i6.tinypic.com/1z4lfk5.jpg" border="0" alt="Jeff Patterson, A-Basin, CO">

Colleagues have reported that HD is a much better solution for multi-frame high-rez, but if you don't yet have an HD video camera, you may find GF is OK in the meantime.

[mirror70]

I like that next winter I'll be able to just hold down the shutter button for someone's entire turn, get a good sequence, and make a poster out of the "money shot".

Does the 30D have a continuous exposure/focus mode? I haven't been able to find the former. I think the AI Servo mode will do continuous, but I haven't checked that yet.

[Jack Michaud]

Does the 30D have a continuous exposure/focus mode? I haven't been able to find the former. I think the AI Servo mode will do continuous, but I haven't checked that yet.

Gosh, I just assumed that in the continuous drive modes, the exposure was continuous as well. I'd have to double check, but I seem to recall seeing different exposure values between shots taken continuously. I do know that AI Servo works in the continuous drive modes, and surprisingly well. This little girl (not mine, neighbor's) was literally *running* towards me down this pier. 5fps continuous drive and AI Servo netted this keeper:
http://www.cs.usm.maine.edu/~gmichaud/marley.jpg

[mirror70]

I shot this (http://www.cf-cars.com/images/pano%20thumb.jpg) in the 5fps mode, and you can see how the early shots are under exposed and the last is over. Maybe there is a setting I missed?

[carvedog]

I shot this (http://www.cf-cars.com/images/pano%20thumb.jpg) in the 5fps mode, and you can see how the early shots are under exposed and the last is over. Maybe there is a setting I missed?

In the first frames the snow is predominately centered indicating lots of light and possibly prompting the camera to decrease exposure. The last frames are mostly trees and sky in the center of the frame.

Almost all digicams also record metadata in a sidecar file visible in photoshop and some other image editing programs. That will tell you exactly what happened exposure, fill flash, white balance and tons of other info.

Also Mirror70 by using the history brush and a backgroung layer you can "erase" the trees that overlap behind your rider. But booster is the master of this.

[boostertwo]

I shot this (http://www.cf-cars.com/images/pano%20thumb.jpg) in the 5fps mode, and you can see how the early shots are under exposed and the last is over. Maybe there is a setting I missed?For post-production work, I've had good results using image>adjust>curves (Ctrl M) for each layer in Photoshop.

[Jack Michaud]

I shot this (http://www.cf-cars.com/images/pano%20thumb.jpg) in the 5fps mode, and you can see how the early shots are under exposed and the last is over. Maybe there is a setting I missed?

Actually I think this sequence is perfect evidence that the camera <i>does</i> adjust exposure continuously. If it didn't, the underexposure of the first shot would have been seen throughout the sequence.

But yes, check the EXIF info.

[Kent]

Time for me to jump in with a question...

Rec'd a Rebel XP as a work gift and trying to pimp it out. Pretty cool so far...providing I have it set on full auto.

No jokes about the Rebel...as it's hard to compete with FREE.

So...looking for ideas on best value lenses. Remember...I'm a total hacker newbie photographer, but it would be nice to take some "action" shots from a distance. Can I buy a non-Cannon lense for cheap? Are the cheap lenses THAT bad. Do I really need IS?

Any links are appreciated..and I'm really going for the best "cheapest" lense.

Also, I need some help with all the other stuff....filters, flash, etc. Just tell me what to buy and I'll figure out how to use it.

K

[Gecko]

I've got over 20 years of good service with B-n-H (http://www.bhphotovideo.com:80/bnh/controller/home?O=NavBar&A=search&Q=&ci=12039) in NYC. We (the navy) buy cameras's and other equipment from them all the time. Sigma Tokina and Tamron are good lenses, my preference is in the order listed. Cheap will be a problem if you go toooo cheap . If you want a Wide angle you'll need something wider than 20mm, I have a D70 and these are the lenses I have Sigma 12-24mm, nikon 18-70mm and a nikon 80-200 (which in truth stays home as I use my nikon 180 manual more). If I had it to do again I would buy the Sigma 10-20mm (http://www.bhphotovideo.com:80/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=381610&is=REG&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation) and the Sigma 18-125mm (http://www.bhphotovideo.com:80/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=324385&is=REG&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation) or 18-200mm (http://www.bhphotovideo.com:80/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=373747&is=REG&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation) as it is I really only carry my 18-70mm and am sometimes left needing more.
Flash make sure that you buy a flash that is dedicated for your camera (in other words a Canon Flash (http://www.bhphotovideo.com:80/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=397664&is=USA&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation) ). Anything else is a waste of time and money. I mean I can plot exposure and guide number pretty fast but as I approach 40 it's real nice to leave some of the tech stuff to a computer and just worry about composition.

Filters are essentially clear lense covers, no lense should ever be without one...period. That said price can vary from $10-$200 depending on brand. I usually go with whatever the house brand is in a shop since I know that in a year it's gonna get replaced anyway. Also look at a shops used filter bin (if they have one) deals can be scored there

[carvedog]

To make your life easier when shooting digital ( or film for that matter) make sure that all the filters are the same. If you use a UV filter use the same one on all lenses, or Skylight 1A or whatever other basically clear filter you use. Just seems easier to match output that way.
Gecko: the Nikon 80-200 2.8 ED lens is one of my favorites and the only zoom lens that I own ('cause it is so stinking sharp). Do you not like yours? Too heavy? Curious.


I've got over 20 years of good service with B-n-H (http://www.bhphotovideo.com:80/bnh/controller/home?O=NavBar&A=search&Q=&ci=12039) in NYC. We (the navy) buy cameras's and other equipment from them all the time. Sigma Tokina and Tamron are good lenses, my preference is in the order listed. Cheap will be a problem if you go toooo cheap . If you want a Wide angle you'll need something wider than 20mm, I have a D70 and these are the lenses I have Sigma 12-24mm, nikon 18-70mm and a nikon 80-200 (which in truth stays home as I use my nikon 180 manual more). If I had it to do again I would buy the Sigma 10-20mm (http://www.bhphotovideo.com:80/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=381610&is=REG&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation) and the Sigma 18-125mm (http://www.bhphotovideo.com:80/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=324385&is=REG&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation) or 18-200mm (http://www.bhphotovideo.com:80/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=373747&is=REG&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation) as it is I really only carry my 18-70mm and am sometimes left needing more.
Flash make sure that you buy a flash that is dedicated for your camera (in other words a Canon Flash (http://www.bhphotovideo.com:80/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=397664&is=USA&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation) ). Anything else is a waste of time and money. I mean I can plot exposure and guide number pretty fast but as I approach 40 it's real nice to leave some of the tech stuff to a computer and just worry about composition.

Filters are essentially clear lense covers, no lense should ever be without one...period. That said price can vary from $10-$200 depending on brand. I usually go with whatever the house brand is in a shop since I know that in a year it's gonna get replaced anyway. Also look at a shops used filter bin (if they have one) deals can be scored there

[Gecko]

the 2.8/80-200mm is about the same weight as my 2.8/180mm. I spent 10 years shooting with the 180mm and it just feels right unlike the 80-200mm which while a very nice lens just doesn't instill me with the confidence that the 180 does.

[Jack Michaud]

Time for me to jump in with a question...

Rec'd a Rebel XP as a work gift and trying to pimp it out. Pretty cool so far...providing I have it set on full auto.

No jokes about the Rebel...as it's hard to compete with FREE.

So...looking for ideas on best value lenses. Remember...I'm a total hacker newbie photographer, but it would be nice to take some "action" shots from a distance. Can I buy a non-Cannon lense for cheap? Are the cheap lenses THAT bad. Do I really need IS?

Any links are appreciated..and I'm really going for the best "cheapest" lense.

Also, I need some help with all the other stuff....filters, flash, etc. Just tell me what to buy and I'll figure out how to use it.

K

Hey, that's great. The Rebel is no slouch at all. I am a heeeeuge fan of IS. Nearly makes tripods obsolete. And the longer the lens, the more you need it. And even at shorter focal lengths, it gives you confidence to squeeze off quick impromptu shots in sub-ideal light. (although IS does nothing for subject movement)

I'm loving my Canon 17-85mm IS USM as an everyday "walkaround" lens. It's the Donek Axxess of lenses! $500 isn't exactly cheap, but you can spend tons more than that on a lens. And it's worth it - way better than the $100 kit lens that probably came with your camera. But you might think it's a little short for action at a distance. For that you'd probably need something that goes up to 200 or 300mm. For third party lenses I wouldn't look much further than Sigma or Tamron.

Definitely get a polarizer, check out the difference:
without: www.cs.usm.maine.edu/~gmichaud/no_polar.JPG
with: www.cs.usm.maine.edu/~gmichaud/yes_polar.JPG

Flash - if you can't get by with the onboard flash, look to the Canon Speedlights, starting with the 400 series.

Shop B&H (www.bhphotovideo.com) or ebay. For scads of info and discussion, check out the forums at www.dpreview.com

If I want the camera to select exposure settings, I shoot in P mode rather than full auto, so I can control ISO, white balance, metering mode, exposure compensation, and focus points (usually center only). I'd recommend you get comfy with P mode.

[carvedog]

I'm loving my Canon 17-85mm IS USM as an everyday "walkaround" lens. It's the Donek Axxess of lenses! $500 isn't exactly cheap, but you can spend tons more than that on a lens. And it's worth it - way better than the $100 kit lens that probably came with your camera. But you might think it's a little short for action at a distance. For that you'd probably need something that goes up to 200 or 300mm. For third party lenses I wouldn't look much further than Sigma or Tamron.

While empathisizing with the need to save money, I think you will be much happier in the long run with the better quality (Canon IS) lens. While the Sigma and Tamron both have higher quality lenses dsigned to compete with OEM lenses - they aren't.

Besides the IS factor the Canon lenses (the better ones) have lower chromatic aberration(?) and better contrast. This will translate into brighter colors and sharper looking images.

I am a Nikon guy, but the Canon lenses are fine. Get one. Shoot lots. Be happy.

[Gecko]

While empathisizing with the need to save money, I think you will be much happier in the long run with the better quality (Canon IS) lens. While the Sigma and Tamron both have higher quality lenses dsigned to compete with OEM lenses - they aren't.

Besides the IS factor the Canon lenses (the better ones) have lower chromatic aberration(?) and better contrast. This will translate into brighter colors and sharper looking images.

I am a Nikon guy, but the Canon lenses are fine. Get one. Shoot lots. Be happy.

I would argue that except I don't have the evidence anymore. We took the time on the ship (like there was anything else to do out at sea) and compared the Sigma 12-24 against both Canon's 10-22 and the Nikon 12-24 (yes we used 2 different cameras my Nikon D70 and my buddy's Canon EOS 20D. What we found out surprised us, The Sigma was faster focusing (remember Nikon and Canon have completely different auto focusing) and brighter at any given F-stop. Now the Sigma is bigger, there's a whole lot bigger glass in the Sigma than either OEM lens but it's also half the cost (well it was where we bought them). Some other things we noticed were deeper colors and no vigneting at max width even with a filter, something that pissed us off about both the Nikon and the Canon lens. something to think about.

[Donek]

Just had to post this one of Claire.
http://www.donek.smugmug.com/photos/86418150-O.jpg
Oh. By the Way that's Don McKee (He's on the Dewar's bottle).

[Jack Michaud]

Sean, been meaning to say what a great shot that is. She's precious.

Got a used 24-70L off ebay, it arrived yesterday - happy happy joy joy!

http://i9.tinypic.com/2rxd4sy.jpg

[Justin A.]

Nosing around at the local Ritz Camera shop, I happened upon a roll of KodaChrome 64 film. I was THRILLED, Kodak canned the 64 about a year ago and the 200 has become their standard. Now to find some stuff worthy of what could be the last roll of Kodachrome 64 I'll ever get my hands on. Anyone else still have a love affair with film cameras? I have a digital too, but film will always have a special place in my heart, since the MP Equivalent of a frame of KodaChrome is about 40MP :biggthump and my Exlim is 6.0MP :(

[Jack Michaud]

http://i7.tinypic.com/2py12jp.jpg

[Justin A.]

Nice shot there jack. Was that done with a digital or was that film? It almost looks like an IR image. Very well done.

Here's my Adams impression...not very good though. Click the image to view it at full size.
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5587398

[Jack Michaud]

digital, Canon 30D with a polarizer. Orange filter effect applied in post.

Is that the Moat range?

[Justin A.]

Circular Polarizer or straight? I have a circular polarizer and truthfully, I'm not too happy with it. I just can't get it to cut the glare out of the sky to get the nice dark tones like you have in your shot of the tree.

Not the moat range, it's Mount Washington Valley as viewed from a pulloff on Rt. 16 in Conway. That snow-capped mountain on the right of the image is Jefferson...I think. It's one of the presidentals anyway. Washington is the next one over, I was taking a series of shots to reconstruct so I didn't include washington in that one. It just happens to be my favorite of the bunch.

[Jack Michaud]

Circular. I thought I had it aligned right, but it looks like it might have been tilted to the right a bit.

Yeah, the Moats are the mountains you see off to the west of Conway. Pretty sure that's them.

[Justin A.]

Duh. I knew that, but I wasn't thinking. I haven't heard them referred to as the moat range for awhile now, but yeah, that's them. :smashfrea

[xxguitarist]

i'm a film guy, my current main camera is a nikon FM2n, but i also have a canon TLb and a (now dead, yet have two lenses for) pentax ME super
looking forward to spring to play with macro settings on the new camera