AmbientMike wrote:
How about the old flash cards? I had 2 512mb and it was amazing! If I shot JPEG I got 150 on each card ! Better than 24 or 36 on a roll.
When i bought the 300D i the start of 2004, I also got Photoshop CS which came with Camera Raw build in for the first time. So I was up and running with raw from Day one.
Whayne, that is a masterpiece Just like Tony's shot from the eagle's catch on the first page! One thing that this thread teaches us that the most important and decisive element in a photo is the talent and skills of a photographer, rather than the technical level of the tools. EOSfun is in the photographer not in the camera. The photographer makes the camera live, not the other way around.This thread is bringing back good memories and is a great way to put all our wishes for new camera characteristics into perspective. It also shows that even though talking EOS can be EOSfun, shooting EOS is the kind of EOSfun what it is all about.
My first DLSR was a Nikon D70
Yeah, Daan, but we were talking the "good" old days here
Just kidding. I guess even one of your Nikon shots would be welcome here, since some even posted pictures from bridge cameras and compacts anyway. Please share some of your great portraits, or whatever subject. I know you have a lot of good stuff. Thanks! Have EOSfun
My first DSLR was a Pentax K200D w/kit. It was 750 freaking dollars! I bought it because I kept missing great kid shots from P&S shutter lag. Eventually, I bought myself the Tamron 70-300 that cost 150 more dollars!
Occasionally I accidentally got some decent shots from the combo.
I even remember having to swap out 4xAAs during the air show
cputeq wrote:
My first DSLR was a Pentax K200D w/kit. It was 750 freaking dollars!
Yeah, buying my first was a similarly painful experience. My only film SLR (a Ricoh KR-10 Super) was £150 new, so coughing up £650 for a 350D definitely hurt. It didn't get better either, when i realised after 2 months that the kit lens was rubbish and i needed to buy something better...
15Bit wrote:
Yeah, buying my first was a similarly painful experience. My only film SLR (a Ricoh KR-10 Super) was £150 new, so coughing up £650 for a 350D definitely hurt. It didn't get better either, when i realised after 2 months that the kit lens was rubbish and i needed to buy something better...
Yeah, that first generation Canon kit lens was an expensive incounter indeed!
the first shot (dog) is when i was testing my newly acquired 80-200 f/2.8 (drainpipe) and i was amazed by the bokeh in the shot. bokeh was something new to me and i was impressed thinking i am a pretty good photographer.
the D30 wasn't too good with action but did a decent job in single shot mode.
Yeah, that first generation Canon kit lens was an expensive incounter indeed!
It's interesting you mention that. I have always found the kit lenses a good deal actually. I remember some discussions on the board in the good old days here about kit lenses and the lowly 28-135IS for example. To my taste they were actually good pieces of glass for the money but they needed some kind of different approach and more postprocessing than the better L lenses. I found the possibilities of counterattacking optical aberrations with RAW converters and Photoshop actually an interesting challenge and exciting compared to the era of film. An optical aberration in a slide was to sit in there forever, while with digital it was not very hard to improve image quality with careful processing and a good workflow. I thought that the philosophy of the Electronic Optical System of Canon EOS came fully appreciated with the new digital workflow. The kit lens 28-80mm may have been limiting in creative possibilities (DOF and speed) but it has given me lots of EOSfun
The Canon EOS 20D was the first dSLR camera I ever owned. It was also the first camera that I owned that wasn't a point-and-shoot. It's definitely what got me interested in photography. But I must say, it was the Canon EOS 5D that got me hooked. I recall telling someone that the 5D would not be the only camera I ever wanted, but it would definitely be the only camera I would ever need. I think that still holds true today.
Here are some photographs from my 20D in my first year of photography:
EOS I agree mostly. I found the 28-135 a decent lens even on the 40D so I am sure I would like it on FF. I probably have more practice doing post work than actual photography, so I can typically extract the look I want from pretty much any lens. The cheaper ones just require a bit more care. My prints using any of my lenses throughout the years look great.
Speaking of imaging software: I'm pretty sure my D60 came with Canon software, before the Digital Solutions Disc separated into DPP and Zoombrowser. I seem to recall it being only Zoombrowser.
All the images I posted here were the first shots out of the D60, or first month, and all were shot as IMG files (RAW) converted to JPG. I remember being so impressed with the idea of an uncompressed and reversible "digital negative". The software also provided the stitching for that pano. I am positive I never owned or bought any Capture 1 or PS product, other than an LE version of PS Elements supplied with Quark Xpress, which I didn't use with the Canon.
Maybe I'm wrong?
I'm trying to remember -- did the DPP and Zoombrowser split up when I got my 20D, or was it the software for the 5D?
Todd -- Amazing use of color and contrast! Great shots.
Gunzorro wrote:
Speaking of imaging software: I'm pretty sure my D60 came with Canon software, before the Digital Solutions Disc separated into DPP and Zoombrowser. I seem to recall it being only Zoombrowser.
Maybe I'm wrong?
I'm trying to remember -- did the DPP and Zoombrowser split up when I got my 20D, or was it the software for the 5D?
That's right. The first generations of Canon cameras came with Zoombrowser. DPP was not launched before 2004, it was definitely not available in 2000-2001 yet. It came with the 1DmkII that I bought, I downloaded a newer release immediately afterwards, but I had already tasted Capture One which was superior in almost every respect. The 20D indeed came with DPP, just like the 5D later did.
Todd, that's great work! THX for sharing.
Veroman: the 10D was great especially for it's colours. Still today I find those very characteristic. The magenta's are very nice, strong and subtle at the same time. Just like greens and aqua. Not always true and scientifically right, but definitely a great character. I still have files from the 10D that I love! If the camera had not been introduced with again a lousy autofocus I might still be shooting it. I loved the images for the EOSfun, but I was so mad after the upgrade to experience that almost nothing improved in comparison to the 30D that I decided to make the jump to an 1DmkII. I found postprocessing of the 1DmkII much more difficult at first hand, but after a while I learned how to manage white balance, colours and sharpness (especially sharpness!). I sold my 10D to a friend and after a short period of seller remorse I never looked back. The 1DmkII was the very first camera with AF that worked for me. Finally almost every shot a keeper
Sorry guys.
Just like Tony's shot from the eagle's catch on the first page! One thing that this thread teaches us that the most important and decisive element in a photo is the talent and skills of a photographer, rather than the technical level of the tools. EOSfun is in the photographer not in the camera. The photographer makes the camera live, not the other way around.This thread is bringing back good memories and is a great way to put all our wishes for new camera characteristics into perspective. It also shows that even though talking EOS can be EOSfun, shooting EOS is the kind of EOSfun what it is all about.
