10D simple test

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Tomash Bednarz, Jul 22, 2003.

  1. Tomash Bednarz, Jul 22, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Tomash Bednarz

    Mark M Guest

    Mark M, Jul 22, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Tomash Bednarz

    David Guest

    David, Jul 22, 2003
    #3
  4. Tomash Bednarz

    Rafe B. Guest

    On Mon, 21 Jul 2003 20:10:28 -0700, "Mark M" <>
    wrote:


    >It would help if you shot at the highest resolution setting.



    What are you talking about? The images are 3072 x 2048.
    As I understand it, that's a 6 Mpixel image.

    Maybe you're not ready for a 10D?


    rafe b.
    http://www.terrapinphoto.com
     
    Rafe B., Jul 22, 2003
    #4
  5. Tomash Bednarz

    Mark M Guest

    "Rafe B." <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Mon, 21 Jul 2003 20:10:28 -0700, "Mark M" <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >
    > >It would help if you shot at the highest resolution setting.

    >
    >
    > What are you talking about? The images are 3072 x 2048.
    > As I understand it, that's a 6 Mpixel image.
    >
    > Maybe you're not ready for a 10D?


    My 10D works just fine, thanks.
    As to your comments...
    -Check it Bub...
    The pics posted are 2048x1360.
    Maybe he's using a "10D Jr.?"
     
    Mark M, Jul 22, 2003
    #5
  6. Tomash Bednarz

    Rafe B. Guest

    On Mon, 21 Jul 2003 20:10:28 -0700, "Mark M" <>
    wrote:

    >
    >"Tomash Bednarz" <> wrote in message
    >news:bfi6d1$qa4$...
    >> Canon 50mm 1.8 vs Tamron 28-300mm
    >>

    >http://trans2.cm.kyushu-u.ac.jp/fotki/warlock/eos/21.7.03e-50mm-vs-28300mmXR/
    >>
    >> Canon 50mm 1.8 vs Canon 28-135mm IS:
    >>

    >http://trans2.cm.kyushu-u.ac.jp/fotki/warlock/eos/21.7.03e-50mm-vs-28135mm/
    >
    >It would help if you shot at the highest resolution setting.



    My apologies, Mark The two pix at the first link are full-res.
    Those at the 2nd link are not.


    rafe b.
    http://www.terrapinphoto.com
     
    Rafe B., Jul 22, 2003
    #6
  7. Tomash Bednarz

    Lionel Guest

    On Mon, 21 Jul 2003 20:38:59 -0700, in <Fl2Ta.13748$Bp2.577@fed1read07>,
    "Mark M" <> said:

    >My 10D works just fine, thanks.
    >As to your comments...
    >-Check it Bub...
    >The pics posted are 2048x1360.
    >Maybe he's using a "10D Jr.?"


    Eh? - I think there's something the matter with your browser. I've got
    <http://trans2.cm.kyushu-u.ac.jp/fotki/warlock/eos/21.7.03e-50mm-vs-28300mmXR/canon50.JPG>
    open in front of me right now, & Opera 7.0 reports that it is indeed
    3072x2048, which is exactly what my eyes are are telling me, as well. ;)

    --
    W
    . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
    \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
    ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
     
    Lionel, Jul 22, 2003
    #7
  8. Tomash Bednarz

    Mark M Guest

    > >It would help if you shot at the highest resolution setting.
    >
    >
    > My apologies, Mark The two pix at the first link are full-res.
    > Those at the 2nd link are not.


    That's OK.
    You missed the second set, and it looks like I missed the first set.
    I'm not sure why he chose to do each differently...
    If he wants to save space, then a full-res crop would work too.
     
    Mark M, Jul 22, 2003
    #8
  9. thanks for any signals :)

    sorry for lower resolution in the second link
    anyway u can see the differences :p i hope as an example, so do not be angry
    i will do it again :) my fault :p

    u can also see nigt shot taken from my apartement just as a test also:
    http://trans2.cm.kyushu-u.ac.jp/fotki/warlock/eos/19.7.03e-pierwsze-testy/104_0457.JPG

    best regards to all of u
    Tomash





    "Tomash Bednarz" <> wrote in message
    news:bfi6d1$qa4$...
    > Canon 50mm 1.8 vs Tamron 28-300mm
    >

    http://trans2.cm.kyushu-u.ac.jp/fotki/warlock/eos/21.7.03e-50mm-vs-28300mmXR/
    >
    > Canon 50mm 1.8 vs Canon 28-135mm IS:
    >

    http://trans2.cm.kyushu-u.ac.jp/fotki/warlock/eos/21.7.03e-50mm-vs-28135mm/
    >
    >
    >
     
    Tomash Bednarz, Jul 22, 2003
    #9
  10. Tomash Bednarz

    Todd Walker Guest

    In article <bfi6d1$qa4$>, says...
    > Canon 50mm 1.8 vs Tamron 28-300mm
    > http://trans2.cm.kyushu-u.ac.jp/fotki/warlock/eos/21.7.03e-50mm-vs-28300mmXR/
    >
    > Canon 50mm 1.8 vs Canon 28-135mm IS:
    > http://trans2.cm.kyushu-u.ac.jp/fotki/warlock/eos/21.7.03e-50mm-vs-28135mm/


    Great stuff. Thanks for posting these. I am about to order a 10D with
    the 50mm 1.8 and the 28-135IS USM so these were perfect comparisons for
    me. I am shocked at the difference in quality between the Canon 50 and
    the Tamron 28-300. All of the camera magazines are raving about the
    Tamron lens and compared to the Canon 50 it looks pretty bad. Of course
    you are comparing a 10x zoom to a prime so I guess if you take that into
    account, it's not too bad but the difference is quite significant.

    --
    ________________________________
    Todd Walker
    http://twalker.d2g.com
    Olympus E20
    Canon G2
    My Digital Photography Weblog:
    http://twalker.d2g.com/dpblog.htm
    _________________________________
     
    Todd Walker, Jul 22, 2003
    #10
  11. tamron is also good lens but not perfect - i got it for 3 days and finally
    decide to change to 28-135IS
    u know, the quality is very important and using tamron its possible to get
    good pics too, but its usualy more soften as seen in the pics
    so i think the better idea is to buy 28-135 even it has not 300mm but
    quality is really impresive
    maybe tamron 28-200 xr is better than 28-300 xr, but am not sure - i havent
    got it in my hands
    and comparing 50mm to 28-135IS u can see the quality is similar, so maybe
    one glass in enough (28-135)
    i will test it more in near future (50mm vs 28-135mm)
    best regards,
    Tomash
     
    Tomash Bednarz, Jul 22, 2003
    #11
  12. Tomash Bednarz

    Mark M Guest

    "Lionel" <> wrote in message news:bfibvb$16i$...
    > On Mon, 21 Jul 2003 20:38:59 -0700, in <Fl2Ta.13748$Bp2.577@fed1read07>,
    > "Mark M" <> said:
    >
    > >My 10D works just fine, thanks.
    > >As to your comments...
    > >-Check it Bub...
    > >The pics posted are 2048x1360.
    > >Maybe he's using a "10D Jr.?"

    >
    > Eh? - I think there's something the matter with your browser. I've got
    >

    <http://trans2.cm.kyushu-u.ac.jp/fotki/warlock/eos/21.7.03e-50mm-vs-28300mmX
    R/canon50.JPG>
    > open in front of me right now, & Opera 7.0 reports that it is indeed
    > 3072x2048, which is exactly what my eyes are are telling me, as well. ;)


    Someone else figured out the discrepancy:
    The images in the first link are full res.
    The images in the second are smaller as I reported.
    So... I guess we're both right.
    :)
     
    Mark M, Jul 22, 2003
    #12
  13. Tomash Bednarz

    W Bauske Guest

    Tomash Bednarz wrote:
    >
    > tamron is also good lens but not perfect - i got it for 3 days and finally
    > decide to change to 28-135IS
    > u know, the quality is very important and using tamron its possible to get
    > good pics too, but its usualy more soften as seen in the pics
    > so i think the better idea is to buy 28-135 even it has not 300mm but
    > quality is really impresive
    > maybe tamron 28-200 xr is better than 28-300 xr, but am not sure - i havent
    > got it in my hands
    > and comparing 50mm to 28-135IS u can see the quality is similar, so maybe
    > one glass in enough (28-135)
    > i will test it more in near future (50mm vs 28-135mm)
    > best regards,
    > Tomash


    Just curious, but how careful were you when you took
    the pictures? In particular, did you match aperture
    settings on both lenses and try more than one aperture
    to see what effect it had on the sharpness of the image?

    Wes
     
    W Bauske, Jul 22, 2003
    #13
  14. Tomash Bednarz

    George Kerby Guest

    On 7/22/03 1:27 AM, in article
    , "Todd Walker"
    <> wrote:

    >
    > All of the camera magazines are raving about the
    > Tamron lens and compared to the Canon 50 it looks pretty bad. Of course
    > you are comparing a 10x zoom to a prime so I guess if you take that into
    > account, it's not too bad but the difference is quite significant.

    Todd, in most all occasions a zoom will NEVER compete with a prime. You gain
    on one hand but lose on the other. That's thje reason I pull what's left of
    my hair when someone starts talking about how GREAT their Smegma 50-500mm...


    ______________________________________________________________________
    Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
    <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
     
    George Kerby, Jul 22, 2003
    #14
  15. Tomash Bednarz

    Lionel Guest

    On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 00:43:42 -0700, in
    <SW5Ta.13787$Bp2.10914@fed1read07>, "Mark M" <> said:

    >Someone else figured out the discrepancy:
    >The images in the first link are full res.
    >The images in the second are smaller as I reported.
    >So... I guess we're both right.
    >:)


    So it would seem. :)

    --
    W
    . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
    \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
    ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
     
    Lionel, Jul 22, 2003
    #15
  16. Tomash Bednarz

    David Chien Guest

    Is it a focusing issue?

    Wondering if you tried to focus manually with the 28-300 and/or use a
    f/stop of f/11-32 in order to minimize softness caused by slight misfocus.
     
    David Chien, Jul 23, 2003
    #16
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Guest

    test test test test test test test

    Guest, Jul 2, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    995
    halfalifer
    Jul 2, 2003
  2. Gazwad

    TEST TEST TEST

    Gazwad, Sep 5, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    659
    Sinisa Saleh
    Sep 5, 2003
  3. TEST TEST Test...Blah Blah Blah

    , Sep 9, 2006, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    811
  4. TEST TEST Test...Blah Blah Blah

    , Sep 13, 2006, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    785
    AnonyMouse
    Sep 15, 2006
  5. richard

    test test test

    richard, Jan 23, 2007, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    552
    Blinky the Shark
    Jan 24, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page