DaGimp 0 #1 October 27, 2003 ok folks...i curently have a flat top narrow with a TRV-22 and diamond .3 lens....what still camera and lens would be recommended?"Professor of Pimpology"~~~Bolas Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Canuck 0 #2 October 27, 2003 If you're looking at 35mm, you can't beat the quality, durability, and economy of the Canon EOS line, and they all have the remote jack to put a tongue switch on. For a lens, to match your .3 video, you will need to go pretty wide, like in the 17 to 20mm range, and that gets expensive. If you're not too worried about matching up the video and the still, again, the Canon EF 24 and 28 mm lenses are hard to beat for the quality and price (although the 24 is quite a bit more) I use an EOS 3000 with an EF 28, mostly for tandems, and get amazing results - I've never had a single complaint. In Canuck dollars, that set-up was about $850 - not sure what the Americano price would be, but presumably less. Canuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deuce 1 #3 October 28, 2003 Go digital. Get a 10D if you can afford it and have a sturdy neck, or get the Rebel Digital if you're a little short on dollars and/or neck. The 10D is nearly twice as fast in informal testing this weekend with Iwan's DRebel vs. my 10D. That DRebel is WAY LIGHTER in the hand and on the head. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaGimp 0 #4 October 28, 2003 but i have noticed that there are a few Digital Rebels out.....which one are you refering to Deuce?"Professor of Pimpology"~~~Bolas Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deuce 1 #5 October 28, 2003 There's only one Digital Rebel, it's the consumer-level digital SLR. I got to handle Iwan's this weekend, and it's a nice camera. for $999 you are ready to go with a lens that you can use for skydiving. The only drawback is that it's almost half as fast/slow. About 30 shots in 60 seconds versus almost a shot a second after the 9 frame burst with the 10D. The digital rebel gives up a 4 frame burst followed by about a frame every second-and-a-half or so. I think for tandem and AFF where you are shooting a script, pretty much, it would be fine. For a sky full of freefliers doing whacky shit every second, I would be frustrated by it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hoym 0 #6 October 28, 2003 You might also do a search for the Canon 300D. It is the exact same camera as the Digital Rebel and you should be able to find some reviews about it under that name. (I think) it was originally released as the 300D but Canon is marketing it in the US as the digital rebel. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Atle 0 #7 October 28, 2003 There are still a couple of drawbacks with digital SLR. Most digital SLR´s have an image sensor which is smaller than a single frame on film, that means you need a wider wideangle lens to get the same result as from a traditional film based SLR. Typically the "Focal Length Multiplier" is 1,5. If you use a 20mm lens on a digital SLR it would be the same as a 30mm on a film based SLR. 20mm is really wide, 30mm is not... A 14mm lens would be like a 21mm, and 14mm lenses are expensive! There are two models that offers "full frame sensor", but they are really expensive (Canon EOS-1Ds $7,999.00 & Kodak DCS Pro 14n $4,995.95), and they are big and heavy. Another drawback is image resolution. 6,3 Megapixel is enough to make 10x7inches full quality photo print. Any larger than this and you loose quality. If you need bigger prints you need one of the above models, Canon EOS1Ds 11.1Mpixel & Kodak DCS Pro 14Mpixel. Digital SLR´s are also in general slower than film based SLR´s. Personally I use a Nikon F90x (90s in US) with 15mm fisheye lens, 20mm and 24mm lenses. 5 frames per second. Very happy with that camera!! But I can´t wait until the digital SLR´s are good enough for my use! Attached are one image shot with the 15mm and one shot with the 20mm. Hope this is useful info... Atle http://www.atledahl.comSee what I'm saying? Thats what I'm saying! What am I saying? I DON'T KNOW!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
monkeyKam 0 #8 October 28, 2003 IMHO... 6.5 megapixels is enough to create very clear photos up to 18 x 12 inches. At 6.5, your photos are 3072x2048 pixels. When printed on late model photo inkjet printers, 166 dpi is plenty for beautiful photographs. Also, there is a program out there called, "Spline-2." It uses a new algorithm for upsizing and enhancing resolution on photographic images. It produces images that look like they were taken at twice or sometimes 4 times the original resolution without appearant loss of quality. It's truly amazing! Also, also, people have the misconception that all photos must be printed at 300 dpi. It's overkill. Take a digital photo and print it at 166 dpi and see what it looks like. Unless you shot it at ISO 400 or higher (more grainy), it will look fantastic. So, 6.5 megapixel is perfectly fine for larger prints. Craig O'Brien out in Perris was creating beautiful 11x17 posters for people several years ago with a Canon D30. They were amazing. That camera is only 3 megapixels. So, technique has something to do with, not brut force with the DPI. :) My 2 cents worth (and years of experience in print and design)... Andy "I drank what?" --Sophocles Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hoym 0 #9 October 28, 2003 On our DZ wall, I've got two 20" x 30" prints hanging up, one above the other. One taken with my film camera and one taken with my Canon 10D. The print taken with the digital camera is soooo much more clear and bright and sharp everyone can notice the difference and better quality of the digital print. Both were developed at the same lab. Now, it is really not a fair comparison as I used consumer grade film and a different lens. But neither was a Canon 'L' series lens. I thought that the images from the 10D were sized at somewhere around 11" x 14" straight out of the camera without any enlargement process and that if you want the print made smaller then you need to downsize it. For upsizing digital images there are heaps of debates and software options/tools for doing this besides the three options available in Photoshop. I've read good things about S-Spline that was mentioned before, and there is also the Genuine Fractals that many people think is very good, and Fred Miranda's Stair Interpolation seems to get some good feed back. For the time being, I've been using Photoshop's bicubic in 10% increments. Seems to do well enough for me for now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deuce 1 #10 October 28, 2003 Yeah, what he said. Resolution with my 10D exceeds what I was able to get with film at big enlargement sizes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Atle 0 #11 October 28, 2003 QuoteOn our DZ wall, I've got two 20" x 30" prints hanging up, one above the other. One taken with my film camera and one taken with my Canon 10D. The print taken with the digital camera is soooo much more clear and bright and sharp everyone can notice the difference and better quality of the digital print. Both were developed at the same lab. I guess I should have been a bit more specific. I normally use Fuji Velvia 50 ASA slide film, a very sharp professional film. 6,3Mpixel is enough for most people, but if you want the best possible result it wont match the best films. I´ve seen some shots made with the 14Mpixel Kodak DCS Pro and that was impressive and can compete with the best films. AtleSee what I'm saying? Thats what I'm saying! What am I saying? I DON'T KNOW!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vdschoor 0 #12 October 29, 2003 QuoteQuoteOn our DZ wall, I've got two 20" x 30" prints hanging up, one above the other. One taken with my film camera and one taken with my Canon 10D. The print taken with the digital camera is soooo much more clear and bright and sharp everyone can notice the difference and better quality of the digital print. Both were developed at the same lab. I guess I should have been a bit more specific. I normally use Fuji Velvia 50 ASA slide film, a very sharp professional film. 6,3Mpixel is enough for most people, but if you want the best possible result it wont match the best films. I´ve seen some shots made with the 14Mpixel Kodak DCS Pro and that was impressive and can compete with the best films. Atle Interesting to read, why would 6.5Mpixel not be enough. I don't think you will be able to tell the difference for 5x7, 8x10 or maybe even a 20x30. Then if you go extremely big (say billboard size) the print quality doesn't really matter anymore since it would make the poster too expensive to produce. Do you really see a difference between your slide film and digital prints? I think the weakest link here would be the printer used to print up that picture. But that's just my thought, I am by far not a professional photographer, and I've only read about the Canon 1Ds, and the Kodak camera you are referering to. Iwan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LouDiamond 1 #13 October 29, 2003 Personaly, I think 6 mega pixles is going to produce an image capable of being printed bigger than most of us will ever use or be asked to produce, outside of commercial advertising(like billboards) and the like that is. From what I have seen first hand and anyone whos been in the bent prop, I can say that not only the camera but the printer is an important part in whole process. I have witnessed a professional machine produce a picture the size of a wall that measured approx 15' X 12' from a 3 mega pixel camera that was clean and free of pixelization. IMO it was pretty damn impressive and I attribute a lot of it to the printer used."It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required" Some people dream about flying, I live my dream SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydivejersey 0 #14 October 29, 2003 Do any of you use a standalone (ie PC free) direct printer. I would like something that can print a sellable print up to A4 in size direct from a memcard. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jimmytavino 16 #15 October 29, 2003 QuoteDo any of you use a standalone (ie PC free) direct printer. I would like something that can print a sellable print up to A4 in size direct from a memcard. I have a Hewlett-Packard 7550 Photosmart printer. it will accept a variety of memory media ( I use sony memory stick 256 mb) ... I am using a Sony Cyber shot DSC-V1,, it's 5 megapixels,,,It has some great post shot, editing features,, like cropping, resizing etc... which can all be done on the stick,, and without losing the original shot..... I love shooting frames,,,in the plane ( i have the optional wide angle lens) and then zooming those images, afterwards,, to find the real neat, expressions, or smiles, or funny faces, or whatever... It is the small corner of the orignal,,, where some real keeper images can be found... The printer has a small screen so you can preview the shot,,, zoom it if you want,,, re align it... and then print,, 4 x 6 , or 5 x 7 or 8 x 10.... the photos are well received... of course the printer comes w/ cd software and cables, for hooking into the p.c. (which i have done) but I have a desktop,,, and so it's easier to run the printer as a stand alone... The camera is small ,,, but that works for me....since I run 2 mini dv's on top of my helmet.. the digi-still is fixed to the forehead of a bonehead batrack.(recently acquired) ....I fire it from a hand held wired remote,,, which lets me power on/ power off the camera, operate the zoom, and fire the shutter.. there are many settings and image details which can be set on this camera,, and I am having fun learning how to make the most of those features.. jmy A3914 D12122 edited to add second view of "late afternoon shadow shot" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Atle 0 #16 October 29, 2003 QuoteDo any of you use a standalone (ie PC free) direct printer. I would like something that can print a sellable print up to A4 in size direct from a memcard. I use an Epson Stylus Photo 915. I haven´t tried printing directly from a memorycard, but the print quality is outstanding if you use photo paper. Most people would not be able to separate it from a photolab print. Both Canon and Epson have some good printers that offers printing from a memory card. I haven´t tried any other brands... AtleSee what I'm saying? Thats what I'm saying! What am I saying? I DON'T KNOW!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jimmytavino 16 #17 October 29, 2003 but what size is " A 4 " ???? Oh yes.. the HP 7550 printer was 269 dollars when i bought it in mid June... may be less ...now... jmy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydivejersey 0 #18 October 29, 2003 A4 is 12x8 inches. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nacmacfeegle 0 #19 October 29, 2003 "I would like something that can print a sellable print up to A4 in size direct from a memcard." I got a nice Cannon from PCWorld for about 190 quid, which is just tip top and tickety boo. Gurny and Grumpy love their A4s of Mininac. It prints from all the normal memory cards, and also direct from my digital Ixus (I don't jump it, its just a fun cam), so no PC required, but it does equally well with a PC appended.-------------------- He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydivejersey 0 #20 October 29, 2003 Was having a quick look around. Stylus Photo 2100 looks good but would need to be connected to a pc however I would have thought that it would be relatively easy to sell A3 size posters immediately post jump that would cost £2 to print for around £20 each. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ihateskydivers 0 #21 November 4, 2003 BAD idea to go out and buy an expensive SLR especially Digital SLR. Just like with video, when you add something more to your head get something cheaper. When your starting, you have a much greater chance of bangin it around or slamming it exiting the plane. Once your comfey with the cheap stuff, start adding. By then you'll have a better idea. For tandem videos, it is not economical go get a digital camera, (NOW, which is not to say that the future is otherwise). After a tandem shoot (the paying kind!!!) you usually hand over the $1 roll of film over to the student for them to develop. Wasting your time and money downloading to disks, or email, or $$$ printing is a waste. Stay one step behind technology and you'll save a bundle. Stick with Canon (because it's LIGHT), all other camera brands are just peachy except for the weight. Make sure the motor drive on your auto-focus can keep up with your flying. The Elan, and EOS models are great, some Rebels are OK. This won't matter if you manually focus, but it can limit your flying to focus. Make sure your lens has ultrasonic technology (Canon, Tamron...etc) so the autofocus can keep up with the motor. Fixed lenses can be slow. Make sure your bite switch is mono so it continually tries to focus, most new Conceptus Switches are plug and play, you have to special order stereo plugs. Good luck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
