Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,989   Posts: 1,524,099   Online: 1106
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 27 of 27
  1. #21
    Poisson Du Jour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    SE Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,515
    Images
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by smallfooties View Post
    Yes I will have to look at affordability. Anybody know what's a reasonable price? Honestly I'm not willing to pay more than 200-300... I'm from Australia so dunno if it's cheaper here or USA?

    The 400D is digital. You cannot put digital-series (EF-S) lenses on film bodies — don't try it for want of the damage this can cause.

    Maybe consider something like a Canon T90 or Olympus OM4 or Nikon FE2 (can be had for around AUD$220.00) and adapt for your Tamron? I am not sure an EOS 3 body could be had for AUD$300, more likely in the AUD$500 range. It now would seem to me that your price range limits will dictate what body you pick up, unlikely the 1V, only a little less likely the 3. A few others choices: EOS 50/50E (ECF), 5 (flawed ECF), 30/33, just good basic cameras (my first and most successful B&W triptych shot 14 years ago came through the EOS 50E and a humble 20mm lens: the printer did the rest!).

    Note that true macro (1:1) photography will not benefit from, nor be facilitated by, autofocus. "Close focus" (<<1:1) might be OK.
    Last edited by Poisson Du Jour; 03-14-2010 at 08:41 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    .::Gary Rowan Higgins

    A comfort zone is a wonderful place. But nothing ever grows there.
    —Anon.






  2. #22
    2F/2F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,008
    Images
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by SilverGlow View Post
    As to the OP, and his choices, I would only get an EOS body that supports E-TTL, as I think this is a fantastic feature.
    E-TTL is just as flawed as any reflected light meter. It will rarely give you the ideal exposure, just as with any reflected meter read directly off of the composition. Like all directly-read (meaning no tonal placement is performed), subject-reading (as opposed to incident light-reading) meters, it is inherently flawed in that it will not likely give the ideal exposure.

    If the flash sensed the distance of that which you were focused on, knew what modifiers were attached, what kind of surfaces your were bouncing off of, how big the room is, etc., and altered the flash power to match that, your exposures for the subject at the plane of focus would be near perfect every time.

    ...but this is not how TTL flash metering works. This would be an impossible system to design for practical use. By the time you input all the variables, your shot would be gone.

    You will get better flash exposures learning to adjust your flash power and/or f stop with distance than you will ever be able to get with any TTL flash meter....not to even mention incident flash meters....the best method for accurate flash exposures. They can be used in more hand held speedlight-lit situations than one would imagine (though not all of them).

    E-TTL is a way to get some sort of workable exposure an average amount of the time for average people who who shoot average-toned compositions and cannot and/or will not do the above. It is not the way to get the ideal exposure.

    Does this mean it has no use? Of course not! It just means that, like with any automated function, you have to be so aware of what it is doing, and always fudging it this way and that, that you are basically taking manual control of it anyhow! In this application, it can be a slight time saver, though you still need a manual thought process to get the best out of it.

    It can also get you that quick, sloppy, ugly, lazy shot in a printable, though not ideal, way. IMO, this is its greatest use! Sometimes, having the freedom to not worry about being technically perfect can free you to snap pix at exactly the right time. An less-than-ideal exposure on a greatly-timed and positioned shot is better than a perfect exposure on a shot in which you missed your desired composition and timing.
    Last edited by 2F/2F; 03-14-2010 at 08:49 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  3. #23
    SilverGlow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Orange County, Calif
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    739
    Images
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by 2F/2F View Post
    E-TTL is just as flawed as any reflected light meter. It will rarely give you the ideal exposure, just as with any reflected meter read directly off of the composition. Like all directly-read (meaning no tonal placement is performed), subject-reading (as opposed to incident light-reading) meters, it is inherently flawed in that it will not likely give the ideal exposure.

    If the flash sensed the distance of that which you were focused on, knew what modifiers were attached, what kind of surfaces your were bouncing off of, how big the room is, etc., and altered the flash power to match that, your exposures for the subject at the plane of focus would be near perfect every time.

    ...but this is not how TTL flash metering works. This would be an impossible system to design for practical use. By the time you input all the variables, your shot would be gone.

    You will get better flash exposures learning to adjust your flash power and/or f stop with distance than you will ever be able to get with any TTL flash meter....not to even mention incident flash meters....the best method for accurate flash exposures. They can be used in more hand held speedlight-lit situations than one would imagine (though not all of them).

    E-TTL is a way to get some sort of workable exposure an average amount of the time for average people who who shoot average-toned compositions and cannot and/or will not do the above. It is not the way to get the ideal exposure.

    Does this mean it has no use? Of course not! It just means that, like with any automated function, you have to be so aware of what it is doing, and always fudging it this way and that, that you are basically taking manual control of it anyhow! In this application, it can be a slight time saver, though you still need a manual thought process to get the best out of it.

    It can also get you that quick, sloppy, ugly, lazy shot in a printable, though not ideal, way. IMO, this is its greatest use! Sometimes, having the freedom to not worry about being technically perfect can free you to snap pix at exactly the right time. An less-than-ideal exposure on a greatly-timed and positioned shot is better than a perfect exposure on a shot in which you missed your desired composition and timing.
    I would have to disagree...I have tens of thousands of flashed wedding pictures that prove what you wrote otherwise. E-TTL is a fantastic feature and it is repeatable and consistent once one knows how it works. E-TTL2 is even better but not supported by any film EOS bodies, save for the very latest Rebel?

    Since the flash meters through the lens, it is irrelevent for the camera to know about the flash modifiers, and the newer EOS flashes do take in consideration the distance from the subject, and it weighs heavily on the focus point the shooter chose. In addition the flash does not care if the it is bounced off the ceiling or wall, again because it meters TTL. All this conspires to create a flashing system that is right on perfect most of the time. The flash works closely with the chosen focus point and this conspiracy results in excellent exposure metering. In addition, the "input of all the variables" is mostly automatic, so the shot will not be gone by the time the camera workflow is done.

    There are thousands of EOS pro shooters that rely heavily on E-TTL for millions of wedding and other types of shots with awesome results.

    I love that one can slave many other EOS flashes and E-TTL supports this automatically, and E-TTL allows the photographer to focus his mind mostly on setting up the shot, composing it...manual flashing is old school and no longer needed save for the very specialized and rare shots. Little need for hand held light meters when using TTL bodies such as the Nikon's and the Canons (later film SLR models only).
    Coming back home to my film roots. Canon EOS-3 SLR, Canon EOS 1V SLR, 580ex flash, and 5D DSLR shooter. Prime lens only shooter.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,025
    1n feels more solid, Eos 3 has more useful features, some improved control functionality and noticeably faster continuous rate. Feels less solid though as for the 2% difference in the finder accuracy, that's neither here not there.

    Beware buying used and check thoroughly. 3 out of 4 of the used SLRs I have bought had faults. One did not focus accurately, one had the detentes missing from the command wheel (functions fine) and one had a command wheel that did not function but felt like it should!

  5. #25
    brucemuir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Metro DC area, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,265
    Images
    4
    1n has ttl
    1v and 3 have ettl

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    NJ
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    23
    Wow, the EOS war zone.... I vote with 1V as the ultimate film EOS, and I prefer any EOS to a Nikon, but there are plenty of good choices in the EOS film range. The 1 is not a bad camera at all, and can just about focus in the dark. All of the 1 series cameras are heavy though, and the first two in the series are very loud as well. The 3 is pretty fine in many respects, but it is loud enough to get you sent to jail, and it's eye control function is much slower than the Elan 7e, as is the AF performance of the 3. The Elan 7e has the AF speed of the 1V, and is nearly silent compared to the 3. It is also dirt cheap. If I drown it, I can toss it, and buy another for $40. It is as light as a feather to boot.

    My favorite is the 1V, and I own one, but it doesn't get as much play as the el-cheapo Elan 7e. Here are few shots of the "old 1", a 10s as just as another cheap possibility that works well (loud as a 3), and the nearly free Elan 7e that has plenty of bells and whistles that were tested there before making it into the later 1V series, as well as ETTL functionality. Lots of choices, and they are all good in the grand view. You can't go wrong. Just buy good lenses as a matter of course.





    Sweet.....

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA., U.S.A.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    228

    Why do I LOVE Film Photography ?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheSohnly View Post
    Digital photography and film photography are NOT similar. A film camera is a light-tight box that you put film in - there are no sensors, instant gratification, or (most of the time) easy modes. There are no megapixels to fawn over. You can't just change ISO on the fly and have the image automatically come out okay.
    Why do I LOVE Film Photography ?

    Let me count the ways... See above !

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin