Com-Central.net

I don't know about about the UK, but in Switzerland and Italy opportunities to rent equipment are very hard to find. As far as I know, only some large store in big cities do that

I go to one airshow a year, even less, renting a long lens for the weekend would be perfect for me, but there is no way I can do that in my area.

Other than that I agree it's a great way to try new equipment too.

Massimo

Hi all,

Regarding camera upgrades -

Another option to explore is to look into renting the camera outfit you are thinking of buying and testing it out under the conditions in which you'll be shooting.
In the US we have rented through lensrentals.com. I imagine there must be something like it for you fellas 'across the pond'.

This past summer we rented a 7-14mm ultra-wide for Mrs VB to try on her M4/3 Panasonic as well as the Olympus E-30 (to stay with a 4/3 system). Tested the lens out at a few AFV museums and an airshow. Learned a lot and it was money well spent (not much money, actually).

Worth looking into.....

Cheers!

If you get a reflex, either Canon or Nikon, it doesn't make that much sense to stick with the kit lens. What's the point of getting a camera with interchangeable lenses if you stick with only one all the time?

Kit lenses can do the job outdoor for AFVs, but fail indoor and on low light.

You can spread the investment, get the body first and the lenses later on. The kit lens will help you getting familiar with the system.

Again, good lenses can last well for over a decade, camera bodies don't.

I don't know what's available on the UK market, but second-hand lenses and refurbished bodies are an option.

Massimo

That sounds like I'll need to make a serious investment, but it's good advice.

The EOS 550D will give you the same low light performances, since they share the same sensor; cheaper, but without tilt screen. It will be good at ISO 1600 (see my pictures from Saumur). Nikon's cameras on the same budget should be more or less equivalent. Try to go to a shop where you can try and handle both, ergonomics may be a factor to consider.

Next step for low light shots would be to get an f/2.8 standard zoom. Then add a good ultra-wide lens. Be ready to spend more on lenses than the camera body. The good news is that bodies get outdated pretty soon, lenses don't.

Massimo

That's an encouraging review. I'm in the process of looking for a replacement for my Panasonic (poor low light results) and this could be just the ticket. I had been tending towards a Nikon since the tilt screen is perfect for high level shots, but this Canon addresses that. A little pricey, but tempting.

You may get more value out of a better lens instead of a new body

Massimo

Nice camera

However I will stick to my "old" EOS 350 for at least another year, perhaps a couple of years
They are a little to expensive to buy another every 2 or 3 years

Michel

Canon Rebel T3i / EOS 600D announced:
www.dpreview.com/news/...os600d.asp

As expected, it has tilt/swivel screen. In terms of image quality nothing new, same sensor as 7D, 60D and 550D, same AF system as 550D.

Massimo

Well, Canon's 17-55 f/2.8 is a first-class lens. For outdoor shots 17 mm is wide enough, indoor, with less space, something wider is handy.

Massimo

Massimo -

I haven't had a chance (Read $$$) to check out any new glass. Still shooting my EFS 17-55 f2.8.

Wikipedia covers the topic:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...ography%29

33 mm on a Canon 50d (APS-C sensor) is usually considered "normal":
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_lens

Anything wider can give you distortion. Wider lenses lend more easily to that, especially at certain angles. I like the dramatic effect that you can achieve that way; then the scale modeller in me prefer to have pictures where it's easier to see dimensions and proper proportions

BTW Have you tried something wider than 17-55? I remember you were talking about a Tokina 12-24 (I have Tokina 11-16).

Massimo

Hi All,

In posting our photos from Calhoun, GA I came across this interesting study in the effect of telephoto compression on an image.

The first shot was taken using my 17-55mm f2.8 lens set at a focal length of 21mm.



This shot was taken at a focal length of 33mm.



The shot @ 33mm has compressed the image. The treads are narrowed, the fenders shortened, and the entire depth of the tank flattened.

Thought you might be interested!

Cheers,
VB

Hi Gang,

Wanted to share a few of our recent adventures in challenging photography!!

When we went to shoot at the Pine Level, NC VFW this is the lighting situation we faced.



What contrasty light?!!

Mrs VB did well to balance the difference by using her flash unit on a remote cable and holding it off to the side.

Her shot:


My shot:


As you can see, she did a better job of balancing than I did.

In the end, we managed to get some good photos - even under less than optimum circumstances. We hung around and waited for the sun to go down and shot some more images in more balanced light. Fortunately we had the time to hang out. Usually it's just shoot and run - no matter WHAT the conditions. LOL!

Also, the following examples are a study in using flash outdoors.

The first is the Sandy ridge, NC M1113A2 shot WITHOUT flash.


Same shot but WITH flash.


Mrs VB has been using an external flash unit for a couple of years and I have been gradually learning to use one as well. The flash makes a HUGE difference both indoors and outdoors! It has taken a while for me to learn how to use flash. Not only the amount to use, but how to expose and color balance. However, it has been such a tremendous asset to our photography that I am using flash more and more. I find myself looking at old photos and wishing I’d used flash when I took them.

I really wish that I’d started using flash a long time ago!

Happy Shooting!!

Lesley, that's an interesting variation, but I can see we're trying to achieve a similar outcome. Some points:

1. Identifier: The first part of the name is, of course, the one that files get sorted on. I keep the original photograph identifier there so that it is easy to refer back and lay your hands on the original image. It is also essential for each image to have a unique identifier otherwise they can't be filed together in the same folder, and using the one provided by the camera is a quick and easy way to achieve this.

2. Tank type: Once all files are named appropriately, I file them by tank type. So M47s go in an M47 folder, Leopards in a Leopard folder, etc. There is therefore no benefit in starting the name with the tank type, since all files in that folder will be of that type.

3. Country: To keep the file name as short as possible I don't include a country name. It is superfluous most of the time (Bovington, Saumur, APG, etc.) but where there is potential confusion I would add a modifier, e.g. for London Ontario (_Leopard_LondonOnt_AA.jpg).

4. Date: This is important but again I only include it electronically where possible to keep the name shorter. For scanned images I include it as part of the location data, so I have _Tiger_Saumur1982_AA.jpg, _Tiger_Saumur1994_AA.jpg, etc.

5. SN/RN: I don't include SN or RN as a separate part of the filename because it is rarely known so only some files would have it. I am trying to achieve a consistent format (i.e. 4 parts separated by underscores) so that the name can be revised automatically later. For example, you could use software to update the name of all vehicles of a certain type or at a certain location and it can achieve that because it looks for the second part of the name (after the first underscore) or the third part of the name (after the second underscore) respectively. There must, of course, be no spaces in the name. Where SN or RN is known I just use it to modify the tank type, for example at Shelby I have _M60-786_CampShelby_JDaneri.jpg and _M60-879_CampShelby_JDaneri.jpg.

6. Author: I like the idea of including the author name in the properties and EXIF - I will look to see if I can adapt the software to do this. I think it should be in addition to the author's name being in the filename, then you can see its authorship without electronic interrogation, and if someone reuses a file on an Internet website it should be obvious who created it (but as a visitor you only get to see the filename).

7. Resolution: in a sense the bigger the better but there are practical limitations on passing around large file sizes so agreed lower resolutions are useful. Books are one of the more forgiving media, they are often only printed at 300dpi so a small photo in one of my books could be as small as 600x400, though for a picture across an A4 page 1800x1200 would be the minimum. In all cases I file a copy of the original file at full resolution, and at least one copy of a lower resolution, cropped and digitally enhanced version (with the '_c' modifier) so I can use them appropriately.


In the proposed scheme your example would look like:

Your preference:

Leopard 2\IMG0371_Leopard1A2(BE)-54793_Leopoldsburg20050410_LDelsing.jpg
Leopard 2\IMG0372_Leopard1A2(BE)-54793_Leopoldsburg20050410_LDelsing.jpg
Leopard 2\IMG0373_Leopard1A2(BE)-54793_Leopoldsburg20050410_LDelsing.jpg
etc.

My preference (for electronic images):

Leopard 2\IMG0371_Leo1A2(BE)-54793_Leopoldsburg_LDelsing.jpg
Leopard 2\IMG0372_Leo1A2(BE)-54793_Leopoldsburg_LDelsing.jpg
Leopard 2\IMG0373_Leo1A2(BE)-54793_Leopoldsburg_LDelsing.jpg
etc.

with the date included electronically in both cases (and the author too if I can use the software to inject it). The important thing is that both versions fit the scheme, however, so they are just personal variations. Either could be created and edited automatically. Could it work for you this way, or would it be too much of a disruption from what you already use?