bushpig 0 Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 Kuma, yeah I don't know anything about that lens. Kokodoko, I have the Olympus U 770sw which I use in the surf and snorkelling. I also used it in the snow these last 2 weeks. Good little point and shoot camera, and great being waterproof. Link to post Share on other sites
kokodoko 67 Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 thanks bushy, i got the canon s5 and am just learning how to use it. Link to post Share on other sites
bushpig 0 Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 sweet Link to post Share on other sites
nzlegend 1 Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 Originally Posted By: Kumapix stick to 2 gig & 4 gig cards. I don't think CB will be shooting 12gb of jpegs anytime soon. my advice is get a fast card, one that has fast read and write times. A really cheap card will have a 1MB/sec write time will take literally freakin ages to transfer a full card. The cheapest cards out there transfer at 6X speed which is about 1.0MB/sec (actually 0.9MB/sec) If you have a basic 2GB card that is full it will take 37mins to tranfer that full card to your PC! 4 gig card over an hour 6x 0.9MB/sec 40x 6.0 66x 10.0 133x 20.0 you want a high speed card and the most well known are the Sandisk Ultra II and Extreme III Ultra II is is 9MB/sec and Extreme III is 20MB/sec. The latter will dump 2 gigs in less than 2mins - a big difference and the write speed is important for continuous shot mode on fast SLR cameras. Extreme III are also as the name states Extreme Quote: Designed to meet the critical speed and performance needs of serious professional photographers—lets you quickly capture, view, upload and transfer large image files Ideal for demanding photo shoots under severe weather conditions—heat, cold, wind, rain, snow, etc. Built to perform in the most extreme environments and temperatures—from -13º F to 185º F -25º C to 85º C Min 20MB/second** sequential read and write Durable, reliable and thoroughly tested—temperature tested (heat and cold); shock and vibration tested For us snowlovers and action people thats an important aspect to take into account. I personally have lost two el-cheapo cards to heat, and it wasnt even that hot but it fried the cards. must be expensive? not at all, on kakaku.com a 2 gig Extreme III start at 4880yen! Link to post Share on other sites
Kumapix 0 Posted January 7, 2008 Author Share Posted January 7, 2008 look on dealnews.com and order from the states. the prices in japan for memory cards are ridiculous Link to post Share on other sites
nzlegend 1 Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 Originally Posted By: Kumapix look on dealnews.com and order from the states. the prices in japan for memory cards are ridiculous I dunno mate, that site has the 2gig Extreme at US$40 which is 4335yen, thats pretty darn close to the Japan price. Japan's prices are coming down. Link to post Share on other sites
bushpig 0 Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 Compact Flash 12 Gig from B and S photo in the US cost me less than the 4 Gig cost me in Japan SG. Link to post Share on other sites
Kumapix 0 Posted January 7, 2008 Author Share Posted January 7, 2008 i picked up a bunch of 2gig ultra II for $20 a piece. I don't think speed is that much of an issue. It doesn't do anything for sequences as it all goes into the camera's buffer. When I get the pictures off the card onto the computer I'm doing something else on the computer anyways so any lag doesn't bother me much. That said, I am now using an extreme IV card with the extreme card reader for top dl speeds...but building 1:1 previews in lightroom for raw files takes time either way Link to post Share on other sites
thursday 1 Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 but what is the speed? SanDisk ratings are basically this: Extreem III= 133x = 20mbs Extreme IV = 266x = 40mbs A Transcend 266x would cost about half of an SanDisk E4 Link to post Share on other sites
miller 1 Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 I thought I would rescue this thread. How is the 300 bushpig? Bored of it yet? Link to post Share on other sites
bushpig 0 Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 No mate Link to post Share on other sites
contender 0 Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 The norwegian living in the room next to me has the d300 with the new 14-24, the new 24-70 and the 70-200. Im just a tad jealous Link to post Share on other sites
big-will 7 Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 Nice. He must have a bit of loose change to use! Link to post Share on other sites
thursday 1 Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 I have been searching high and low for the 24-70. Rarer than sashimi. Contender, that Norwegian has now reached his goal in life. Time for him to lay down. Link to post Share on other sites
Fattwins 0 Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 BP seriously start shooting more in RAW! Link to post Share on other sites
contender 0 Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 I cant help but think that the 24-70 is a strange choice for the D300. I would probably miss the last millimeters down to 17 or 18. However on the D3 it should be the perfect choice and what I've heard it is better than the Canon 24-70. Link to post Share on other sites
thursday 1 Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 it was intended for the D3. I see the trend going to full format, hence this range of lenses and then perhaps the next gen D300 (D500?) would be an FF. I am not going to buy DX lenses. The 14-24 is all over the place. Nobody is buying them here. Much too specialiszed I reckon, alot of stock brought in but not too many people taking it. Link to post Share on other sites
bushpig 0 Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 Originally Posted By: Fattwins BP seriously start shooting more in RAW! I intend to at some point FT, but I must ask... Why? Link to post Share on other sites
Fattwins 0 Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 because you can really edit your pics. Ian showed me the difference last night. Link to post Share on other sites
bushpig 0 Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 Yeah I know mate, but I want to get my head around it first, rather than have a backlog of pics to have to go back on. I know RAW is better, but you can still edit jpegs quite well. Link to post Share on other sites
Fattwins 0 Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 bp just go out tonight and shoot some pics in raw and see the difference in the editing suite. Link to post Share on other sites
bushpig 0 Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 I have mate. I also have a decent program (LR). There are a few things I want to get used to before going full hog with it though. I have seen the difference, and while they are certainly more tweakable, they are not always noticeably better quality. For pros who are aiming at massive poster size stuff, then the added tweakability is no doubt good. LR does a pretty damn good job even with JPEGs. Link to post Share on other sites
base40 0 Posted January 22, 2008 Share Posted January 22, 2008 Bushpic, what application is LR? Link to post Share on other sites
Kumapix 0 Posted January 22, 2008 Author Share Posted January 22, 2008 Originally Posted By: Bushpig but you can still edit jpegs quite well. true but you're losing quality everytime you save in jpeg (lossy format) starting from the second you take the photo Link to post Share on other sites
bushpig 0 Posted January 22, 2008 Share Posted January 22, 2008 LR = Lightroom Kuma, true, but LR works on the original and any new changes or adjustments are made to the original, not to a resaved jpeg, so the loss is minimal. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts