kja

Hehe, good for those who live near one...my closest pro lab would likely be Perth - 1200kms south of me! Hard to talk to them in person BTW - so what was his answer on the metallic prints?

A couple people have wondered about the 28-135...here are a couple quickies I did this morning. I have to say, this lens is still fun All details are on the photos (all three at 135mm focal length). All hand held, ambient light, no cropping, resized in Lightroom, text added in photoshop & save for web...

That would be cool!

Sounds good These guys are just hanging out keeping my other lenses company so I'd love to see them go to a home where they'd get the use they deserve!

Not on calibration but +1 for why images will sometimes look off at "consumer" type labs - it's all a crapshoot that the people running and maintaining the equipment have any clue what they are doing. And that they aren't applying some "correction" to the files that get printed. Use a better lab. Digital Works has ALWAYS been spot on for printing for me and are worth the slightly extra...shipping doesn't totally suck and they are super quick usually. There are lots of other labs around, too.

Use both - get to know their differences in handling, field of view, end product. Mix it up - use the one you don't automatically reach for sometimes. Force yourself to see things or approach things differently. Practice using different settings and see what happens. But first and foremost, get comfortable nailing focus. IMHO it's the extremely rare photograph that will work without a good solid focus point.

Looks like you're having a great time! And I agree with the others, get lower and watch your focus. Great start. I wouldn't start adding lenses until you get totally comfortable with what you already have. Not only will your skills improve as you master your current rig, but you'll also develop a sense of what YOU like and what you are missing - then you'll know where to spend your dosh. There is no "best" lens for doggie shots. I've shot my doglets with everything from a Tokina 10-17 fisheye to a 50 1.4 to a 100-400 zoom...and everything in between. It totally depends on the conditions you are shooting in and the look you want to achieve. I'd guess you'll want to start with a prime in the 30, 50, or 85 range and something pretty fast, so a 1.8 or 1.4 maximum aperture. This range will give you lovely portraits, give you some more possibilities in lower light and help you achieve that often (but not always) desirable shallow depth of field/blurred background.

JS - I don't know if you've seen any of my posts about my hands, but I have terrible problems with them sometimes. It's one reason why I actually thought my lens held up extremely well - it's so much lighter 405g vs 610g. It might not seem a lot but I certainly could feel it! And because it was significantly lighter, it didn't put any strain on my hands simply holding it and I didn't find the need for OS. If you want, we could work a return policy for you if you buy it and find that it is a problem because of your hands. al - here you go: I have two lenses for sale at the moment: Sigma 18-200 3.5-6.3 DC - this is the NON OS version. It is much lighter and smaller than the newer OS version (but of course you don't get the OS). This is a fabulous & versatile all rounder for focal length and it never missed focus for me. I'd never sell something that I wouldn't use myself so know that it's working flawlessly, producing sharp, clear images. It comes with the original hood, both caps and Sigma's black protective storage box. SOLD Post. Canon 28-135 3.5-5.6 IS USM - Here's the blurb: Again, works flawlessly and I'm very impressed with the images this lens produces. Comes with both caps and a Canon EW-78B II hood. Asking $360 shipped Express Post. Reason for selling: neither of these two lenses sees any use. The 18-200 had slightly more use but I'll bet I've shot fewer than 500 frames with it. The 28-135 hasn't been on my cameras at all in ages and probably has fewer than 250 frames shot on it. I just don't use these anymore and they need to go to a loving home! I don't have any photos with either of these on my current hard drive, but if you're wanting some I could probably take a few. you can PM me here or better yet email me as sometimes I don't get in here to check -> [email protected] Happy to answer any questions you have! Also happy to entertain offers

JS - I've used both of them as my bestie has the OS version. It's way heavier and bigger - also more expensive! I've never found that OS was an issue on this lens. The HSM of the newer lens is a nice thing, for sure. But if I were looking now, I'd save the money, buy the older, non-frills version and put the extra cash towards a specialty lens

I have a few bits that I just don't use anymore and am finally getting around to selling some - check out my special thread here. And coz I couldn't post in the Photos section and neglect to add a photo, here's my friendly lizard ... he likes to hang out by my car door and scare the crap out of me when I try to leave the house.

A friend is selling hers for $575 Canadian if that helps.

Short and sweet: Yes, the noise in high ISO goes like this from best to not as good (though still very usable at 800 imho: 40D, 50D, 30D, 20D There are some who say the noise of the 30D isn't as pleasing as that of the 20D. I don't have enough experience with the 30D to comment directly on that - from my experience they are quite similar and not a huge difference. I shoot my 20D at 1000 ISO happily. Yes, there is slightly more detail in some images on the 50D over the 40D however it does fall down in the shadow detail and that's where it matters to me. It's a close one and not worth the premium for the 50D over a good 40D if you can find one. Though the "cost" of finding a 40D instead of just buying a 50D might be an issue, too. MP is not necessarily a good indicator of image quality. It's more about the sensor. Fewer pixels on the same sized sensor is better - it's not good to ram them all on there The 50D does have a newer, different sensor than the 40D and it is said to handle highlights better. I couldn't really see it and I could see that it didn't handle the shadows as well, imo. You can always wait. As soon as something comes out, something better will come out in three or six months. Buy when you need it and start using it is my theory. And you'll never find a consensus on which camera is best - everyone has their own opinion and sometimes they have them for no reason at all But frankly, it would be very very hard to go wrong with either of these models.

yes, from the 30 to the 50 is a good upgrade. You ask if it's "worth it" - what is missing on your 30D or what could be done better? Those points will address the features YOU personally need as you move up the line. But from the 40D to the 50D nope. In fact, after having used a friend's 50D overall I still like my 40Ds better. Personally I'd find a good 2nd hand 40D and not pay the premium for the 50D. And I think the 40D is that much better than the 30D, too. The 7D is a fantastic body and so very sorely tempting. I see you've discounted it but it is a significant upgrade whereas the 50D is only a moderate upgrade, imho. Of course, it's way more money, too!

OMG the list is so long -> Stuff, stuff and more stuff

I've got my trusty Canon 20D that I've been considering selling...email me -> [email protected]

It's here and you can download CS Photoshop 5 (or any of the components for the new CS5) for a free 30 day trial. Trial starts the first time you open your download. Also, Australia looks to have dropped their upgrade price to something more reasonable in this version (the upgrade from 3 to 4 was stupidly expensive) if you don't want to go overseas for the full version. I can't wait to find time to open mine and have a play for the first time. Have fun!

Congrats to you guys!! Awesome results ;)

Canon G series. Or the S90. If you end up loving all it can do once you learn the basics, then add a dslr down the road. You will ALWAYS want to have a smaller compact camera for those outings where a dslr is too big/bulky/heavy etc so it's money well spent up front. Most people I know carry a compact in their purse, briefcase, bag or glove box every day.

Head over to POTN's dedicated G series area here - tons of examples and real world use. These are excellent compact cameras. here's a show off thread for the G10...I'm sure there's a G11 one somewhere on the board, but you'll need to look for it. Compacts have inherent limitations, as does every camera. Shooting at high ISOs is one of those - they mostly just get by to 800ish (some suck at 400, but not ones we're talking about here). Don't go into it expecting dslr quality, simply great quality in a little package and you'll be fine. heck, I've been known to shoot my $100 SD1200 at ISO 800 and still use the images so it certainly can be done!

If you're happy with the size and expense etc, then you can't go wrong with a dslr and then you can choose your lenses. Good zooms don't have to be terribly expensive but as you become more demanding with your requirements then the price goes up. I'm not a huge zoom fan in compacts - I don't shoot that way so I don't look for that. I simply look for quality, ease of use, size, ability to control my settings (or not as the case may be), room to learn and try new things. I personally wouldn't be without a compact camera coz one goes everywhere with me! I went with the very simple, very basic SD1200 - only a small zoom range, no RAW, no manual controls. But super tiny and does a great job for what I want. I don't need my compact to do anything else coz when I want to do more, I know I'll be taking my slr anyway The trick is figuring out what you actually have on your MUST HAVE list - that is the only way to narrow things down to reasonable selections as there are a zillion different options out there. For dslrs since you also want video, your choices are more limited in the slr range. Canon's 7D will set you back some, but it's mighty fine camera

Do you want to go the dslr route? These are big, bulky and have different lenses for different purposes. They are awesome but they aren't "toss it in your handbag every day and go" cameras. They will also be a much larger spend For compact cameras that offer a huge amount of flexibility, check out the Canon G series and the Canon S90. Hard to go wrong there. not super tiny but still a pretty good go anywhere size. They have a lot of features that will allow you to explore and learn and figure out what you really want from your photo time & experience.

I sent my Canon 1DIII in in October last year. Three days after they received it they sent a letter stating that it was done and ready to be sent back.

I've bought mine straight from adobe.com

All three lenses have advantages and disadvantages. Of the three, the Tamron 90 has the slowest autofocus according to some friends who have used at least two of those listed. I adore my Sigma lenses (don't have their macros) and have never had a problem - always perfect out of the box.

I see shopping in my future