this is fast wei

HOLY CRAP THE 450D! o_O now if i wanna upgrade then its gonna be worth it this time

eying for the body only. It looks damn "clean" get what i mean? looks more plasticky than ever hehe

but new battery grip? that sucks... =(

This post has been edited by R a D ! c 4 L: Jan 24 2008, 02:07 PM

how much did you spend on the lens? Im eying on this lens once i get my wide angle

thanks for the info. Could be cheaper i think. Need to scope around about this lens. FTZ selling 2nd hand at 800 even.

The filter size is going to be an issue liao. Have to go for those thin type filter =/ at 82mm it could cost up to 200 - 300...

its the same la, bring a card reader along then mostly everyone can view your pics liao

SD cards have high speed ones too you know

There's a 133x speed 1. Which means should be around 15mb per sec for write speed and around 20mb per sec for read speed. Biggest I've heard is around 4gb 133x by Lexar.

Meh, ignore la. Autofocus fast or not fast its not the main thing. Those are just mere debates between lens and gears. We need not to take into account of what matters most on that situation, just be happy with what you have and use them to the fullest.

^whoah, custom indeed. There's a site where it teaches you to make those custom hoods

If you're talking about quality/built quality, its a so so lens only. Meant for budget users. If u save up more and you're on budget, just get the 55-250 instead. It has IS on it which helps alot. Or, u can save a little more, get the 70-200 f4 L. Comes with IS

I'd go for the Sigma

I really don recommend u having the 50-200. My bro have 1, im not very pleased with it. And im not the kind that's picky about lens, but the 50-200mm really doesnt appeal to me. The USM does though.

The alternative to the 28-70L, the sigma 24-70 around 1.6k.

but the 24-70 is expensive man owO" I would not have that kind of cash to get that lens.

btw, a recent shoot. Rather than venture more into fashion... this is more to conceptual.

Just a simple RAW conversion.

This is one of those test shot. There's props on the background. No need much touch up, i did a few tweakings in lightroom, this is the results which i liked

the sigma 70mm macro is better, but the downside there's no USM. U can get the 105mm by sigma too, cheaper than the 70mm but just as sharp.

guys, anyone of you here tried the whale tail?

er... simple fact about these stuffs...

Adobe RGB has a wider, or you can put it "hidden" color range. Colors may looked pale when u see it on monitor. Thus its meant for more advanced editing. But mess up the colors then you'll have to start over again, so careful tweaking is needed.

Its the opposite for sRGB. Has so so color range, easy during editing but you wont get the most out of your photos. Colors are "richer" on the surface for sRGB, but you wont get the most out of it.

I use Adobe RGB, then convert them with a ProPhotoRGB profile in Lightroom. Because ProPhotoRGB gives me the best almost accurate colors when i print them out. And if I want to post the photos online. I'll just convert the color profile to sRGB using photoshop once I edited everything.

Things you must know when before you do editing. CALIBRATE your monitor. Spend a few hundred on calibrating hardwares like the Spider2express or newer versions. There's a good calibrating hardware like the Huey Pro too. Cost alot more than the Spider2express. Once you finished calibrating your computer, you get more accurate colors.

Note that the internet uses sRGB, so if you post a photo online with a AdobeRGB as the color profile. Then you'll face risk of losing the colors. Here's an example:

Sample A, Using AdobeRGB:


Sample B, Using sRGB:


So basicly:

#1: if you want to get the most out of your photos. Use AdobeRGB. It may look pale on your screen, but after a few adjustments, the colors are superb.

#2: Stick to sRGB if you rarely edit your photos, or you just do basic editing like levels and curves.

#3: Invest in a calibrating hardware. It comes with its own software so you can do easy step by steps on monitor calibration.

#4: Don't ask me about ProPhotoRGB. All i know that it has the widest color range known(for me). And the color quality of the print it produced is almost what i see on my monitor.

#5: Remember, if you wanna post your photos online and you're using the AdobeRGB profile. You can change them via photoshop. Go to Edit > Convert to Profile > Under "destination space" > select sRGB IEC 61966-2.1. Then save your photos. Then post them.

Hope this little info helps.

This post has been edited by R a D ! c 4 L: Jan 30 2008, 12:38 AM

Aye. Thanks for clearing things up this is more accurate than what i mentioned. I just posted them based on my experience and what i know only.

nice im treating myself with a Tokina 12-24mm, usable on full frame at 16-18mm

hello guys, long time no see happy chinese new year! went back to my kampung at sarawak lol back with ang paus and bought myself the tokina 12-24 f4

bought it 2nd hand for 1k condition is superb going to test it out in these few days

viking: can you add this little info onto my nick at the 1st page?

BG-E3, 580EX II, Tokina AT-X 12-24mm f/4, Various Cokin P filters

Thanks in advance