[M_Six]

Originally Posted by Chewy734

nice shot.

+1

[Litos]

doesn't have so much bokeh at F2 as i would expect.

[Chewy734]

Originally Posted by Litos

doesn't have so much bokeh at F2 as i would expect.

Did you mean that the DoF doesn't seem shallow enough at f/2? I agree with you. The whole car is in focus, which is something you wouldn't expect at f/2.

[Litos]

Originally Posted by Chewy734

Did you mean that the DoF doesn't seem shallow enough at f/2? I agree with you. The whole car is in focus, which is something you wouldn't expect at f/2.

yes - that's what i meant.

at F2, the background should be a blurry mess.......

hell the front rims should be in focus and the back rim should be a blurry mess, HAHA !!!!

[M_Six]

Canon 70-200mm F4L at 200mm, ISO 3200, 1/60 handheld. Really not bad noise for high ISO.

[Chewy734]

it's good you weren't shooting him at 70mm Mark

[M_Six]

Originally Posted by Chewy734

it's good you weren't shooting him at 70mm Mark

He was just the first to the party. Was running out of light for hand held shots, but...

[Chewy734]

haha... so this is what happens when you live outside of Chicago, eh?

[M_Six]

Originally Posted by Chewy734

haha... so this is what happens when you live outside of Chicago, eh?

It's been worse.

[FStop7]

Originally Posted by Litos

doesn't have so much bokeh at F2 as i would expect.

To get the rich bokeh there needs to be more distance between the subject and the stuff in the background, plus the camera may need to be a little closer to the subject.

[Litos]

Originally Posted by FStop7

To get the rich bokeh there needs to be more distance between the subject and the stuff in the background, plus the camera may need to be a little closer to the subject.

dude, that shot was taken at 20MM at F2.

[rodi]

the car is pretty far away. at least 100 feet. if that's the case, then @ f/2 and 200mm, you have at least 9 feet of depth of field.

[Chewy734]

ahh... how did you make that back-of-the-envelope calculation rodi?

[rodi]

i whipped out my iphone with the Viewfinder app, set it to full-frame at 200mm and aimed it at a door across the room about 10 feet away. estimated how big the car is and how far away it would need to be to fit in the frame the way the gullwing does. figured it was about 100 feet or more. then i opened the DoF app and punched in 200mm @ f/2 @ 100' on FX sensor and it gave me 9.1' of DoF.

if you ever need to scout a location without your gear, the Viewfinder app is worth the $8 or whatever price it is now. i use it on jobs at least once a week during pre-pro meetings so i never take my camera/lenses.

[Chewy734]

Thanks rodi. I was looking for an app that could do something like that. I'll look into it.

[scollins]

Originally Posted by Chewy734

Canon PIXMA Pro 9000 Mark II Inkjet Photo Printer $49.95 after $200 rebate @ BHVideo

1. click here
2. Click on "email me a better price", enter your email address.
3. Check your email, they will send you a link to buy the printer for $249.95.
4. Check out and download the rebate

Enjoy! This might be a very limited time sale, so be quick about it if you're interested!

Originally Posted by M_Six

Anyone have one of these printers? First they were giving them away with Canon bodies and now you can get one for $50.

I have this printer and I'm very happy with the results. That is paying $225 for the printer. For $50 I'd be massively happy with the printer!!!!

[Chewy734]

cool! Based on your experiences Scott, how many photos can it print out before the cartridges need to be changed?

[remmib]

Originally Posted by rodi

the car is pretty far away. at least 100 feet. if that's the case, then @ f/2 and 200mm, you have at least 9 feet of depth of field.

Exif says "Subject Distance" was 20 meters or 65 feet.

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by remmib

Exif says "Subject Distance" was 20 meters or 65 feet.

I don't know why, but my EXIF distance is almost always wrong when I check it.

Dave

[The1]

it's a great shot.

and Marc, we expect to see a full review of the lens by the end of the week

Same to you Rodi

I was debating that printer for a while, but mine is working pretty well for pictures at the moment, so i'm not in a rush. Once i start doing more professional stuff, then i'll shell out some money, but i'd probably go for the full monte and get the 9500 to get the best colours.

[The1]

also for anyone with the canon printers out there, i've read some reviews where people are using the aftermarket refillable ink cartridges. They all say not worth it and just stick to the canon ink as it has better colour, lasts longer, and people have had problems with the aftermarket units leaking into the printers and having to pull the printer apart to clean it.

[Chewy734]

The 9500 was also on sale... I think $250 after rebates, which is a great price as well. But, you can't beat the 9000 for $50. Hell, the ink costs way more than that!