Pictures of corals, advice needed

[Recty]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13912357#post13912357 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by TitusvileSurfer
But there isn't an IS version of the 24-70 f/2.8L.

Well then that further confirms my idea that I'm not getting a 24-70 f/2.8L with IS!

Well we will see, I might go with the 50mm 1.4 or skimp down to the 1.8, I'm not sure yet. If I get the 24-70 f/2.8L I'll probably not even have the leftover cash for the 1.8, heh It's hard to drop $2300 on camera stuff in one day for me, I like to buy slowly!

 

[TitusvileSurfer]

Buying slowly is GOOD. You don't need both. The best advice I could ever give anyone about buying camera equipment is not to rush anything and soak it all in. Of course before you can really understand first hand why a lens is better than another, or why you need a flash unit, you should at least have a DSLR and some random lens for reference.

 

[Recty]

Yeah, I think I'm going to go with the 50mm 1.4, but I'm not sure yet still. I'd really really like to just get the 24-70 2.8 but I just really dont know if I can swing the cash. I can, but I'm going to Hawaii in a month or so and want some easy spending money over there

I might go with the 40D and the 24-70 instead of the 50D and the 50mm 1.4.

 

[TitusvileSurfer]

I can understand wanting money in Hawaii. All of your choices are logical so I'll endorse either way. I personally would prefer the 40D and 24-70 (heck I have both) over the 50D and 50 f/1.4. Again either would be great though.

 

[Recty]

Well thanks for being supportive It does help actually, heh.

I actually just "pulled the plug" and bought the 50D and 24-70 2.4L

My first lens ever is an L, I'm doing it backwards, heh.

 

[TitusvileSurfer]

Mwuhahahahahahahaha! Just don't cheat on your wife with it.

 

[IPT]

Nice - I'm sure you'll be very happy with it. Post some of the shots so we can see them

 

[Recty]

I will do it, thanks for helping me decide guys

My wife is safe in my heart, right next to my aquariums and soon to be cameras. She definitely isnt below them.

Yet

I'll post some shots. I was going to buy Lightroom 2, but didnt. I'll get that later on, so I'll just be working with the software that comes with the Canon package, I hope that will be enough.

 

[TitusvileSurfer]

The software that comes with the Canon package is plenty for someone just starting out IMO. You can do RGB curves and white balance RAW adjustments ect. Photoshop is a lot of fun because I can combine a seahorse and a real horse, but for your basic color adjustments the stock software should be sufficient for the foreseeable future. Lightroom takes RAW editing to the next level and is a worthwhile purchase, but Canon will give you enough to correct actinic lights and such for free.

 

[Recty]

Sweet, that is what I wanted to hear

 

[IPT]

I think on the Canon website there is a tutorial for using the software (DPP - digital Photo professional). If not, then do a google search (there is one out there (free). It will make your life a lot easier

 

[Recty]

Excuse the dirty water, this is right in the middle of a water change. I think not bad though for only having the camera a couple hours, this is my first fish attempts. I'll learn better how to do it over the weekend!

 

[Recty]

The cool, I mean COOL, I MEAN SWEET thing about this is none of these pictures used a flash. Before my fish would be so dark without a flash, or else way bright with a flash, it was horrible to get my point and shoot to get a good picture.

This camera is amazing

 

[TitusvileSurfer]

If you got an 18-55, you couldn't get away with that anywhere near as well. The 24-70 rocks. Not having to use a flash is (one) thing it does best. I love your Humuhumunukunukuapuaa by the way.

So you have an amazing camera and an even more amazing lens. Give us a full report of you first impressions. How do you like the wide to telephoto zoom range of the lens on a 1.6 body? Are than any surprises or let downs from the advice and testimony I have been giving you?

 

[IPT]

Gald that you like it. Yeah, the cameras these days (the SLR's for sure) are quite impressive with the quality they can turn out. Looks like your off to a great start. Did you shoot RAW? What software did you use?

 

[Recty]

I like the Humu too. I wish he had his tail flared in that picture like the clown, but oh well

To be honest, my first couple pictures I was not impressed with. I broke it out of the box at work and snapped a couple pictures of a co-worker's fishtank. He just has a small 5g acrylic with a semicircle front, with a german blue ram inside. I'm not sure if the camera was focusing on the acrylic? Or what was going on, but my shots just were that perfectly clear look I wanted. However, he didnt clean his glass or anything (no algae the human eye can see though) and the pumps were running, but still I thought I'd be able to get a good shot.

I had it about 2' away and at full 70mm, so who knows. My problem was that there would be a plant a little ways away that it was focused on perfectly, yet the fish was a little blurred. I'm not sure why, as I directly set the auto focus to the middle of the frame and made sure the red square lit up on the ram, but it still wasnt focusing quite right.

Manual focusing on something that small that is moving is harder than I thought. Autofocus, even though a little blurry, ended up being better than my attempt at autofocus

But now that I've gotten home, I really do like the camera/lens combo. The first couple pictures I took turned out great. I ended up snapping like 50 pictures and only kept 5, but that's because I'm still playing around. Once I learn the camera, I'm betting I can get some AMAZING shots of these fish, I'm excited

And I feel like you really did me a favor in recommending this camera and lens to me, it really does what I wanted and it does it well Thanks dude, and IPT from Alaska also, you guys are a big help and I'm glad I asked my questions here!

 

[Recty]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13932145#post13932145 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by IPT
Gald that you like it. Yeah, the cameras these days (the SLR's for sure) are quite impressive with the quality they can turn out. Looks like your off to a great start. Did you shoot RAW? What software did you use?

I shot some RAW and some jpeg just to see what the difference would end up being. I ended up not keeping a single jpeg, all 5 pictures I kept were RAW.

Thanks, I think I'm off to a decent start too... I was a little worried my first fish picture attempts at work was going to indicate how shoddy my future attempts would turn out

I'm actually driving out to my brother's house in a little while but I'm coming back on Sunday or Saturday night, I'll see if I can get some more fish pics then.

 

[Recty]

Just messing around a little with the camera and lens, I love being able to set it to 2.8 and get some cool pictures with the main subject clear but the rest all blurred. I went out to my brother's house this weekend and got some pictures of his kid, it was fun

And then I took a couple pictures of his tanks, he has freshwater instead of salt, which I find to be a little boring but oh well, he likes it

I've taken almost 500 pictures already, crazy.

 

[IPT]

Looks nice. Glad we were able to help and that you're happy with the purchase. 5/50 isn't bad at all. Back in the film days the thought was that if you were keeping more than 1-2 shots per 36exp roll, you either weren't taking enough shots or you weren't editing harshly enough!

 

[TitusvileSurfer]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13939246#post13939246 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Recty
I love being able to set it to 2.8 and get some cool pictures with the main subject clear but the rest all blurred.

The ability to hit f/2.8 certainly adds a creative gateway, if not a practical one, which is just not available in cheaper lenses.