Canon user thread - post your pictures here
- Thread starter CR_OPSO
- Start date
crazymcnutjob
Active member
Recently got a Rebel XTi for Christmas and 3 days ago I went up to my lake house in Michigan to test it out (and to attend a crazy party). Here are a few I took. All were taken in manual mode at 100 ISO (except for the last one, which was taken at ISO 1600). All of them were taken with the 18-55 kit lens and had some color manipulation in photoshop. Enjoy!
(8 second exposure time)
panoramic shot merged together in PS CS2 (photomerge)
a high dynamic range image made in CS2 (5 bracketed exposures)
another HDR - i think this one turned out better than the one above.
a friend of mine at the party, getting ready to pass out. Shot at ISO 1600, with (obvious) motion blur layer added.
Overall, I'm very pleased with how this camera handled landscapes.
(8 second exposure time)
panoramic shot merged together in PS CS2 (photomerge)
a high dynamic range image made in CS2 (5 bracketed exposures)
another HDR - i think this one turned out better than the one above.
a friend of mine at the party, getting ready to pass out. Shot at ISO 1600, with (obvious) motion blur layer added.
Overall, I'm very pleased with how this camera handled landscapes.
Canon being too clean? Nikon more filmish?
Canon being too clean? Nikon more filmish?
I agree that there seems to be a difference between the two manufacturers. I like both. In fact, I almost bought a D50 first. Then, I remembered my dad had an Elan II E with extras that I could use if I bought the XT. I'm glad I went that direction.
I think the principal difference is the default sharpness of parameter 1, and the very noise-free processing of the digic II processor. I've noticed that when I ramp up the ISO to 800, speed the shutter up, lower whaterver exposure compensation I'm running, and run on parameter 2, the pictures look more filmish...closer to what I think you guys have been talking about.
I think it's great there are so many options now. I remember being totally impressed with a Sony point/shoot that burned to CD's. I look at those pictures now and laugh.
I was wondering if any of you know how wedding photographers get that blurred, almost glowing, dreamy look to some of their pictures? I've tried things in photo editors, but the only thing I've seen come close to what I want is a Cokin filter. One of the websites I looked at pretty much called Cokin stuff crap, but it looked good to me. Anyone have any experience with that stuff?
Canon being too clean? Nikon more filmish?
I agree that there seems to be a difference between the two manufacturers. I like both. In fact, I almost bought a D50 first. Then, I remembered my dad had an Elan II E with extras that I could use if I bought the XT. I'm glad I went that direction.
I think the principal difference is the default sharpness of parameter 1, and the very noise-free processing of the digic II processor. I've noticed that when I ramp up the ISO to 800, speed the shutter up, lower whaterver exposure compensation I'm running, and run on parameter 2, the pictures look more filmish...closer to what I think you guys have been talking about.
I think it's great there are so many options now. I remember being totally impressed with a Sony point/shoot that burned to CD's. I look at those pictures now and laugh.
I was wondering if any of you know how wedding photographers get that blurred, almost glowing, dreamy look to some of their pictures? I've tried things in photo editors, but the only thing I've seen come close to what I want is a Cokin filter. One of the websites I looked at pretty much called Cokin stuff crap, but it looked good to me. Anyone have any experience with that stuff?
another non pro rebel xt shot
another non pro rebel xt shot
This is my in-laws' dog, Baxter. He went blind (SARDS) Dec. 8th
He's still with us though. :smile:
Photo Details:
Manual settings
28-105 USM lens @ 105mm
1/100 sec
f/8
ISO 800
bounce flash with my cheap vivitar
Auto enhance w/ Photoshop, shrunk to 1024 res for this post
another non pro rebel xt shot
This is my in-laws' dog, Baxter. He went blind (SARDS) Dec. 8th
He's still with us though. :smile:
Photo Details:
Manual settings
28-105 USM lens @ 105mm
1/100 sec
f/8
ISO 800
bounce flash with my cheap vivitar
Auto enhance w/ Photoshop, shrunk to 1024 res for this post
conrad_johnson
Well-known member
Thats it...You asked for it... DOG PICS.
My boston terrier, Ajax.
My boston terrier, Ajax.
conrad_johnson
Well-known member
That dog is f'in cute.:smile:CR_OPSO said:To carry on the recent dog theme
This is my Dad's Brittany Spaniel.
Chad
CR_OPSO
RebelXTuser
Thanks!breadboy said:
I used my Rebel XT and 50mm 1.8 for that picture. The aperture was open a little more than I wanted it (his nose isn't quite in focus) at 2.8, but it was getting dark and I needed the extra shutter speed (1/125) since he wouldn't sit still. I actually cloned out my finger, which was on his back to try to keep him from moving.
I took this one in color and converted it using the channel mixer. If you aren't familiar with it, here's an explanation I typed in another thread: Open the channel mixer and click "monochrome" and just play with the sliders. It opens with red at 100%. You can move that down to 0 and then set another channel to 100% to see what that looks like... and so on. Depending on what colors are in your photo, certain channels will look better than others. You'll most likely need a mix to get it just right. As a starting point, they should add up to somewhere in the neighborhood of 100% (for example 25% red, 50% green, 25% blue), but it doesn't have to be exactly 100%.
From there, I used high pass sharpening to bring out the eyes a little more. (create a new layer, use the high pass filter on the top layer, and change the blending mode to soft light or hard light, lower opacity to taste) Then, I erase everything from the high-pass layer except what I want to sharpen. Usually, for web size photos, unsharp mask works just as good and it's faster... but I like the extra control you get with the high pass method.
Other than that, I think I darkened the bottom-left corner since the other corners were already dark.
I noticed in your signature, you also have the 50mm 1.8. I keep that one on the camera 90% of the time. Not bad for $70, eh?
Chad
MrBattle@mac.com
Member
here is my dog:
conrad_johnson
Well-known member
I think it was iso 100.breadboy said:Looks like Ajax needs a new toy
Rebel xt.
I used a canon zoom lens. I don't remember wich one. 28-70 mabe?
Thanks.
cast4shows
Member
A couple of my December Pics
A couple of my December Pics
I took the one of the sign in Newport Beach with (Canon EF 50mm F1.8 II)....I am a surfer so I really love this campaign. The 2 of the cats were taken at my grandparents house in Ohio with (Canon EF 70-200 F4.0L USM)
Love these 2 lenses....once I get a sharp wide I will consider myself set
A couple of my December Pics
I took the one of the sign in Newport Beach with (Canon EF 50mm F1.8 II)....I am a surfer so I really love this campaign. The 2 of the cats were taken at my grandparents house in Ohio with (Canon EF 70-200 F4.0L USM)
Love these 2 lenses....once I get a sharp wide I will consider myself set
cast4shows
Member
Do Nikon Prime Lenses fit Rebel XT Canon
Do Nikon Prime Lenses fit Rebel XT Canon
In reference to the picture found above, shot with Nikon Prime Lens.....I did not know that Nikon lenses actually fit a Canon DSLR Body. Is this the case? I doubt it, however is so I guess it will open up a whole new variety of lens options for me..including used because used canon lenses are so hard to find.
Anyone know the answer to this?
Do Nikon Prime Lenses fit Rebel XT Canon
In reference to the picture found above, shot with Nikon Prime Lens.....I did not know that Nikon lenses actually fit a Canon DSLR Body. Is this the case? I doubt it, however is so I guess it will open up a whole new variety of lens options for me..including used because used canon lenses are so hard to find.
Anyone know the answer to this?
CR_OPSO said:
I tried what you recommended, and that nailed it! Here's an example of my reluctant model
50mm prime lens
f/4.0
1/80sec
ISO100
Processed the RAW w/ Raw Shooter Essentials (free) since I under-exposed the pic so much I had to ramp it up to +3 ev
made a duplicate layer, 75% opacity, mulitply, guassian blur @ 45 pixels.
This is exactly what I was looking for! Thanks for the suggestion. I won't buy any filters now...why spend the money!