Some Niece Shots...

[24Peter]

Sisters taken with Sigma 18-200 OS and two Sunpak 383's on stands with white shoot-thru umbrellas.

Xiao

http://photos.imageevent.com/24peter/uploads/upload2/large/IMG_2602.JPG

Charlotte

http://photos.imageevent.com/24peter/uploads/upload2/large/IMG_2555.JPG

[michaelb]

Love that first one Peter.

[cdr116]

Very nice lighting, i really like the first one :)

btw... how do you like your 28-105? I'm about to buy one for my XTi

Very nice photos!

[nqjudo]

Nice shots Peter. Good job with the lighting.

[24Peter]

Thanks guys. I've got hundreds more if anyone wants to see them... ;)

As for the Canon 28-105, I've posted extensively on this lens in the past. I seem to have a pretty a good copy and prior to getting the Sigma 18-200, it was probably my most used lens (I'd guesstimate at least 15,000 shots with it on my XT.) It is a good lens with certain (obvious?) limitations, but well worth the $229 I paid new for mine.

[aparmley]

Peter!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You, you, you have a new camera!

[24Peter]

Peter!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You, you, you have a new camera!

ANDY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

'Bout time, no? ;) (Got $500 for my XT w/grip and kit and 50 1.8 lens :D) (Lovin' the new D300 high ISO pics though, think I shoulda waited Mr. Nikon? :confused: )

[coldrain]

ANDY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

'Bout time, no? ;) (Got $500 for my XT w/grip and kit and 50 1.8 lens :D) (Lovin' the new D300 high ISO pics though, think I shoulda waited Mr. Nikon? :confused: )
I like the 1st pic where she grabs the hat... very cute!

About the noise, the D300 is not better in high ISO than your camera... where did you get that impression? The Nikon applies a lot of NR (even in RAW), and then still the results are comparable to the 40D (but with less detail and dymanic range)... so, with some good NR post processing you can do better with your 40D than with a D300.

Both are nice cameras though, don't get me wrong. but high ISO? The 40D does edge out the D300 a bit and the A700 a lot.

[RichNY]

ANDY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

'Bout time, no? ;) (Got $500 for my XT w/grip and kit and 50 1.8 lens :D) (Lovin' the new D300 high ISO pics though, think I shoulda waited Mr. Nikon? :confused: )

Since you are relocating out to the right coast, you might as well sell off your Canon gear rather than pay to move it and by a D300 once you get out here. ;)

[24Peter]

Since you are relocating out to the right coast, you might as well sell off your Canon gear rather than pay to move it and by a D300 once you get out here. ;)

Well considering I just today got a Canon 50 1.4 and Sigma 30 1.4 (from buydig.com, Beach Camera's internet discounter), now I have even more Canon gear to move. ;)

But... compared to what it's gonna cost me to ship my car plus all my furniture, maybe I should sell that stuff and plan on keeping the 40D! :eek:

[RichNY]

Well considering I just today got a Canon 50 1.4 and Sigma 30 1.4 (from buydig.com, Beach Camera's internet discounter), now I have even more Canon gear to move. ;)

But... compared to what it's gonna cost me to ship my car plus all my furniture, maybe I should sell that stuff and plan on keeping the 40D! :eek:

It cost me almost 10k to move my car and furniture back to NY from MN in the late 90s. If I had to do it over again I would have sold 3/4 of what I had and driven the SUV to NY with the remainder instead of flying. Single dumbest thing to move- pool table which I've been storing for 10 years.

BTW- Are you moving to NY or NJ?

[24Peter]

BTW- Are you moving to NY or NJ?

Right now it looks like NJ in late spring.

Here are a couple more niece shots for you guys:

Brooke, natural light ISO 1600 Sigma 18-200 OS:

http://photos.imageevent.com/24peter/uploads/upload2/large/IMG_2178.JPG

Katelyn 430 EX bounced off ceiling Sigma 18-200 OS:

http://photos.imageevent.com/24peter/uploads/upload2/large/IMG_2727.JPG

I noticed that in certain lower (but not what I would call "low") light situations the Sigma front focuses pretty bad. (You can see it in Katelyn's shot - the focus point was her eyes but her sleeves/wrists are in sharp focus.) So... I need to have it calibrated. Apparently I can just walk it in when I'm back in NY in a couple of weeks and they'll do it while I wait.

[24Peter]

About the noise, the D300 is not better in high ISO than your camera... where did you get that impression? The Nikon applies a lot of NR (even in RAW), and then still the results are comparable to the 40D (but with less detail and dymanic range)... so, with some good NR post processing you can do better with your 40D than with a D300.



In terms of noise and a more pleasing image, to my eye the D300 wins:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D300/FULLRES/D300hSLI3200.HTM

40D (not sure if what his NR settings were)

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E40D/FULLRES/E40DhSLI3200.HTM

[coldrain]

In terms of noise and a more pleasing image, to my eye the D300 wins:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D300/FULLRES/D300hSLI3200.HTM

40D (not sure if what his NR settings were)

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E40D/FULLRES/E40DhSLI3200.HTM
That imaging-resource is also a very odd result anyway.. just about every other comparison looks very different. But that is not weird, just about everything from imaging resource is odd?

Something a bit more telling, better done and more interesting:
http://www.hugorodriguez.com/articulos/batalla_12_mp_07.htm

Here you can actually get an idea of what does what, and see the NR Nikon applies too.
The 40D and D300 are close, but the 40D is better (and loses less DR and saturation).

Then some blahblah about the actual processor performance... not really important, but gives a good background on what we are seeing in regards to Nikon's chominance noise filtering (also in RAW):
http://theory.uchicago.edu/~ejm/pix/20d/posts/tests/D300_40D_tests/

And from some people that are scary:
http://www.astrosurf.com/buil/nikon_test/test.htm

[cdifoto]

Since you'll be next door, you'll have to find some models for us to shoot. :D

[24Peter]

Since you'll be next door, you'll have to find some models for us to shoot. :D

Don!!!!! Wazup! Tell us (me?) what you've been up to... :)

[cdifoto]

Don!!!!! Wazup! Tell us (me?) what you've been up to... :)

Trying to steal Jamie's clients. I'm not doing a very good job at it though. :(

[JTL]

In terms of noise and a more pleasing image, to my eye the D300 wins:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D300/FULLRES/D300hSLI3200.HTM

40D (not sure if what his NR settings were)

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E40D/FULLRES/E40DhSLI3200.HTM
In that example, clearly, the 40D is representing more detail (and more image noise) and the D300 is using a heavier handed approach to NR and fine detail suffers as a result. It's definitely two completely different philosophies regarding image output. As to which one is more pleasing, it is purely subjective. As to which one would give you the most flexibility in post-processing...the answer, at least to me, is obvious. ;):)

[cdifoto]

As to which one would give you the most flexibility in post-processing...the answer, at least to me, is obvious. ;):)

I don't want flexibility in post-processing. I want a camera where I don't have to do shyt. I want a camera that doesn't even require that I show up. Too bad nobody has manufactured it yet.

[JTL]

I don't want flexibility in post-processing. I want a camera where I don't have to do shyt. I want a camera that doesn't even require that I show up. Too bad nobody has manufactured it yet.I'm STILL waiting for anti-grav. I am sooooo sick of having to hold my camera....

What are you doing slumming over here anyway...sick of those POTN snobs? :D:p:D

Good to hear from ya! :)

[AdamW]

I'm STILL waiting for anti-grav. I am sooooo sick of having to hold my camera....

Yeah! And what about the flying cars and jet-packs we were promised?

And why can't I get a lens that really freezes motion?

Stupid future....:mad: