Photoclubalpha

Oh, what the hell, here are a few more.

Batman emerging from his lair

Looks cold where you guys live!

Here are a few of my recent winter photos:

A couple of golden oldies... http://www.nikonweb.com/paris2005/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; Funny. That first 2005 photo on that page is similar to my 2001 photo on the Pont Alexandre III in Paris: http://www.bakubo.com/galleries/France/slides/paris-seine-view-1_ni-sc-p...

That's what I want is an expensive 50MP when the most pixels I ever need or most anyone else will ever need is about 16MP. :roll: 48MP is native 20 x 27 @ 300 DPI unframed and unmatted! Honestly, how many semi-pros and advanced amateurs are hanging those? Alamy standard is basically 11 x 17 @ 300 D...

So far, every digital camera I have bought had the option for selecting smaller sizes. I suppose a 50mp camera would probably have options for shooting several sizes too, maybe the smallest would be something like 6-10mp. I always shoot full-size though.

I am pretty much neutral on high mp. I like the 12mp on the A700, even more with v4 firmware. If quality can be kept up then 20mp, 24p, 50mp, etc. is fine with me. Yeah, lenses are another issue though. I expect over time the tech will improve enough that it will happen. The raw file sizes keep goin...

bfitzgerald wrote:Frankly I would be dead happy with a 16mp FF myself, hell even a 10mp FF would be great for most jobs.

I seem to recall not so long ago that you were happy with 6mp and didn't want more. What happened?

The Sony 18-250mm f3.5-6.3 is the lens I have come to use the most on my A700. In fact, I just added a ton of new photos in my Hawaii album that were made with it: http://www.bakubo.com I am still amazed that my 18-250mm in a fairly light, compact package gives me a fov of 27-375mm and does it with ...

I would assume the Sony version of the 18-270mm would be non-stabilised, and therefore possibly have much better centering and maybe even a slightly different internal optical formula - the potential is there to make a better non-VC lens, than the Tamron VC version. That would be very nice if it tu...

And here is some stuff on the Tamron 10-24mm:

http://virtualentity.blogspot.com/2008/ ... sigma.html
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tamron/10-24mm.htm

I found a few reviews and usage reports of the Tamron 18-270mm:

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showprod ... 217/cat/23
http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/superzoomtest
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/tam ... p3_vc_n15/

Rockwell on his website reviewed the Tamron 10-24mm a few weeks ago. He thought it wasn't so good.

worse viewfinder, less fps, worse quality body. The pros would still buy A900 I haven't seriously considered an A900 because I just don't want to spend $3k and I want a built-in flash for my rare uses of a bit of fill-flash outdoors. Put it all in an A700-like body and that would be good enough for...

Dusty wrote:Under $2k FF 24 MP would grab my attention, but what would we be losing from the a900?

A couple of things that come to mind that could be left off the A900 to get an A800 price down are a less than 100% vf and fewer fps. Add a built-in flash though.

is there any indication yet on the effect these elctromechanical parts have on how long a lens lasts ? For example what happens when one of hese lens OS systems goes bad is it like body AS where the sensor can be shifted? Back when I was using a Canon 30D I would read a lot of the posts in the Cano...