Ashanali

You could have a look at the Tamron 90mm 2.8 macro. It has had some great reviews. It will be my next lens.

oooh. My favorite lens! You'll love it

When I first heard it was coming out I said, " oh gee, another camera that people are going to trip over themselves and waste money on." Then I did all the reading and now I want one. For us it means we will be able to add snippets of video to photo slideshows at weddings where they don't have a videographer. We're very excited

just thought I would add that cameras direct are NOT gray importers. They have genuine Australian warranties.

Yes, I know where it is cheaper http://www.shopbot.com.au/p-32489.html I haven't used the place that has then for $119 but they seem to be popular. I have used cameras direct and they are brilliant. Next day delivery in most cases.

yes. This is why photographers build kits and if they change to another brand further down the track it costs them a fortune. Lenses are compatible from body to body within a brand. We currently have a canon 10D, 30D and 40D and will be purchasing a 5d mark II in a few months, all lenses work on these cameras and also work on 300D, 450D etc. btw - if you have small hands and want something light, try out the Pentax range

There's some very interesting information about the Canon autofocus system here: http://night-ray.blogspot.com/2006/09/cano...nformation.html As for the comment about horizontal lines, it depends on which focus point you are using... Some focus points recognise horizontal lines, others vertical. The center focus point recognizes both. Here's an image of the 40D viewfinder: The center focus point recognizes both vertical and horizontal lines for focusing. The top and bottom focus points: vertical lines only. The others: horizontal lines only. Thanks for that Luke. It was ages ago when I was given the info so I couldn't remember it clearly.

Manual focus - it will focus wherever you leave it, so if you are slightly out, then obviously this is the result you get. Auto focus - the lens likes to focus on horizontal lines. I can't remember the reason why (I used to know ) but if your camera is struggling in low light you need to either, add light from another source (torch, lamp, video light etc) or find a contrasting horizontal line to focus on.

The Canon vs Nikon debate will always be around. It comes down to what you like, what feels good in your hands and what you are comfortable with purchasing. (I used to work selling them, I was always asked for my preference. I would then ask people, "why? are you buying me a camera?" ) Remember, once you start with a brand, you will continue to build a kit around it so after a couple of years, it will end up costing you a fortune to replace you gear if you suddenly decide you want to change brands. A wedding photographer in Qld recently changed all his gear from Canon to Nikon... at a cost of $30,000. It really does add up! In reality, both cameras are much of a muchness unless you really want to start researching stuff like the types of sensors they use, what bits and pieces are made out of, etc. If you have no desire to know all of this and just want a nice camera to play with, then go with whatever you want. Just make sure YOU want it and not the salesperson

Nope. http://www.shopbot.com.au/p-32489.html the 50mm 1.8 is $124 at camerasdirect (and I highly recommend them).

the price difference between the 1.2, 1.4 and 1.8 is due to many factors (if you are talking about Canon). The 1.2 is an L series lens. These are top of the line, with high quality glass 1.4 is also high quality but a step down from the 1.2 and doesn't have that lovely 'L' tag attached. (whilst I would love a 1.2 the actual difference in output is negligible between the two. I bought the 1.4 ) the 1.8 is very lightweight and cheaply made. Lots of plastic. A great lens for those shooting on a budget.

Chezzy, I like the one with the reflected crocs

Yes. There are long ways and short ways of doing it. I have a purchased action from Nik Efex that does a great infrared conversion.

HDR samples For those who wanted to see more samples of HDR (similar to tonal contrast)

I think it is a number of factors. The lens is an obvious one. The tasks for the challenge were shot at 1.4 and the last spider image was shot at 2.8. The depth of field would have made a huge difference as would the focal length. The spider had moved her web and restructured it which meant that the look of the web was different (it doesn't have that lovely arc anymore) and she had also changed the angle. With the 50mm it was harder to get in and there was obviously no blue background (kindly provided by my blue Tarago). The 70-200 meant I could step back from the spider and move into a different position around the hedge so it has a vastly different POV. The weather conditions and lighting also played a role. The day I photographed the photos for the challenge, it was on the verge of raining (so very dark) and very windy. The spider web was blowing all over the place (and seeing as how I was so close to her, she nearly ended up on my camera more than once ), the other photo was taken on a glorious golden afternoon when 'pidey and web were bathed in a beautiful warm light. Just goes to show... there are many factors that go into taking pleasing photos. It is never just a matter of 'point and shoot'.

I couldn't find the photo I was thinking of... but the guy in the link I posted is along those lines. Old, wrinkly, or just faces with a lot of character.

http://www.photosig.com/go/photos/view?id=1964493

Old people work great on dragan effect I'll try and find a photo that I am thinking about... brb with a link

I love Orb Weavers (as long as they don't build webs where I need to walk). I was upset one day last year when I heard my neighbour outside spraying madly. They are immigrants and thought the orb weavers were dangerous to their kids. My partner went out and explained that they are native, not dangerous and actually good for keeping insect numbers down. Thank god he stopped spraying but so many would still have died

oookay... the front of my house has my favourite spider. Unfortunately she has moved her web over the last few days and it is harder to get in close to her with a 50mm. I am practicing shooting with wide open aperture so most of these are at 1.4. it was very windy and a few little flowers blew into her web and she promptly went and removed them. Then I went and photographed the flowers in my front yard. A few days ago there was an abundance of roses... today there was only this one left ( I didn't realise I had so many flowers in my yard ) This one doesn't count for the task... it was taken last week when her web was in a better position. It was also taken with a different lens (70 - 200mm, 2.8). I just wanted to post it because she is such a pretty spider.

rocco... go and visit photosig.com It is a photo critiquing website (lots of crappy work but also some absolutley brilliant stuff there too). You can do a search for HDR as they have a whole folio devoted to it. There is some impressive stuff there. There are also many samples of work using dragan effect. The difference is that dragan is an effect achieved by doing this that and the other with an image. You can even download free actions for this effect (I have one loaded here). HDR is the layering of images taken at different exposures. You can produced HDR effect using one single RAW image if you really want to be tricky. I am off to make the kids some dinner but I'll play around with a couple of HDR samples and post them here later if I get the chance.

I was at the Sydney PMA APPA judging in 2004 when Matt Hoyle's image (the one under 'icebergs') scored 99 out of a possible 100. The room erupted then one of the judges asked, 'now that the judging of this image has finished, is the photographer in the room?' and this modest little man stood up and the cheer that went up was unebeleivable. It actually left a tear in my eye. A friend of mine was one of the students who was changing the images that went up for judging (off topic but sort of bizzare with the timing, this same friend has been working in the UK for the last couple of years and is currently back here renewing her visa and she happened to go out and shoot a wedding with OH just yesterday... then this topic pops up.) Anyway, I digress... back then you had to have a small print of the unedited file on the back of the competition entry. She was telling me that the original was so uninspiring she was simply in awe of the PS work that he had done to produce such an awesome result. To answer your question, any number of techinques could have been used (I dare say Matt has his own methods). I am also a fan of his work and feel that it is a blend of tonal contrast/HDR techniques or dragan effect and smoothing techniques as well as playing around with saturation and vibrancy. Another photographer you would like would be Damien Bredburg http://www.bergandwest.com.au/ or even Michael Cook (a relatively new photographer on the scene with some awesome work) http://www.michaelcookphoto.net.au/ You might also want to check out this website for some awesome photography www.savvystudios.com.au *snicker* (if you notice, we use the same website people as Matt Hoyle. They are brilliant templates for showcasing photographers)

We have the Canon. There is a good review of the Tamron in this month's Better Photography. Just keep in mind that IS is useful when getting into longer focal lengths

Interesting method! I haven't heard of that one before. Just goes to show there is more than one way to skin a cat I thought the same

sigh, I am so confused the settings are much the same as I had mine on for my eagles and the weather conditions looked similar, the differences are kit lens, I set WB to cloudy, and ME I suppose the eagles could've been further away too, but even so................I am reluctant to go buying more expensive lenses until I gain a good understanding of what I am doing. And how do I even know how much is due to the limtations of the equipment I have or my inexperience? could an experienced photographer have gotten better pics with my camera? Probably....maybe. It's so frustrating, I think I stuffed up an amazing opportunity to get those eagles yesterday. Now, where's that wrist slashing emoticon. Your eagles could also (and quite likely) have been in a very different angle. Remember that photography is essentially 'painting with light' so if you have bad light, you need to work harder to creat a good image.