What's your digital camera history?

"Nick C" wrote in message
news:JuEDc.162318$3x.144691@attbi_s54...

"Brian C. Baird" wrote in message
.. .
In article D3uDc.160205$3x.16579@attbi_s54,
says...
There is a very handy feature in the MK II and that is using the
setting that will show blown-out whites in the picture on the monitor,
along
with the histogram, so that an easy adjustment can be made to
eliminate
the
blown-out whites and correct the histogram.

The 10D has that too. A life saver if you're trying to get that
critical shot.


Thanks. Not having a 10D or ever used a 10D, I didn't know that.

Being a loooong time film user, I've the habit of having a back-up camera
body, which at times, was a handy tool to have. I'm wondering if there is
a
advantage to having a digital back-up; possibly the 10D as a back-up to
the
MK II. I can see where having 1.6x may be an asset to minimizing the need
for long lenses that would cost about the same for a 10D body. Do you have
an opinion to offer?

nick


Actually, that's been a feature of digital SLRs for a long time, my circa
2000 D30 does it too. It is handy...
As far as the backup body idea, things can go wrong, batteries fail a
critical times, cards get full, it's nice to have a camera you can grab to
get the shot, then go change batteries, cards, whatever. And if there is,
god forbid, a catastrophic failure, it is good to have something there to
use.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com

On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 07:26:29 +0000 (UTC), (Dave
Martindale) wrote:

Randall Ainsworth writes:
1st digital camera - Quicktake 150

2nd current & only digital camera - Canon 10D

That's quite a leap!

Dave

Mt first digital camera is the Digital Rebel, I've been using the same
Pentax K1000 for the previous 25 years.

Thought I would go Canon as I couldn't really make use of my old
manual K-mounts on the Pentax *ist digital, and the glass selection
and picture quality was certainly the best, dollar for dollar.

GK

Brian C. Baird wrote:
In article JuEDc.162318$3x.144691@attbi_s54,
says...

Being a loooong time film user, I've the habit of having a back-up camera
body, which at times, was a handy tool to have. I'm wondering if there is a
advantage to having a digital back-up; possibly the 10D as a back-up to the
MK II. I can see where having 1.6x may be an asset to minimizing the need
for long lenses that would cost about the same for a 10D body. Do you have
an opinion to offer?


I've read of a lot of photographers keeping a 10D as a backup to a 1D or
1Ds. I remember reading an article in Pop Photo last year about a bird
photographer - he shot primarily with a 1Ds, but a few of his shots were
with his "backup" 10D. I'll have to dig through my back issues and pull
it up.


My backup to my 300D for overseas travel is my old C-2100UZ. Since most
of what I shoot on those trips is for projection on an XGA projector,
the limited 2 mp resolution does not matter.

Depending on which new offerings Canon announces this Fall, I plan to
upgrade (e.g., 10D MkII if there is such a thing) and the 300D will
become hers (and the backup).

Phil

"Brian C. Baird" wrote in message
.. .
In article JuEDc.162318$3x.144691@attbi_s54,
says...
Being a loooong time film user, I've the habit of having a back-up
camera
body, which at times, was a handy tool to have. I'm wondering if there
is a
advantage to having a digital back-up; possibly the 10D as a back-up to
the
MK II. I can see where having 1.6x may be an asset to minimizing the
need
for long lenses that would cost about the same for a 10D body. Do you
have
an opinion to offer?

I've read of a lot of photographers keeping a 10D as a backup to a 1D or
1Ds. I remember reading an article in Pop Photo last year about a bird
photographer - he shot primarily with a 1Ds, but a few of his shots were
with his "backup" 10D. I'll have to dig through my back issues and pull
it up.


It's been a thought on my mind since acquiring the MK II, that a back-up
body may be in order. Reason being: buying a long lens (L-USM or USM) costs
about the same as a 10D body, but the long lens would be for me, of sometime
use. I've often changed imaging interests and now no longer interested in
imaging requiring long lenses. But should a just-in-case condition arise
perhaps the 28-135 IS USM lens could double for a 216mm IS USM lens while
still having the advantage of having a back-up body.

Just thinking.

nick

"Phil Wheeler" wrote in message
...


Brian C. Baird wrote:
In article JuEDc.162318$3x.144691@attbi_s54,
says...

Being a loooong time film user, I've the habit of having a back-up
camera
body, which at times, was a handy tool to have. I'm wondering if there
is a
advantage to having a digital back-up; possibly the 10D as a back-up to
the
MK II. I can see where having 1.6x may be an asset to minimizing the
need
for long lenses that would cost about the same for a 10D body. Do you
have
an opinion to offer?


I've read of a lot of photographers keeping a 10D as a backup to a 1D or
1Ds. I remember reading an article in Pop Photo last year about a bird
photographer - he shot primarily with a 1Ds, but a few of his shots were
with his "backup" 10D. I'll have to dig through my back issues and pull
it up.


My backup to my 300D for overseas travel is my old C-2100UZ. Since most
of what I shoot on those trips is for projection on an XGA projector,
the limited 2 mp resolution does not matter.

Depending on which new offerings Canon announces this Fall, I plan to
upgrade (e.g., 10D MkII if there is such a thing) and the 300D will
become hers (and the backup).

Phil


Phil, if there is such a thing as a 10D MK II, I have no doubt that the
processor would be updated in such manner as to equal the processor in the
1D MK II. If that were the case, make bet there will be a back-up body in my
digital bag. g

nick

"Skip M" wrote in message
news:dXEDc.732$876.390@fed1read07...
"Nick C" wrote in message
news:JuEDc.162318$3x.144691@attbi_s54...

"Brian C. Baird" wrote in message
.. .
In article D3uDc.160205$3x.16579@attbi_s54,
says...
There is a very handy feature in the MK II and that is using the
setting that will show blown-out whites in the picture on the
monitor,
along
with the histogram, so that an easy adjustment can be made to
eliminate
the
blown-out whites and correct the histogram.

The 10D has that too. A life saver if you're trying to get that
critical shot.


Thanks. Not having a 10D or ever used a 10D, I didn't know that.

Being a loooong time film user, I've the habit of having a back-up
camera
body, which at times, was a handy tool to have. I'm wondering if there
is
a
advantage to having a digital back-up; possibly the 10D as a back-up to
the
MK II. I can see where having 1.6x may be an asset to minimizing the
need
for long lenses that would cost about the same for a 10D body. Do you
have
an opinion to offer?

nick


Actually, that's been a feature of digital SLRs for a long time, my circa
2000 D30 does it too. It is handy...
As far as the backup body idea, things can go wrong, batteries fail a
critical times, cards get full, it's nice to have a camera you can grab to
get the shot, then go change batteries, cards, whatever. And if there is,
god forbid, a catastrophic failure, it is good to have something there to
use.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com


Thanks skip. We think along the same lines. I'm asea with the thought of
getting the 10D or waiting to see if there is such a thing as a 10D MK II.

Geeze Skip, I feel like a new kid on the block. I keep saying I'm a film
user and here I am getting deeper into digital. Sometimes I have to stop and
wonder about me. g

nick

From: Brian C. Baird

I've read of a lot of photographers keeping a 10D as a backup to a 1D or
1Ds. I remember reading an article in Pop Photo last year about a bird
photographer - he shot primarily with a 1Ds, but a few of his shots were
with his "backup" 10D. I'll have to dig through my back issues and pull
it up.

That was probably Arthur Morris but he's switched to the 1D Mark II for most of
his bird work now and the 1Ds is now his 'backup' Here are some samples of
his images, mainly with the M II ...

http://www.birdsasart.com/bn135.htm
http://www.birdsasart.com/bn136.htm
http://www.birdsasart.com/bn138.htm
http://www.birdsasart.com/bn137.htm

I've used the 10D some for bird photography and the 1.6 multiplier is great but
the AF is not good enough for many situations, I've found.

Bill

In article , grant kinsley
wrote:

Randall Ainsworth writes:
1st digital camera - Quicktake 150

2nd current & only digital camera - Canon 10D

That's quite a leap!

He only asked for digital.

Through the years I've gone from a Brownie to an Olympus rangefinder,
Pentax Spotmatic (which still works), an RB 67, a Pentax 6xc7, and SX
70, a Nimslo 3D, Calumet 4x5 view, and two Hasselblads (500C/M &
EL/M).

I acquired the Quicktake just for something to screw around with.

"Nick C" wrote in message
news:sJFDc.119418$HG.31491@attbi_s53...

"Skip M" wrote in message
news:dXEDc.732$876.390@fed1read07...
"Nick C" wrote in message
news:JuEDc.162318$3x.144691@attbi_s54...

"Brian C. Baird" wrote in message
.. .
In article D3uDc.160205$3x.16579@attbi_s54,
says...
There is a very handy feature in the MK II and that is using the
setting that will show blown-out whites in the picture on the
monitor,
along
with the histogram, so that an easy adjustment can be made to
eliminate
the
blown-out whites and correct the histogram.

The 10D has that too. A life saver if you're trying to get that
critical shot.


Thanks. Not having a 10D or ever used a 10D, I didn't know that.

Being a loooong time film user, I've the habit of having a back-up
camera
body, which at times, was a handy tool to have. I'm wondering if there
is
a
advantage to having a digital back-up; possibly the 10D as a back-up
to
the
MK II. I can see where having 1.6x may be an asset to minimizing the
need
for long lenses that would cost about the same for a 10D body. Do you
have
an opinion to offer?

nick


Actually, that's been a feature of digital SLRs for a long time, my
circa
2000 D30 does it too. It is handy...
As far as the backup body idea, things can go wrong, batteries fail a
critical times, cards get full, it's nice to have a camera you can grab
to
get the shot, then go change batteries, cards, whatever. And if there
is,
god forbid, a catastrophic failure, it is good to have something there
to
use.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com


Thanks skip. We think along the same lines. I'm asea with the thought of
getting the 10D or waiting to see if there is such a thing as a 10D MK II.

Geeze Skip, I feel like a new kid on the block. I keep saying I'm a film
user and here I am getting deeper into digital. Sometimes I have to stop
and
wonder about me. g

nick



Nick, I'm exactly the same way. I bought a used D30 last Sept. to see if
digital was the way I want to go, and now I can't see myself going any other
way. The only thing holding me back is that I still can't get black and
white results that make me completely happy. I'm thinking about selling
some stock and buying a 1D mkII, but, like you, I'm waiting to see what the
successor to the 10D is like.
BTW, I notice by some of your posts that you are in SoCal?
If you want to continue that thought, my email is valid.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com

In article , bhilton665
@aol.comedy says...
That was probably Arthur Morris but he's switched to the 1D Mark II for most of
his bird work now and the 1Ds is now his 'backup' Here are some samples of
his images, mainly with the M II ...

http://www.birdsasart.com/bn135.htm
http://www.birdsasart.com/bn136.htm
http://www.birdsasart.com/bn138.htm
http://www.birdsasart.com/bn137.htm

Yeah, that's the guy. Great shots.

I've used the 10D some for bird photography and the 1.6 multiplier is great but
the AF is not good enough for many situations, I've found.

It's not a pro AF system. I just shoot a ton of shots to make up for
it. Still get the keeper in the end.