Photoclubalpha

No flash, that is a side lamp which caught it on the edges. Have to say C1 4 is pretty good, giving it a bash on trial, that one was shot raw, C1 can do decent skintones, and when you hit "auto" on WB, exposure, levels etc, it gets it pretty well. I hit auto in LR, and it stuffed up the ex...

I voted no as well.

I don't see a significant cost or size advantage, and long term FF lenses are a more logical choice.

Interesting shots.. Seems some folks like colour, more than I do. I will do flash, but only if I have no choice That last one is kinda scary though, could work great for a horror film poster! I had a play about in C1 4, picked a 70's film style, and a vignette, just a casual shot of small man doing ...

Greg, what did you use software wise for scanning?

I just put the image in a photo program, hit auto WB, and that pretty much sorted the sky out ok. The magenta is the problem, just shift that down and it's pretty good.

I like the 1st and 3rd shot.

I tend not to be a fan of wonky angles, but in this case it works pretty well, adds to the action as such. It can be overused though..but I will let it off this time!

Thanks for the response. I admit I am pretty happy with them overall, of course I got a few duffers..kids are unpredictable at times. I have always found it hard to do non close up people shots, maybe I will try some more on that one. It's more a case of struggling with what to put in, and keep out....

I have had some complaints that I was not posting any images (sony ones), or taking part in photo related activities, from some forum members ;-) So here we go with a few casual shots, taken with the A200 and 50mm f1.7. Light source, energy saver bulb, jpegs with only a resize and sharpen. I have no...

So the new lens is good then??? ;-) Evil, I would rather shoot with this..than buy an Evil camera! http://www.ozcamera.com/hanimex110.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; I am pretty certain I have a 110L up in the loft somewhere..probably near mint. When I got my ist "...

Tried it for a while, needs some work interface wise, but it's running very fast. I have not used a faster raw converter. Though it's a bit of a memory hog, I don't mind if it's speedy. Output wise, too early to say, it looks decent enough. As for ACR, "everything" beats it for details, C1...

Just a quick word on silverfast.. Not easy to get into, it takes some time. But, once you do..it's pretty potent as far as scanning software goes. Vuescan, has some nice things about it, but a horrible interface (try adjustments..way easier on silverfast) Not cheap though, best bought with the scann...

Olympus are even worse that sony on prices (bodies and lenses) bar the odd blowout twin kit deal..check out the E-30 and E-3 saucy isn't the word.

Sony have got a bit better on lens prices, well that might not remain so, with the yen going as it is.

I don't have much Olympus digital experience, a brief encounter with a few. Used them on 35mm for a while.

DK is right, the lenses are very good, but the bodies are not IMO. I wouldn't go near them.

Not bad.. The 3L is too crippled for my tastes, but it's an ok price for new. The 28-100mm isn't half bad on a a film body, it's better than you would expect. Not so good digital due to the sensor bloom thing. On the other hand, you could get a film 5 for that price, in VGC on ebay, and it's a much ...

And that is not an overstatement! Shooting at high ISO in low kelvin lighting conditions (sub 2500k) can often cause problems with noise, but not just luminance noise..the blue colour noise can cause major problems. In this shot at ISO 3200, the A200 is being pushed, no question..in honesty, I could...

I guess you could always get really small memory cards..say 128mb or something! That would stop you machine gun shooting. I am finding 36 exposure rolls of film a struggle to finish myself, I prefer the 24 myself..if I could get 10 exposures that would be nice. I certainly agree that quality counts ...