Massassi Forums Logo

This is the static archive of the Massassi Forums. The forums are closed indefinitely. Thanks for all the memories!

You can also download Super Old Archived Message Boards from when Massassi first started.

"View" counts are as of the day the forums were archived, and will no longer increase.

☖ Forums → Discussion Forum → Rebel XTI + Canon 70-200 f/4L lens
12
Rebel XTI + Canon 70-200 f/4L lens
2008-02-13, 8:25 PM #1
I know this isn't a photography website, but I thought I'd contribute my most recent hobby.

I got this camera for christmas and the lens off ebay.

[http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/2927/picture2035gl6.jpg]

[http://img86.imageshack.us/img86/1922/picture2098cs5.jpg]

[http://img179.imageshack.us/img179/7264/picture2116yx3.jpg]

[http://img179.imageshack.us/img179/8411/picture3017rs3.jpg]

[http://img179.imageshack.us/img179/8552/picture3071ug5.jpg]

[http://img179.imageshack.us/img179/9725/picture2009jd9.jpg]

The second to last one is mars (I think). The last one is not the 70-200 lens but the kit lens, which is 18-55, but it's still a sweet effect.
The power was out, and that's the power truck going to all the generators in the neighborhood to do maintenance or something before they turn the power back on (they had us on generators for a day or two)

Oh yes, and that's my truck at the bottom :D.
This signature agrees with the previously posted signatures. To violate previously posted signatures is a violation of the EULA for this signature and you will be subject to unruly behavior.
2008-02-13, 8:40 PM #2
2nd shot is my favorite.. I would love to get a nice camera one of these days
"Nulla tenaci invia est via"
2008-02-13, 8:43 PM #3
Here's some photos I've taken with my Rebel:

[http://www.unm.edu/~aroessne/temp/001.jpg]
[http://www.unm.edu/~aroessne/temp/002.jpg]
[http://www.unm.edu/~aroessne/temp/003.jpg]
[http://www.unm.edu/~aroessne/temp/004.jpg]
[http://www.unm.edu/~aroessne/temp/005.jpg]
[http://www.unm.edu/~aroessne/temp/006.jpg]
[http://www.unm.edu/~aroessne/temp/007.jpg]
[http://www.unm.edu/~aroessne/temp/010.jpg]
twitter | flickr | last.fm | facebook |
2008-02-13, 9:14 PM #4
Whoa, those are nice pictures.

It would totally suck to drop a camera like that.
Back again
2008-02-13, 9:30 PM #5
It would totally suck to drop you on your head when you were an infant.

Oh, wait.
2008-02-13, 9:41 PM #6
TimeWolf, those are some really great shots.

I have the Rebel XT, and just got the Canon 75-300 lens for Christmas.
2008-02-13, 9:49 PM #7
Originally posted by Reid:
It would totally suck to drop you on your head when you were an infant.

Oh, wait.


[http://content.ytmnd.com/content/1/6/4/164834c288d5ff4ee77d21c380fd3311.gif]
Back again
2008-02-14, 6:45 AM #8
Man I gotta get one of those, sweet shots!
Quote Originally Posted by FastGamerr
"hurr hairy guy said my backhair looks dumb hurr hairy guy smash"
2008-02-14, 7:41 AM #9
Yeah, seriously. I don't know how it can get better than that, but apparently they have the Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III Black 21.1 MP. I wonder how crisper or clearer that would be.
Back again
2008-02-14, 7:52 AM #10
Usually if you're thinking about upgrading your camera the best thing you can do first is upgrade your lens rather than megapixels. The 21.1MP camera would be really good if you're printing really large prints, though.
twitter | flickr | last.fm | facebook |
2008-02-14, 8:00 AM #11
I must suck at looking at photography because I honestly think it looks the same as any other decent camera.
2008-02-14, 8:03 AM #12
or trying to get a nice big shot of some really small thing...


i give you all permission to use that out of context
eat right, exercise, die anyway
2008-02-14, 8:06 AM #13
The last one is good, but might I suggest climbing up on something, or going to some odd position works.

Other than that, pretty good both you and TimeWolf
2008-02-14, 8:29 AM #14
i was hoping to get a new camera with part of my tax money... but that didn't happen

maybe when this $600 rebate happens... the aging sony camera i have is not a bad camera... it's just got some limitations and quirks that get in my way
eat right, exercise, die anyway
2008-02-14, 9:09 AM #15
[http://img179.imageshack.us/img179/7264/picture2116yx3.jpg]

The more I look at this one the more I could swear it was a render.... mmm man good shots.
Quote Originally Posted by FastGamerr
"hurr hairy guy said my backhair looks dumb hurr hairy guy smash"
2008-02-14, 11:38 AM #16
Just a little thing someone showed me today. My friend from high school works at Rev3, and they used my photos for their Daily Segment! :D

http://revision3.com/tzdaily/2008-02-14quickview/
twitter | flickr | last.fm | facebook |
2008-02-14, 11:45 AM #17
Originally posted by Warlockmish:
[http://content.ytmnd.com/content/1/6/4/164834c288d5ff4ee77d21c380fd3311.gif]


Would have been better if you had just called him a furry.
2008-02-14, 4:26 PM #18
Originally posted by Cool Matty:
I must suck at looking at photography because I honestly think it looks the same as any other decent camera.


[http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/3508/abcdefgpx1.jpg]

You can't do that with a camera that fits in your pocket.
(as far as I know)

sorry for the pixellatedishness of the left one, I had to resize it by hand and it has some extra noise from higher ISO.
This signature agrees with the previously posted signatures. To violate previously posted signatures is a violation of the EULA for this signature and you will be subject to unruly behavior.
2008-02-14, 4:50 PM #19
I like the shot you took from I-5 of the MTA building, with the US Bank Tower and Federal Building and the background. You can even see the clock on Union Sation.
2008-02-14, 5:11 PM #20
Whoa, that's downtown LA? I thought there were more buildings.
Back again
2008-02-14, 5:15 PM #21
Well they always say TV adds 10 pounds...

I guess it applies to cities too.

Honestly I didn't have an opportunity to try and get the right angle or anything, I just snapped a picture as I passed downtown.
This signature agrees with the previously posted signatures. To violate previously posted signatures is a violation of the EULA for this signature and you will be subject to unruly behavior.
2008-02-14, 7:02 PM #22
Man, I need a new lens. And/or time.
2008-02-14, 7:13 PM #23
Originally posted by Veger:

You can't do that with a camera that fits in your pocket.
(as far as I know)

sorry for the pixellatedishness of the left one, I had to resize it by hand and it has some extra noise from higher ISO.


No offense, but why couldn't one? What's hard about that picture as far as cameras go? :confused:
2008-02-14, 7:39 PM #24
You can get a really good quality picture out of a point and shoot if you take your time. My point and shoot takes alright photos, but i have to touch them up in photoshop afterwards.

The difference though (from what ive noticed) is just quality. a DSLR will take higher quality / better color pictures. You bsically get more control over how the picture is taken
[01:52] <~Nikumubeki> Because it's MBEGGAR BEGS LIKE A BEGONI.
2008-02-14, 7:40 PM #25
You should take some nice pictures at Pepperdine with Malibu in the horizon or the LA Zoo could be another place. I see lots of photographers come and take pictures of the new Sumatran tiger cubs (not as small and cute as before) but still are nice to take photos of.

If you ever get a chance, Hearst Castle is another great place too.
Back again
2008-02-14, 7:41 PM #26
CM it's all about limitations... even the top tier point and shoot models have limitations that entry level DSLRs won't have the big one being the fact that the lens cannot be changed and that makes a hell of a difference
eat right, exercise, die anyway
2008-02-14, 7:54 PM #27
Originally posted by DrkJedi82:
CM it's all about limitations... even the top tier point and shoot models have limitations that entry level DSLRs won't have the big one being the fact that the lens cannot be changed and that makes a hell of a difference


But my original point is I can't see any difference between lenses :/
2008-02-14, 8:56 PM #28
Originally posted by Cool Matty:
But my original point is I can't see any difference between lenses :/


Between lenses or between point and shoot cameras vs SLR cameras?
If it's the lenses... go here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WUu2eteZLU&feature=related

That compares the standard kit lens (the lens it comes with) with a lens that I really want :P. Just watch the first minute and a half.

By the way, that guy is my idol, watching his videos taught me how to use my camera half-decently.

Originally posted by Cool Matty:
No offense, but why couldn't one? What's hard about that picture as far as cameras go? :confused:


In one picture I left the aperature open longer, allowing more light into it. the other I quickly opened it, allowing it not to get too bright and a focus on the lighter part. (the "smile")
This signature agrees with the previously posted signatures. To violate previously posted signatures is a violation of the EULA for this signature and you will be subject to unruly behavior.
2008-02-14, 9:02 PM #29
well with modern lens manufacturing and coating processes, there isnt a large gap in lens quality among slr lenses.

there is a bigger gap between point and shoot and slr lenses though. they are ground less precisely, and their rated apertures are not their actual apertures. take a point and shoot rated at f/2.8 and take a picture of some cityscape in open sky lighting(thats not bright sun. open sky is like...a partly cloudy day or something). then take the same shot with a slr with a lens rated at 2.8. you'll see a big difference as far as depth of field. (namely, the point and shoot will be have a larger depth of field than the slr, because comparatively, the 2.8 on the point and shoot is equivalent to a 11 or 16 on the slr.)

also, **** cannon.
My girlfriend paid a lot of money for that tv; I want to watch ALL OF IT. - JM
2008-02-14, 9:11 PM #30
I kinda wanted the Nikon D80 once I heard about it, but Christmas had already passed.
This signature agrees with the previously posted signatures. To violate previously posted signatures is a violation of the EULA for this signature and you will be subject to unruly behavior.
2008-02-14, 9:37 PM #31
Originally posted by Veger:
I kinda wanted the Nikon D80 once I heard about it, but Christmas had already passed.


Get a D70 instead.

D80 might be higher megapixel, but it's the same size CCD and as I understand has a slightly slower shutterspeed.

Megapixel is just a buzzword for impressionable idiots to ooh at.
2008-02-14, 9:43 PM #32
the D70 is a nice camera, but the D80 has a higher quality sensor. its not about megapixels, it's the tech that goes into the sensor. the cameras came out three years apart, do you think they'd still be using the same type of image sensor? seriously.

that said i do like the D70, the time's i've used one, i have been suitably impressed. and the fact that its nikon means it's sexier.
My girlfriend paid a lot of money for that tv; I want to watch ALL OF IT. - JM
2008-02-14, 9:50 PM #33
Originally posted by Ford:
the D70 is a nice camera, but the D80 has a higher quality sensor.


Pretty close to the same actually.

The output isn't worth the price difference. (Or atleast it wasn't about a year and a half ago)
2008-02-15, 4:20 AM #34
[http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/TajMahalbyAmalMongia.jpg]

Can your camera take pictures like this one? It wasn't photoshopped.
Back again
2008-02-15, 5:20 AM #35
yes i can take a picture of a painting with my camera
gbk is 50 probably

MB IS FAT
2008-02-15, 6:00 AM #36
Ew! Dirty hotlinker!

Apparently it is a real photo, taken with some crazy type of film though.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:TajMahalbyAmalMongia.jpg
2008-02-15, 6:27 AM #37
excessively grainy that photo is
eat right, exercise, die anyway
2008-02-15, 10:19 AM #38
That really looks like a painting but I'll take your word for it.
This signature agrees with the previously posted signatures. To violate previously posted signatures is a violation of the EULA for this signature and you will be subject to unruly behavior.
2008-02-15, 12:23 PM #39
Originally posted by Warlockmish:
[http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/TajMahalbyAmalMongia.jpg]

Can your camera take pictures like this one? It wasn't photoshopped.


Technically it was, because there's no way to get those results with out a PC to interpret the RGB pictures. Even so, pretty cool, especially for the 1900s. I'd like to see people fool around with that today.
2008-02-15, 3:20 PM #40
a nikon d40 user here
12

↑ Up to the top!