The DSLR Thread

[download2live]

Originally Posted by bilalsyed

Love the Panasonic GH-2

That GH2 is one mean machine. Only fly in the ointment was the price when it was launched.

[bilalsyed]

Originally Posted by download2live

That GH2 is one mean machine. Only fly in the ointment was the price when it was launched.

true. prices now ?? any idea ? net says around $800 here on the forum i guess i saw some post which said its for $499 on a website within US. where can i grab it ? a good deal ?

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by sachinj12

Still beats me, why a DSLR if all they are gonna use is auto mode! Maybe better camera=better pics syndrome? OR, snob value?

Probably because of the bigger sensor. I am a 4/3 sensor user, and APS-C sensor users have always told me their is bigger than than mine, hence better.

Now consider the same argument with APS-C vs the tiny point-n-shoot sensors. If you can automatically improve your photograph by spending more money, lot of them will take that option. Easier than learning photography. In fact, I have been told by entry level dSLR (APS-C) users that their is better than my E3 because they got bigger sensor.

[autocrat]

Originally Posted by fuel_addict

Can anyone who has used the Canon 60D point out its real world advantages over the T3i (600D)? Technically, the cameras are "almost" similar barring few advantages like higher shutter speed, higher fps and all 9 cross points for AF in the 60D. I am debating between these 2 cameras. I currently own the 1000D that I want to replace.

Cross type focus points are significant - offers better autofocus at lower light / slower lenses. Also I remember 60D has better video abilities.

[HellwratH]

Originally Posted by Samurai

Probably because of the bigger sensor. I am a 4/3 sensor user, and APS-C sensor users have always told me their is bigger than than mine, hence better.

Now consider the same argument with APS-C vs the tiny point-n-shoot sensors. If you can automatically improve your photograph by spending more money, lot of them will take that option. Easier than learning photography. In fact, I have been told by entry level dSLR (APS-C) users that their is better than my E3 because they got bigger sensor.

And the other funny part is people using APS-C cameras think that APS-C gives you way more shallow DOF than 4/3rds or micro 4/3rds sensor. This photo from the recently released 75mm f1.8 should dispel all such claims:

http://olympus-imaging.jp/product/ds...x_sample01.jpg

And, recently on another photo forum there was a big "argument" (if I may) when I questioned a person criticizing a photo based on the size of sensor and camera (D800). In some ways, we do carry the biases that the camera matters (it does to some extent) more than the photographer .

[autocrat]

Originally Posted by HellwratH

And the other funny part is people using APS-C cameras think that APS-C gives you way more shallow DOF than 4/3rds or micro 4/3rds sensor. This photo from the recently released 75mm f1.8 should dispel all such claims:

http://olympus-imaging.jp/product/ds...x_sample01.jpg

And, recently on another photo forum there was a big "argument" (if I may) when I questioned a person criticizing a photo based on the size of sensor and camera (D800). In some ways, we do carry the biases that the camera matters (it does to some extent) more than the photographer .

Yep.. Dof is something to do with focal length and aperture, system does not matter.

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by HellwratH

And the other funny part is people using APS-C cameras think that APS-C gives you way more shallow DOF than 4/3rds or micro 4/3rds sensor.

It does, doesn't it? DOF is affected by sensor size, aperture and focal length.

[bilalsyed]

Originally Posted by ampere

I have a 550D and am pretty happy with its performance. You should give it a thought. If you already have canon lenses, 550D definitely makes sense.

As i mentioned we already have a 550d and i've used it so much that the shutter count has crossed the 40K mark. Awesome camera. but I want a change now.

[ampere]

Originally Posted by bilalsyed

As i mentioned we already have a 550d and i've used it so much that the shutter count has crossed the 40K mark. Awesome camera. but I want a change now.

My only point was (as others noted) was if you already have a set of Canon lenses, do
you want to move to Nikon? If you can get good value for your lenses, then you should surely consider Nikon.

Now that you have clicked so much with 550D, any thoughts of upgrading to
full frame? (I know you mentioned about budgets). But just a thought !

Also how about 600D?

[HellwratH]

Originally Posted by Samurai

It does, doesn't it? DOF is affected by sensor size, aperture and focal length.

Aperture, yes. Sensor size does affect the DOF because you have to move further away with small sensors to compose similar frame (keeping FL constant), hence the distance to subject gets altered which increases DOF. Also, variation of focal length does not affect DOF if magnification of the subject is constant. In effect, the DOF depends on the magnification of the subject. And magnification is independent of sensor size .

But, what I was trying to get at was the fact that most APS-C users dismiss micro four thirds as a system that is incapable of producing images with shallow DOF.

[navin_bhp]

Originally Posted by fuel_addict

Can anyone who has used the Canon 60D point out its real world advantages over the T3i (600D)? Technically, the cameras are "almost" similar barring few advantages like higher shutter speed, higher fps and all 9 cross points for AF in the 60D. I am debating between these 2 cameras. I currently own the 1000D that I want to replace.

Apart from what you and autocrat have already mentioned the 60D is a better camera to hold than a 600D. The battery lasts twice longer and you get dedicated buttons for metering, AF, ISO and drive along with a top LCD. You would also appreciate the fact that you can adjust the color temperature using the kelvin scale. I cant really live without that feature.

[autocrat]

Originally Posted by navin_bhp

You would also appreciate the fact that you can adjust the color temperature using the kelvin scale. I cant really live without that feature.

Knowing Canons philosophy on indoor white balance, this is a very valid point you have mentioned

[clevermax]

Originally Posted by navin_bhp

You would also appreciate the fact that you can adjust the color temperature using the kelvin scale. I cant really live without that feature.

Originally Posted by autocrat

Knowing Canons philosophy on indoor white balance, this is a very valid point you have mentioned

I use custom WB. You just need to put it into the "set" mode, point the center of the frame to a white surface near you and 'click' to set. It will set the WB correctly. Manually adjusting the kelvin won't be accurate in some cases.

[autocrat]

Originally Posted by clevermax

I use custom WB. You just need to put it into the "set" mode, point the center of the frame to a white surface near you and 'click' to set. It will set the WB correctly. Manually adjusting the kelvin won't be accurate in some cases.

I use this technique on my 400D. Its pretty accurate. I bought 18% grey cards, but can't carry the full compliment everywhere. There are some light sources like tube lights that have colour temperature marked on them, but when I set it to that, its hardly accurate.

I now shoot RAW and use the slider on dpp to set the WB to what I feel is right.

[navin_bhp]

Originally Posted by clevermax

I use custom WB. You just need to put it into the "set" mode, point the center of the frame to a white surface near you and 'click' to set. It will set the WB correctly. Manually adjusting the kelvin won't be accurate in some cases.

Attachment 932451

Attachment 932452

Certainly a valid point there clevermax. The correct way of using the white balance is taking a picture of a grey card (white balance card) under the available light and using that as a reference color. Some carry an expodisc and some have the grey card itself. That being said, what do I do if I want the picture to have a bluish tone (say 2500 Kelvin) or a warmer tone around 8000 kelvin just bring in that creative touch to the picture. Something that can also be done during post processing too but it's just a handy little feature that I tend to use a lot.

I guess the 18% grey card is used to get accurate metering and the white balance card is lighter compared to this card. I may be wrong.