Meet photography guru, Laurie Excell

[GrafxEditor]

Hi guys,

I'm pleased to announce a brand-new feature we've never offered here on the forums before. This thread will be moderated by photography guru Laurie Excell, who has graciously agreed to answer all of your questions about digital cameras and equipment. This is a very exciting advancement indeed for our little forum!

Laurie spent the first 25 years of her career in photographic sales helping pros and hobbyists alike decide which photographic equipment best suited their needs. All the while, she was an avid photographer. In 2000 she left sales to become a full-time professional wildlife and nature photographer. She has been published in Outdoor Photographer, Outdoor Photography (UK), Photoshop User, and Layers magazines. You will also find her photography on Audubon calendars, as well as postcards, calendars, and posters for the National Park Service.

As if that's not enough, Laurie also leads wildlife photography safaris in North America and is an instructor with the Digital Landscape Workshop Series, Photoshop World, and Cruising Through Life training extravaganzas. She also runs a business called EQuipmentLady, where she sells photographic equipment on consignment for other photographers when they upgrade their equipment. Oh, and in all of her spare time, she's the Photo Equipment Advice Desk Guru for our very own National Association of Photoshop Professionals.

OK, I'm exhausted just going through all of that! I think you get the idea: She knows her stuff! So please make Laurie feel welcome and start shooting off every question you've wanted to ask but were afraid to.

One final note: This goes without saying, but if you have an answer to someone's question, please feel free to weigh in and join in the fun. Think synergy. :cool:

Annie

[mkctlc2001]

Welcome Laurie! :) It is wonderful to have you here. I am very excited. I don't have questions yet just because I don't know enough about it to ask but I will be reading and learning as the others ask. Right now I only know how to use the program settings on my Nikon coolpix8700. Again welcome aboard!:)

[mrod]

I'll second all that Annie just said. Several months ago I submitted a question to her via the NAPP Equipment Advice desk about DSLRs, and got a quick, in-depth and very helpful reply back!

Glad to have you around, Laurie!

Mike

[photoshopsusieq]

Welcome aboard, Laurie! I'm sure I'll have LOTS of quesions. Thanks in advance for your help and support.

[lexcell]

Hi Everyone,
I am glad to be a part of this great forum. As Annie mentioned, I have a fairly extensive background in photography and equipment. My friends call me a gear head...well, you get the drift. So, jump on in and fire away with your questions. And everyone throw in your two cents worth as well. Let's make this a fun learning experience for one and all. I find that I learn new things this way as well. Thanks for the warm welcome, I look forward to meeting many more members over the next few weeks.

Let me clarify the two new forums here...
The Digital Cameras and Equipment Thread is for just that...any questions you may have about lenses, cameras, flashes, filters, accessories. What to buy, what best suits your specific needs, etc.
The Technique Thread is for questions that are how to, and what is...just like the first question here about depth of field.

Keep smiling,
Laurie

[billz]

Welcome aboard Laurie ... I'm confident our questions will keep you busy!

Bill

[bayhli]

I'm thrilled to have you here Laurie. :)

Hopefully you will enjoy the forum as much as we all do.

[Diana]

Wow, our own on-board expert.:) Welcome, Laurie!

Diana

[Robyn]

How exciting..............welcome Laurie!

[efarnstrom]

Welcome, and here is a question. I've used my wide-angle lens before on landscapes, but for the first time I was taking a sea-scape. The way I 'fixed' the distortion was with the filter to straighten the horizon. Was there anything I could have done while taking the photo?
http://www.pixentral.com/hosted/1m5L7Ca84ogdH1H3sXy1Sj19TRemRK_thumb.jpg (http://www.pixentral.com/show.php?picture=1m5L7Ca84ogdH1H3sXy1Sj19TRemRK)

[jazzfisher]

Hi Laurie--Welcome!
Here's my first question--can you come over to my house & give me some lessons???????:D

[Inspeqtor]

Wow! Annie and the team. Thank you for adding Laurie and these new subjects to our forum!

Laurie, I want to give you a warm welcome to this great place :)

[Aussie Nan]

WELCOME LAURIE! Christmas has certainly come early for us here at the village. It is wonderful to have you on board. Hope we don't give you too many headaches!

Toni

[Bayla]

Laurie,

May I add my words of welcome? How exciting to have our own 'in house' expert! Thanks Annie & the team!:)

Bayla

[GaryK]

Hi Laurie

Welcome to the village. I hope you enjoy your time spent here. :)

[Wendy]

Oh WOW ...

Welcome to the Village Laurie :)

Wendy

[lexcell]

Hi efarnstrom,
If you had held the camera perfectly level with the horizon you would not have gotten the curved effect. Really wide angle lenses do have a tendency to give you the curved earth look when you tilt up or down. With a landscape shot, you may not notice it as much if there is alot fgoing on in the frame like trees, rocks, etc. Here, with the vast horizon it is exagerated. I can even get a relatively straight image with a fisheye if I hold it perfectly flush to the horizon. It does, however, restrict your creative composition.

Also, thanks for the very warm welcome everyone.

[kathydel]

Wow another great new feature. Welcome Laurie..This is a wonderful idea. I appreciate your taking the time out of your obviously busy schedule to share your knowledge and expertise with us. Looking forward to learning more here and eventually asking some questions myself.

Kathy

[Berengaria]

Oh, I'm going to love this subject. I've had my Canon S3 IS for several years and only really know the basics. I've so many problems I'm trying to solve. You'll surely be hearing from me Laurie. Many thanks for coming aboard.

Berengaria

[Not4wood]

Hi guys,

I'm pleased to announce guru Laurie Excell. :cool:
Annie <Snip>

Welcome Laurie.

Looking forward to hearing your point of view about the current range of equipment available.

[JulieM]

Welcome, Laurie! This is certainly an exciting new feature in the Village. Yes, I'm quite sure we'll keep you busy here. And thank you, Annie!

[GeoR]

Hi Laurie: Welcome & am looking forward to learning more. GeoR

[nkeevers]

Welcome Laurie! Glad to have you here at the Village and hope to pose some questions soon!

[Mary]

Welcome Laurie - and thank you to Annie and everyone else who has turned what we thought would be BAD into something that is BETTER!!!!! :):):)

[Joe M]

This is fantastic.

A great addition to the Forums.

[Grant]

Hi Laurie welcome aboard ...

--

[lsweeney]

Welcome, Laurie!

And thank you, Annie and company, for providing us with another wonderful resource!

[jvolpe]

Hi Laurie, welcome to the forum. I'm very excited to have you on board. I love working w/Elements, but it's very exciting to have someone help with our camera questions. I have a Nikon D200. What is your website for your selling camera equipment? I have a Nikon N90 I'd like to sell. Also your workshops sound exciting. Any in the New England area? :)


Janis

[lexcell]

Wow! What a warm welcome from everyone. Thanks! I feel right at home already. Janis asked me about my consignemnt sales and workshops so I am going to post the websites so that everyone can learn more about me...
www.laurieexcell.com (http://www.laurieexcell.com) my personal website You can click on my blog for my latest adventures and click on safaris to see the safaris I lead
www.equipmentlady.com (http://www.equipmentlady.com) my consignment website...stay tuned lot's of gear being posted this weekend
www.digitallandscape.org (http://www.digitallandscape.org)
www.cruisingthroughlife.com (http://www.cruisingthroughlife.com) see the Picture Perfect Cruise
www.photoshopworld.com (http://www.photoshopworld.com) I teach a pre-conference all about beginning photography

[NMarti]

Laurie
Welcome aboard! It will be so great to have you here. I think based on the fact that when I went to bed last night this had not even been posted and now at 9 am the following morning we are on page 3 of welcomes you can get the idea that people are excited about not only photography but the opportunity to learn. It will be a real treat to learn from you.

[mrod]

Hi Laurie-

What's the best way to contact you? I just submitted something via the form you have at www.laurieexcell.com (http://www.laurieexcell.com/), but if this isn't the best way, could you PM me and let me know?

Thanks!
Mike

[DMurray407]

Wow. this is great! I'm working on my list of questions . . . .
Welcome Laurie-and thank you Annie!

[Jancy]

Welcome Laurie, Looking forward to everyones questions and learning from your expert advice!

[winclk]

welcome laurie.

i am looking forward to learning how to use my camera (nikon d50).

maybe after you get settled in we could have something like a photo shoot maybe every other week or once a month.

we could have a lesson and then go out and shoot something that goes along with the lesson and then post our pictures. this way we could learn hands on training so that we could better uderstand how to use our cameras and lenses.

we could post exactly what we shoot without any photoshop touchups and maybe you could tell us what we could do to make our photos better.

just a suggestion. don't know if this would be too much for you to do here on this site.

[Elemobe]

WOW, this is fantastic news A BIG welcome Laurie and thank you Annie. Talk about a phoenix rising from the ashes:D

Wonderful idea, I'm so happy (as she skips around the room;))

[lexcell]

Hi Winclk,
That may be something we can work in in the future. But, for now I just want to get acquanited with everyone and see how the questions go. This would actually fit more in the techniques section. I appreciate your suggestion and enthusiasm.

[Ric Cisson]

Hi Laurie and welcome aboard. It is more an honor and a priviledge to have you amongst us to field our photography questions. I am particularly interested to hear your discussions on equipment choices, as fast as the industry is changing, it is so hard to know sometimes what is best suited anymore for the different types of nature and landscape photography in particular. I just visited your personal website. Would you be willing to field questions as they relate to printing?

Again, welcome aboard!:) And Annie...I really think you have outdone yourself...what next?:)

[lexcell]

Hi Ric,
Thanks for the warm welcome. Let's stick with photography here for now. I'm sure there are other sections in this forum that address printing. I think I'm going to have my hands full with these two forums and all the enthusiasm you are all exhibiting.

[RobertSchuldenfrei]

Hi Laurie,

Let me add my word of welcome. This is going to be (and already is) a great sub-forum.

Cheers,

Bob

[Jerrilyn]

Hi Laurie, it's wonderful to have you here. What a treat! Thank you, Village People ;), for bringing her on board!

[efarnstrom]

Hi efarnstrom,
If you had held the camera perfectly level with the horizon you would not have gotten the curved effect. Really wide angle lenses do have a tendency to give you the curved earth look when you tilt up or down. With a landscape shot, you may not notice it as much if there is alot fgoing on in the frame like trees, rocks, etc. Here, with the vast horizon it is exagerated. I can even get a relatively straight image with a fisheye if I hold it perfectly flush to the horizon. It does, however, restrict your creative composition.

Also, thanks for the very warm welcome everyone.

As you said, mostly there is a lot going on in my landscape photos, but this was a surprise when I looked at the ocean pictures. I appreciate the information. In the future I will try this out.

[bnk1953]

Laurie - curious to get your opinion about zoom lenses - I'm looking at the tamron 18-250.
Thanks
~bruce.

[lexcell]

Bruce,
It depends on what camera you have...

-If you have Nikon, I'd save up and go with their 18-200mm...you gain a half stop at the 200mm end and it has VR which enables you to hand hold at slower shutter speeds than normal. If your budget just won't allow you to go the extra expense, then the Tamron would be my second choice.

-If you have Canon, the Tamron is about as good as anything else out there. Canon does not have a lens in that range.

[vawitt]

Welcome, Laurie! I hope you have a big cup of coffee on hand because I think this will be a very popular place to hang out. Thanks for agreeing to come counsel us!

~Val in cloudy IL

[msbrad]

Wow! This is exciting. ...and welcome.
Be prepared for questions from me.
m

[Edmund]

Laurie, Welcome aboard. You and Annie have just added a very much needed sub-forum to an already great forum.
Sincerely,
Eddie

[Not4wood]

Bruce,
It depends on what camera you have...

-If you have Nikon, I'd save up and go with their 18-200mm...you gain a half stop at the 200mm end and it has VR which enables you to hand hold at slower shutter speeds than normal. If your budget just won't allow you to go the extra expense, then the Tamron would be my second choice.

-If you have Canon, the Tamron is about as good as anything else out there. Canon does not have a lens in that range.

Great timing.

A guy I know, (dont know him that well to call a friend yet ;)) just returned from a Photo Expedition to the South Georgia Island and tonight he was complaining about his Tele Zoom (cant remember the full range) 400. He was saying that first he was the one that had the baby zoom on this trip, but his camera was having a hard time focusing in the low light because his lens was only a 4 and he now wished his lens was faster. He is into the Canon Line above the XTI. Sorry, I think he said about 12-16 MP but not sure. I dont know Canon so I can quote you. What was interesting about this discussion is he had mentioned most of the Photographers on this trip had huge stuff. There were people on the trip who weren't photographers and it wasn't just an exclusive Photo Tour. If I remember correctly he said the group/s owner or organizer is Cheeseman??? Anybody heard of this? I will search it but I'm in the middle of something at the moment and will do the search in a bit. Multi-tasking right now LOL and just dropped in to read the latest post.

[stepasan]

Welcome to the forum Laurie.
It is very exciting to have someone like you ready to answer such technical questions.

Stephen

[richardallen]

Great to have your advice available. I am starting to get back in photography, mainly outdoors. will need your advice.
rick:)

[lexcell]

Thanks for the warm welcome everyone. I am happy to provide my advice wherever I can. I am finding that several members are very proficient at photography and are giving excellent advice as well. It's great to have a variety of opinions to dig through and find the solution that works best for each and every one of you.

[Michael1116]

I shoot a lot of live concerts some indoors, some outdoors. I usually take two bodies, one set with a wide zoom, and one with a zoom telephoto. I have a constant f/2.8 wide zoom, and need to replace my 70-200mm f/4 Canon with the 70-200mm f/2.8. The f/4 is probably my favorite lens, but it is only fast enough during the day.

Question...
In your opinion is the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 IS version worth the extra $500-$600 over the non IS version? I have read on other forums that some believe the non IS version to be sharper than the IS.

PS I see you have an IS for sale in your e-bay store

[Chuck S.]

Michael, while you're waiting for the expert response from Laurie:

Going from f/4 to f/2.8 gets you one stop - is that going to be enough to make a difference for you in the non-daylight setting? IS, presumably, might give you an additional 1 or 1.5 stops. If the sharpness is equivalent, that extra stop or two might be worth the $$. Just speculating - I have the f/4 but not either f/2.8.

[Michael1116]

Thanks for your input Chuck. I had heard the same things. If you have the f/4 you already know how great the colors and contrast are.

[jazzfisher]

Michael,
Welcome to another concert photographer! I have the Pentax K-10D which has the IS in the camera. But have been shooting with a 2.8 zoom even before I got the IS. I think the IS helps some, but the 2.8 really makes a big difference. I also just got a 50mm 1.4, & a 77mm 1.8. I just shot an indoor concert last weekend-I will try to put a shot or 2 in my gallery today or tomorrow. Most of the time though I used the 2.8 lens--but you do miss some of the action shots (not enough light) even with the IS.

[lexcell]

Chuck nailed it with his comments on the differences. You will be able to handhold up to 2 stops slower with the IS but, it depends on whether or not your subject is moving. It only helps you to hold steady...not moving subjects.

[starkarlis]

I have made a New Year's resolution to take my photography from a hobby to a craft. I see al of these beautiful pictures and realize that sometimes it is just being in the right place at the right time. So my question is this: do you carry your camera with you EVERYWHERE just in case. I have a full time job and sometimes during the day I see something and wish I had my camera. But living in Texas, I don't want to leave it in the car all day. This morning it is 28 degrees and the the rest of the year it is 105:D. This is not good for my camera, right? Not to mention the unthinkable that someone might break into my car or steal it from my desk. So although this isn't a technical question, I would love to know anyone's opinion.

Thanks

Starla

[Chuck S.]

Starla, greetings from down I-45!

One answer to your dilemma is to carry along a camera that fits in pocket or purse; there are some surprisingly good point & shoot cameras on the market today that can give you a very nice quality image. I have a DSLR, but it stays in the house most of the time; my P&S, on the other hand, is almost always with me: in my laptop bag or in a pocket or in a belt case.

Another alternative is a camera phone. Some of the newer ones can take a creditable snapshot. And I'll bet that most of us almost always have our phones....:)

[Not4wood]

As much as I really want to bring my DSLR with me at all times, its very impracticale and of course your right about leaving it in the car. The temps and possible theft make it more inviting to leave it in the house.

Just make sure that if you use a P&S just keep it set on the highest quality and the largest size photo. This way you wont regret taking a great shot and then having to cringe because the quality wasn't the best the camera could make. A lot of people, keep the P&S camera's set for a lower setting so they can take more photo's and then regret it later. :eek:

[Chuck S.]

Just make sure that if you use a P&S just keep it set on the highest quality and the largest size photo. This way you wont regret taking a great shot and then having to cringe because the quality wasn't the best the camera could make. A lot of people, keep the P&S camera's set for a lower setting so they can take more photo's and then regret it later. :eek:

Excellent advice, Mark! A few years ago, I encountered a person whose goal was to maximize the number of photos he could get on his camera's memory card! As a result, he shot them all at 640 by 480 pixels, then wondered why his prints looked so bad...:rolleyes: Memory card prices have come down to the point that a 1GB or 2GB card is a very cost-effective choice.

[starkarlis]

That's what I am afraid of. I have this great Sony camera and the thought of it at home and missing a great shot or getting a terrible one just kills me. Oh waht to do...:confused:

[Fernan]

Hello Laurie! Welcome to the forum. :)

[Ericr2zz]

When using a wide angle lens, position the horizon in the center of the image to minimize distortion.

[lexcell]

That may minimize distortion but, it limits your creative choice of where to place the horizon. Most images are stronger with the horizon line lower or higher rather than centered. However, sometimes, a centered horizon works creatively as well. I recommend putting the horizon where it gives me the strongest image, not based on the focal length of a lens.

[Chuck S.]

In many/most cases, the Correct Camera Distortion filter will take care of wide angle lens 'issues'. It's one of the most useful tools in Elements IMHO.

[Not4wood]

Placing the Hosizon in the center of the shot creates a stagnant peaceful calming effect. Depending on what the artist is trying to do at that moment, usually the Horizon line is either higher or lower to create movement or tension but mainly to help move the eye across the photo.

Like most rules, this is made to be broken. But unlike most rules, this one is a steadfast rule and if broken you must have a very good reason or the shot just doesn't look right. All books on composition, all teachers of composition all make the same statement. If you must, then do it but don't be surprised if others come at you for a story....

Doing it for less distortion effect??? Nonsense, sometimes having a distortion effect is worth the creativity as well.... Anything to be different.......

[Ericr2zz]

Hi Laurie,

Nice to have you on board! Would like to know
what equipment you use, your equipment preferences for particular
outdoor situations, and the amount of equipment you
carry when "on assignment".

Can you also tell us how you select UV/polarizer filters (is there really a difference
in manufacturers' brands. How do you tell if a filter is high quality?)

Also, what's your preference in shoulderbags/slingbags/backpacks?

Just trying to get a sense of what the pros use.

Thanks!

[Caroleen]

Laurie,
Looked at your blog last night and boy, it is photography at its best.

I personally was asked this question when I changed over to digital.
Is there any difference in the quality of the picture whether its film or digital? I have a 10 mp camera and had a Canon 35 mm before. My son said the pictures looked grainy whereas they did not before. Would you say that film gives a better picture than digital?

Also, are the pictures printed on these home photo printers going to last in the years to come or is it better to get your pictures printed from a Photo shop? I remember the old Polaroid and how you cannot see the pictures today they are so faded. Anyway, just a few questions I've been pondering?
Thanks so much, can't wait to hear your advice on different topics.

[Not4wood]

Laurie,
Looked at your blog last night and boy, it is photography at its best.

I personally was asked this question when I changed over to digital.
Is there any difference in the quality of the picture whether its film or digital? I have a 10 mp camera and had a Canon 35 mm before. My son said the pictures looked grainy whereas they did not before. Would you say that film gives a better picture than digital?

Also, are the pictures printed on these home photo printers going to last in the years to come or is it better to get your pictures printed from a Photo shop? I remember the old Polaroid and how you cannot see the pictures today they are so faded. Anyway, just a few questions I've been pondering?
Thanks so much, can't wait to hear your advice on different topics.

Carol,

What do you mean by grainy? Is it noise? Is it something that can be cleaned up with Elements? Why don't you post a shot, with your camera information and maybe we can help.

To answer the other question about logevity, "We really don't know, Yet". I just got a new HP Printer and the quote is from HP, "When using HP Inks with certain HP Papers I can get between 100-200 years out of the photo depending on if its in an album or behind a glass on a wall". How would they know? Digital Photo's haven't been around 20 years let alone 100??? Twenty years ago, I was in Mid Manhattan shooting portraits at the Studio using Poloroids and regular film. There was no digital, there were puters but barely at that time. Matter of fact, I had just found a Poloroid I had shot using my 4x5 Poloroid back and it wasn't discolored at all. Matter of fact, it was in an old film box in my old portfolio case and wasn't exposed to light. That was an old photo about 20 years old. I didn't know Poloroids held up that long. I remember seeing shots turn brown and fade. I had never seen one in that good of condition. Maybe there is hope??

[Ericr2zz]

I'm considering purchasing a full frame camera to replace my Canon Rebel XT (1.6 crop factor). Other than WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get), do full frame cameras, in general, produce better quality pictures?

Any other advantages to Full Frame vs. cameras that have crop factors?

[Lesa]

I believe the answer is yes. A full frame camera has a much larger sensor, therefore (all things being equal) the photos should be better quality. Also, a full frame camera will allow you to shoot in lower light situations without pumping up the ISO quite so much.

I hope others will reply to this post as I want to learn more. I recently played with a 5D while teaching a photo editing class at Orleans Camera in Cape Cod, and was just amazed at its speed, brightness of photos in really low light, and the overall image quality (I currently shoot with a Rebel Xti).

I can't stop thinking about the darn thing. Arg!!!

[JulieM]

Interesting, Lesa. I hadn't realized there was a low-light advantage in using a full frame sensor. Why would that be the case, I wonder?

[LeeOtsubo]

I'm considering purchasing a full frame camera to replace my Canon Rebel XT (1.6 crop factor). Other than WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get), do full frame cameras, in general, produce better quality pictures?

Any other advantages to Full Frame vs. cameras that have crop factors?
As always, the answer is, "It all depends!"

What are you trying to photograph. If your interests are landscape, portraits and architecture, the FF 5D is your choice. If your interests are sports, wildlife and PJ, a 1.6 or 1.3 crop body is a better choice.

First and foremost, do you currently own any EF-S lenses? If so, you're up the creek with a 5D. You'll have to replace them with EF lenses.

Second, do you usually have a telephoto mounted on your body? If so, you lose the 1.6 crop factor.

Third, do you have a lot invested in XT accessories? If so, you're again "up the creek".

What makes you say the 1.6 crop bodies aren't WYSIWIG? By definition, what you see in the VF of an SLR is what you'll capture. The XT and XTi show 95% of the scene while a 5D shows 96%.

The VF in a 5D is much brighter because it allows more light to enter when the aperture is wide open prior to releasing the shutter. That's a good thing.

The 5D is superior in low light because it has 8.7 micron photosites vs 5.7 microns for the 10.5MP XTi. Extrapolating to the 6.5MP XT, it has about 9 micron photosites. The big difference, of course, will be the DIGIC II CPU in the 5D vs whatever the XT had.

Bottom line, "It all depends!"

[Lesa]

I hadn't realized there was a low-light advantage in using a full frame sensor. Why would that be the case, I wonder?

Honestly, I have no idea; could it be because the larger sensor size captures more light? :)

[Not4wood]

Thats like saying, the 120 Roll Film sees more light because its larger so your exposure is going to be different then the 35mm exposure.

Does the 4x5 Negative which is a lot larger then the 35mm format see more light or is the exposure the same???

I am not saying your wrong, but I never heard of the light factor in the size change over. Just the crop factor in your shot. I have the D80 and its 1.5 times crop factor. Its the exposure off if I use an external light meter? NO, its exactly the same as far as I know.

We need someone who has more knowledge and experience in the Digital Format???? Laurieeeeeeeee, I think your in the field again. First, how r u? How is this group?? If you got a second we sure can use your knowledge and answer the above questions for us.

Thank you in advance.

If your talking about real advantages, the only real thing I see is that my 18-135mm Zoom is equal to a 202 if your talking about a 35mm. Thats it.

[LeeOtsubo]

...Thats like saying, the 120 Roll Film sees more light because its larger so your exposure is going to be different then the 35mm exposure.

Does the 4x5 Negative which is a lot larger then the 35mm format see more light or is the exposure the same???...

I don't know who you're addressing this toward but if this is in response to my post above, the 5D has a bigger prism and mirror. Therefore, it allows more light to enter when the mirror is down and the aperture is wide open prior to releasing the shutter. Perhaps you're unaware that the aperture is held wide open until the moment the shutter is released. That's why they call it "stopping down". The aperture blades "stop down" to the selected aperture.

The prism is the chunk of glass housed in the hump in front of the VF. Its purpose is to refract the image coming into the camera and direct it out the viewfinder in the proper perspective, ie right-side up. The larger the prism, the brighter the VF.

Canon was able to accomplish this by deleting the integrated flash which is unneeded in a professional grade camera. In fact, in Japan, a pop-up flash is one of the features of an amateur body.

If your post was addressed toward me, I stand by my earlier assertion. I've taught digital cameras and photography for the past 8 years. In that time, I've presented to over 30,000 people including audiences of over 500. There are few questions that I haven't yet heard. I don't know everything but when I post something, you can take it to the bank.

BTW, a 1.5 crop factor does NOT make your 135mm lens equal to 202mm. It gives you the field of view of a 202mm lens. It's only when you normalize an image at similar sizes does the 1.5 crop image seem larger. All other things being equal (eg equal sensor resolution and lens resolving capability), the 1.5 crop image will not have any more detail than a 135mm lens on a FF camera.

[Lesa]

The 5D is superior in low light because it has 8.7 micron photosites vs 5.7 microns for the 10.5MP XTi. Extrapolating to the 6.5MP XT, it has about 9 micron photosites. The big difference, of course, will be the DIGIC II CPU in the 5D vs whatever the XT had.

I'm not sure I know what all this means, but it sounds like it makes sense! And in my testing, the photos from the 5D were much brighter at a lower ISO than my Rebel Xti in the low light setting of a classroom with projector.

Take from that what you will :)

[LeeOtsubo]

I'm not sure I know what all this means, but it sounds like it makes sense! And in my testing, the photos from the 5D were much brighter at a lower ISO than my Rebel Xti in the low light setting of a classroom with projector.

Take from that what you will :)
Hi Lesa,
Assuming you mean both images were taken in a classroom with only a projector for light, the 5D would have produced a "cleaner" image (less noise). This may have contributed to a "brighter" look than an XTi that would probably produce dark, muddy blacks and speckled whites.

Light particles (photons) are captured by photosites (light sensitive devices). A large sensor (usually) has larger photosites (measured in microns). Large photosites capture more photons and create a stronger signal. A strong signal requires less amplification than a weak signal. That means the noise is not amplified along with the signal. Noise is present in every electronic circuit. It's created by heat which casues electrons to bounce off each other, vibrate, scream in pain (just kidding to see if your eyes have glazed over) and other natural phenomena.

But size isn't the only factor (everyone knows that! :D) Although the XTi and 5D both use the Canon DIGIC II CPU, the 5D uses much more sophisticated algorithms for processing the signals coming off the sensor. This helps to better filter the signal and suppress the noise.

Forty years as a photograpaher, teacher and electronics engineer has some benefits. :D You should sign up for one of my Webcasts.

[Not4wood]

Lee and Lesa,

First I'm not attacking. I trying to understand by questioning and comparing to my existing knowledge and building on it, since I am actually still pretty new to Digital Photography as a whole.

Lee,
OK, I can understand what you are saying about the size of the Mirrors and the Sensors. Yes, I do also know about the Mirror being Stopped down. LOL
So, from what you have said about the larger aperture opening, larger mirror and also larger sensor to let light in to brighten up the view finder. But, then my questions is from everything you mentioned its the view finder that brighter not the ending result in a compared photograph. Am I correct in this? But, I can see you also addressed Lesa's question so I am still confused by your answer. From what you said her two shots should be almost exactly the same. The changes that are noticed are a cleaner image, maybe a more detailed shot as well from the newer more complicated sensor and algorithims. I'm also pretty sure its the programming of the actual puter in the camera as well. But anyway your saying that the two shots shouldn't be all that different.

Now, I'm sorry if I put you on the defensive before but I still feel that my old 4x5, medium formats and 35mm (all film cameras if you will) set at the same exposures and lighting will have the same exposed Photo. I just dont understand the principle of a larger sensor capturing more light to make a shot lighter. Doesn't make sense to me. Your information mentioned above is all for brightening the view finder correct?

[lexcell]

Hey gang,
Sorry I missed all the interchange here. My post notifier did not let me know there was an exchange going on in this section.

I'll try to put my two cents worth in for the various topics posted here. Then, let's move some of this discussion to another thread. It does not belong here and maybe someone else out there would like to read and contribute to the discussion.

OK, a full frame sensor should not give a better exposure than a 1.3/1.5/1.6 sized sensor everything but the sensor size being equal. Light, ISO, aperture, etc are what make up an exposure. So, if I have a 50mm lens with ISO 100 and am shooting at 1/125 @ F8 on a small sensor camera and I pick up a full frame camera with the same lens the exposure should be the same. (One thing may change the exposure and that is the full frame sensor is effectively giving a wider field of view than the cropped, smaller sensor and you may be getting more light from the scene this way...)

As for the brightness of the viewfinder, not all cameras are created equally as Lee so eloquently pointed out and detailed. So, one camera may look brighter through the viewfinder than another but the exposure should not change.

EricZ asked me what equipment I use...turn to the thread "What Equipment Do You Use" and I'll list the equipment I use for my style of shooting and everyone can throw in their lists of equipment for their type of photography....

[LeeOtsubo]

Lee and Lesa,

First I'm not attacking. I trying to understand by questioning and comparing to my existing knowledge and building on it, since I am actually still pretty new to Digital Photography as a whole.

Lee,
OK, I can understand what you are saying about the size of the Mirrors and the Sensors. Yes, I do also know about the Mirror being Stopped down. LOL
So, from what you have said about the larger aperture opening, larger mirror and also larger sensor to let light in to brighten up the view finder. But, then my questions is from everything you mentioned its the view finder that brighter not the ending result in a compared photograph. Am I correct in this? But, I can see you also addressed Lesa's question so I am still confused by your answer. From what you said her two shots should be almost exactly the same. The changes that are noticed are a cleaner image, maybe a more detailed shot as well from the newer more complicated sensor and algorithims. I'm also pretty sure its the programming of the actual puter in the camera as well. But anyway your saying that the two shots shouldn't be all that different.

Now, I'm sorry if I put you on the defensive before but I still feel that my old 4x5, medium formats and 35mm (all film cameras if you will) set at the same exposures and lighting will have the same exposed Photo. I just dont understand the principle of a larger sensor capturing more light to make a shot lighter. Doesn't make sense to me. Your information mentioned above is all for brightening the view finder correct?

After 30,000 students, you're not going to offend or make me defensive. I've heard just about every half-baked theory and old wives tale out there. I try to offer answers that any level of digital photographer can understand. Sometimes, I miss the mark and people think I'm being condescending. It just means you were above or below the level I targeted based on your question.

As Laurie said, there are only 3 major controls: Aperture, Shutter Speed and ISO. In my workshops, I teach this concept as the Exposure Triad. An image exposed at 1/250", f/8, ISO 100 allows the same amount of light to enter the camera whether it's FF or APS-C.

The difference comes into play in how the signal is processed or, as Laurie pointed out and I missed, the field of view. The simplest explanation for the phenomenon witnessed by Lesa (5D has brighter images than XTi) is that the FF 5D has a wider FOV and may have captured more of the low light being thrown off by the projector. I had assumed that, in order to normalize the images, the 5D had used a longer FL to capture the same area as the XTi. That may not have been the case. As we've already established, the 5D at 50mm captures 39.6 deg horizontal FOV while an XTi at 50mm captures 25.4 deg horizontal FOV. Therefore, to normalize the images, the 5D should be set to 80mm or the XTi to 31mm.

A more complex explanation involves the sophisticated low light capability of a 5D versus the entry-level capability of an XTi. But, as I preach to my students, always try the path of least resistance first. Only when that fails, try a complex, convoluted theory. That's my last post on this subject.

[Edmund]

Lee, I just love your answers to all these confusing questions. Your answers are short and right to the point and very plainly said in lay man's language.
IMHO.
Eddie:)

[Not4wood]

Thank you all!!

[C8franklyn]

Hi Laurie,

This is fantatic. This forum just gets better and better especially with professionals like you who are willing to share their vast photographic knowledge. Thank You.

Now for the question:

I currently use a point and shoot (Sony Cyber Shot) which has a Carl Zeiss lens and I have been very happy with the results. I have had the camera for 2 years now and it is time to upgrade. I'm torn between an advanced P&S (Sony Cyber Shot H9, that has a tremdous amount of features that I love) and a DSLR. Please advise in your opinion what is the best move. My price range is $400-$700. FYI, I am working with a stock photo agency to sell my photos.

www.photo.net/photos/PhotoByCate (http://www.photo.net/photos/PhotoByCate)

Thanks much,
Cate:)

[mariba]

Hi Laurie,

I'm so glad that you're here. I've decided to get a DSLR camera, but the more research that I do, the more confusing it becomes! I've been looking at an Olympus SP-560 Ultra Zoom. I have an interest in action/wildlife, so I would like something with good continuous speed, as well as a need for a good macro mode. I've got the macro thing fairly well understood, but I am a little lost on being able to achieve 15 FPS shooting speeds, on a camera thats rated for 3! Any thoughts?

Thank you,
Marie

[RobertSchuldenfrei]

Hi Laurie,

I'm so glad that you're here. I've decided to get a DSLR camera, but the more research that I do, the more confusing it becomes! I've been looking at an Olympus SP-560 Ultra Zoom. I have an interest in action/wildlife, so I would like something with good continuous speed, as well as a need for a good macro mode. I've got the macro thing fairly well understood, but I am a little lost on being able to achieve 15 FPS shooting speeds, on a camera thats rated for 3! Any thoughts?

Thank you,
Marie
Hi Marie,

With camera companies bringing out new models every Monday and Tuesday, have you thought about someone's trade-in? When you move to a DSLR you are going to want a collection of lenses and other accessories. Why not an older Canon or Nikon? With the money you save you can pick up a few "goodies" right away. My, now "old," D70x still takes pretty good shots.

Cheers,

Bob

[mariba]

Hey Bob,

I'd never thought about doing that. Where would be a good place to start looking? Maybe newspaper classifieds?

Back atchya,

Marie

[RobertSchuldenfrei]

Hey Bob,

I'd never thought about doing that. Where would be a good place to start looking? Maybe newspaper classifieds?

Back atchya,

Marie
Hi Marie,

I would start with camera stores as they are in a position to evaluate the used camera and back up the sale with credit. Even mail-order outfits like B&H can be used. If you use eBay, make sure the seller has a good reputation as this is an expensive item. Gee, maybe it is time to move up from my D70x and sell it to you :D. Just kidding, it does everything I want in a DSLR. Craig's List is a good way because you can test the camera before you buy.

Tell us what works for you,

Bob

[Grant]

Buying a used camera brings a blush to my face when I think of my first "used" camera.

Many years ago a local hair dresser was charged for operating a common body house. His defence was that he had a studio in the back of his shop that he rented out to photographers and what they arranged with the girls was none his business. When asked why the high cost of rental his defences that he supplied all the equipment. I gave him a call and offered to buy all his equipment from him. He agreed and I ended up with brand new equipment that, I suspect, never had film in it.

He ended up going to jail and I ended up with equipment that lasted 30 years.

[Chuck S.]

Grant, I don't think anyone will be able to top that story!!:D

[mariba]

Wow, I never would have even thought to make the offer! I guess thats a perfect example of 'opportunity only knocks once', because I can't imagine a deal like that happening again. Too bad...

[lexcell]

Hi Cate,
Thanks for the warm welcome. I had a few additional questions about what your intended use for your images was until I read the last line about working with a stock agency and that answered my questions.
You should go with a D-SLR if you want to go into the professional market. A D-SR has a larger sensor which will give you better images in the long rung, it has a vast array of lenses, flashes and accessories to choose from and let's you grow better than a P&S or an Advanced P&S.
I'd look at either the Nikon D40X/D60 or the Canon Rebel XTi/XSi. I have posted a link to a side by side comparison of the four cameras for you to look over and decide which camera has the most features that suit your style.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=canon_eos450d%2Ccanon_eos400d%2Cnikon_d40x %2Cnikon_d60&show=all
I would buy the camera separately and then buy the lens that best suits your needs and budget.

[lexcell]

Hi Mariba,
While I think Olympus, Pentax, Sony, etc make good cameras when you mentioned that you were interested in wildlife, I would suggest that you stick with either Canon or Nikon for the wide variety of lenses that are currently available in both the new and used market.
I have found that folks who get really serious about photography and want some of the more exotic lenses end up outgrowing their system if they don;t have Nikon or Canon.
Robert had an excellent suggest of getting a used Nikon or Canon to save money and spend more money on lenses.
Make a list of the features you want in a camera, the types of subjects you like to photograph and then go to www.dpreview.com and go to the buying guide where you can enter all the cameras you are interested in and have a side by side comparison of features. It's a great place to start!

[Chuck S.]

Robert had an excellent suggest of getting a used Nikon or Canon to save money and spend more money on lenses.


For those who are squeamish about buying on eBay or other exchange/auction type sites, please note that B&H Photo (and probably other e-tailers as well) sells used equipment via their website. My one experience with them on used gear was very satisfactory - the camera (a Canon G6) had been refurbished and came with all the standard accessories, manual, etc. No problems! Their prices aren't dirt cheap, but I look at the premium (if any) as being some insurance that I'm not getting a camera or lens that was dropped in the sand or exposed to a lot of bad weather.

[C8franklyn]

Thanks Laurie. I've decided to go DSLR. Who-hoo. Can't wait to get my new camera. Thanks for your advice.

[C8franklyn]

Laurie,

I need clarification on two the lens types. What is the difference between a STANDARD 18mm-50mm and a DT AF 18mm-50mm. I am assuming that AF means auto focus. I am looking at the Sony DSLR Alpha A200 and the A300.

Thanks,
:confused:

[C8franklyn]

Correction the lenses are 18mm-70mm.

[greys4u]

Hi Laurie and welcome. Have a question, I dropped my s8000fd and it went south! I take alot of action shots (mostly birds) but I dont want to change lenses to capture a special moment or that spotting of a bird. Any suggestions, there are so many new cameras on the market and I am totally stuck. I would go with the Fuji but I need a smaller camera, one that I can take with me that does what I need. Anything on the market right now, brand, etc. I need more than 3x optical, over 6 megapixels, digital zoom does not matter.
Thanks,
greys4u

[William Clifford]

Hi,

I'm going to Africa on June 2nd (Tanzania). Any Suggestions? Thanks, Bill Clifford. Nikon D200, Nikon D100, Nikon 80-400VR. plus wide angle. I also have a JVC-HD.

[Photographer Wanabe]

Brucha Haba-a! (Welcome in Hebrew). So nice to have some one like you here. I have 2 questions already (and probably more to come).
1. I have a Nikon D80 and I love taking pics of my son doing Karate, kicking the air. I find however, that the camera is not fast enough because I seldom get the kicking foot where I want it to be. I checked the pfs-speed of the camera and I get 1.8 pics per second in any setting (auto in bright light with exposure of roughly 200, manual with exposure of 500, etc.). What setting does Nikon use to measure the advertised 3 pfs?
2. I bought the camera with the 18-200 lens, with the intention of never changing the lens to avoid getting dust on the sensor. Since I bought the camera I removed the lens only once in a clean place. Yet, one year and ~300 pics later, I got dust anyway! What did I do??? Where did it come from?

[lexcell]

William,
You will want plenty of battery power, CF cards, plenty of hard drive space, a power adapter and a couple of pillow cases to keep the dust off of your equipment.

[lexcell]

Hi Wannabe,
Thanks for the warm welcome.

Here is what Nikon has to say about the fps of the D80
3 fps Average frame rate with manual focus, manual or shutter priority auto exposure, a shutter speed of 1/250 of a second or faster and memory remaining in the buffer.

As for the dust...it's something that we have to deal with in digital. Here is a great tutorial on sensor cleaning...
http://www.moosepeterson.com/techtips/cleanccd.html

[Wendy G]

Hello Laurie:

Welcome!

I have several questions:

I'm currently shooting with a Nikon D70 using a Tamron 28-300 lens. I love the combination. Because I'm lazy and don't use a tripod when I should, I've been waiting for Tamron to come out with their new version (for Nikon) with vibration compensation. I looked at the similar Nikon lens with vibration compensation, but comments I've read say it doesn't have a lock which means the lens zooms out gravity pulls it. So, questions #1 and 2: Is the Tamron lens worth the wait? Or can you suggest something else?

The D70 is great, but it's a little bulky, so I've been looking at various versions of Coolpix. The S600 has "4x wide angle" zoom and the S550 has 5x zoom. Question #3: What's the difference? Question #4: Any other suggestions for a compact camera?

Thank you.

[lexcell]

Hi Wendy,
The nikon 18-200mm VR is an excellent lens and the 2nd version has far less issues with the gravity issue. However, when you are hanging a fairly heavy lens from your shoulder gravity will pull on it.
I personally prefer to stick with the manfacturer's own lenses but, if budget, features, etc are a factor, then I like Tamron, & Sigma lenses. They are very good quality for a reasonable price.
If you go with a P&S you will sacrifice the range of lens that you currently have in favor of a smaller camera. Depending on how you shoot your D70 and what quality you use, the P&S cameras that you are considering do not offer RAW format and the sensors are smaller. If you make large prints, you will find the P&S do not have quite the same resolution as the D-SLR due to the size of the sensors.
It really all depends on your needs and final output as to which type fo camera will best work for you.
I also like the Canon G9 if you need the RAW format and some of the manual overrids that you have with a D-SLR.

[Wendy G]

I don't use RAW, so that's not really an issue. Could you please explain the difference between the S600 "4x wide angle" zoom and the S550 5x zoom? Thanks.

[lexcell]

Hi Wendy,
The S550 has an effective focal length range of 35mm-180mm and the S600 has an effective focal length range of 28mm-112mm. So, the 550 has great magnification and the 600 has a wider angle lens.
Here is a link to a side by side comparison of all the features of both cameras for you to review.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=nikon_cps550%2Cnikon_cps600&show=all