Oh no! Not another Lorquin's Admiral Closeup!

Mike B in OKlahoma · Post by **Mike B in OKlahoma** » Mon Jun 04, 2007 11:54 pm

A more conventional closeup than the first shot of this guy I posted a couple of days ago. Still using the Canon 180 and Rebel XTi (that's the 400D for those outside the USA), this shot was taken just 19 seconds earlier than the original extreme closeup shot!

Ken Ramos · Post by **Ken Ramos** » Tue Jun 05, 2007 2:55 am

Reble exti, I recommended that camera yesterday to one of the guys at work, who was wanting an slr but did not want to lay down a lot of cash for one. Yet for a modest sum more he could go ahead with the 30D. Anyway how do you like that 400D Mike, is it worth the cash in your opinion? Sometime, a good while later down the road for the moment, I am hopeing to get my hands on a new 5D. I really like the idea of having something along the lines of a full frame 35mm in digital.

Mike B in OKlahoma · Post by **Mike B in OKlahoma** » Tue Jun 05, 2007 7:44 am

Ken Ramos wrote: Anyway how do you like that 400D Mike, is it worth the cash in your opinion? Sometime, a good while later down the road for the moment,

I really like the small size and weight of the 400D. So much lighter and more pleasant to carry than my 1Ds it's unbelievable. Image quality is basically indistinguishable from the 10% more pixels of the 1Ds (I usually feel like there is actually a teeny bit more detail in the 400D pictures, suspect that has something to do with the way the software processes them). High ISO performance is noticeably better than my 1Ds.

Two things I don't like:

1) The viewfinder on the 400D is awful. I cannot tell at all when something is in focus with the viewfinder, I use autofocus confirmation as has been discussed in other threads here lately. Manual focus by eye just doesn't work at all for me. This is a very serious drawback for someone who does a lot of macro. If I'd known about it, I would've gotten a 20D or 30D instead.

2) The 400D doesn't have the second control wheel on the back. You have to hold down a button near the viewfinder and use the main control wheel (in front of the shutter button) instead. This in itself is a pain in the butt, but it is worse because the button you have to hold down is VERY close and just to the lower right of the viewfinder. I am left-eyed, and the result of all this is that if I want to adjust exposure compensation, I have to use that button, and the natural way to use it is to stick my right thumb up and depress it. Only problem is that about half the time I try this, I stick my thumb in my right eye!

So if I have to be VERY careful when doing this, or more likely take my eye slightly away from the viewfinder. This is a nuisance, but not as serious a flaw for me as the viewfinder.

End result is that I consider the 400D very acceptable for a second camera (and the small size is even a significant advantage for this), but for a primary camera I think the 30D (or an old 20D, etc.) is a better deal, especially for someone who does a lot of macro. My old EOS 10D was much more convenient to use, and the viewfinder was less intolerable for manual focus. In your case, Ken, I'd recommend you save the money towards that 5D instead. I've not used a 5D viewfinder, but if it is anything like the 1Ds, you won't believe how much difference that makes. First evening I had the 1Ds, I put a 50mm lens on it and sat in my easy chair watching tv through it, it was so large and clear!

(I just went back and reread your post--For your friend, if he's only modestly going to be into seriously playing with exposure compensation, and won't use manual focus, the XTi is probably a pretty good deal IMO). But he should be aware of those issues. Also, if he is right-eyed, I think the exposure compensation issue won't be nearly the problem it is for me.)

Bruce Williams · Post by **Bruce Williams** » Tue Jun 05, 2007 10:45 am

I really like this image Mike. However there is something about the compositional balance that puzzles me.

Why am I puzzled?

Well... because I really like the strong diagonal lines and the distribution of colour and the overall sense of compositional weight ...AND most importantly it just "feels" so RIGHT - yet at an intellectual level I feel it shouldn't work as well as it does.......and it's the conflict/contradiction between how I THINK I should feel and how I ACTUALLY feel about this image that puzzles me.

...and now you're thinking "What the b****y heck is he on about - so now you're puzzled too

.

Interesting comments about the 400D. I'm at the point of buying and am currently torn between the Canon 400D + 100mm 2.8 Macro USM
and the Nikon D80 + Nikon AF-S VR 105MM F2.8G IF-ED macro (marginally favourite at the moment).

Bruce

rjlittlefield · Post by **rjlittlefield** » Tue Jun 05, 2007 2:24 pm

Bruce Williams wrote:it's the conflict/contradiction between how I THINK I should feel and how I ACTUALLY feel about this image that puzzles me.

Check out http://www.ted.com/talks/view/id/97, Dan Gilbert speaking on "What makes us happy?".

I think you'll find it interesting.

After you're done with that one, try http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/20, Malcolm Gladwell on "What we can learn from spaghetti sauce".

--Rik

Mike B in OKlahoma · Post by **Mike B in OKlahoma** » Tue Jun 05, 2007 3:21 pm

Bruce Williams wrote:I really like this image Mike. However there is something about the compositional balance that puzzles me.

Why am I puzzled?

Well... because I really like the strong diagonal lines and the distribution of colour and the overall sense of compositional weight ...AND most importantly it just "feels" so RIGHT - yet at an intellectual level I feel it shouldn't work as well as it does.......and it's the conflict/contradiction between how I THINK I should feel and how I ACTUALLY feel about this image that puzzles me.

...and now you're thinking "What the b****y heck is he on about - so now you're puzzled too .

Interesting comments about the 400D. I'm at the point of buying and am currently torn between the Canon 400D + 100mm 2.8 Macro USM
and the Nikon D80 + Nikon AF-S VR 105MM F2.8G IF-ED macro (marginally favourite at the moment).

Bruce

I just seem to like strong diagonals dividing the image roughly in half in my pictures, I've noted before that I use them again and again. See the second photo here:

http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... php?t=2642

And in lots of other shots.

I repeatedly hear that the Nikon viewfinders are much better than the Canon ones, but have never even looked through a Nikon DSLR viewfinder, so can't really say. If you can get a look through a sample of each, it would be worth your while. But I really don't recommend the 400D as a camera primarily for macro, based on my miserable experience trying to manually focus the thing. I can work with it using focus confirmation, but that is limiting.

beetleman · Post by **beetleman** » Thu Jun 07, 2007 5:17 pm

A nice and crisp photo Mike. I love the matching eyes.

Erland R.N. · Post by **Erland R.N.** » Sat Jun 09, 2007 11:22 am

I must say I like this photo very much.
Erland

DaveW · Post by **DaveW** » Sat Jun 09, 2007 11:45 am

Nikon now seems to be standardising on the 10Mp sensor for all it's new range Bruce. My D200 was the first, but now 10Mp sensors go from the new entry level D40X to the D200 though the less pixeled D40 is still available.

One of the few differences is the number of channels, or whatever they are called, to take the information off the sensor, but I presume more are only needed for the cameras with the faster motor-drives to get the information off quicker and that does not affect normal photography or macro.

Maybe camera manufacturers have now realised that with present sensor technology for an APS sized sensor 10-12 Megapixels is about the sensible limit before the pixels get too small? The D200 viewfinder is not too bad, but none of the DSLR viewfinders are as large as the old Canon or Nikon professional ones that covered 100% of a 35mm film frame I believe.

The problem too is a smaller mirror reflects less light to the viewfinder, but I find the D200 OK. As to Canon's I have never used one, but most of the top camera makers produce quality equipment and are best in some feature and not quite as good in another but all within a hairs breadth of each other.

I manual focus my Nikon 80% of the time and always completely ignore the focus confirmation light, plus I now have to use glasses to read or see my computer monitor. However using the D200's viewfinder dioptre adjustment I can focus OK without needing glasses. I would have thought Canon would have had similar viewfinder dioptre adjustments, so unless your sight is very poor you should be able to adjust the viewfinder for manual focusing?

Good luck in your choice.

I think I would have liked to see all the insect in shot Mike or an even closer crop of the head. Nice picture though.

DaveW

Bruce Williams · Post by **Bruce Williams** » Sat Jun 09, 2007 1:24 pm

Mike and Dave - Thanks for your advice it all helps. Pretty much decided now on the Nikon D80 + AF-S VR 105MM F2.8G IF-ED macro.

Rik - Thanks for the link - enjoyed hugely - TED Talks is now registered as a Favourite.

Bruce

DaveW · Post by **DaveW** » Sat Jun 09, 2007 1:51 pm

Here they are side by side Bruce:-

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare ... d&show=all

A 30 page review of the D80:-

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond80/

And a 30 page review of the 400D

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos400d/

Sorry to post these on your thread Mike, but as you introduced the cameras topic I thought it was OK?

DaveW

Mike B in OKlahoma · Post by **Mike B in OKlahoma** » Sat Jun 09, 2007 3:38 pm

DaveW wrote: Sorry to post these on your thread Mike, but as you introduced the cameras topic I thought it was OK?

Ken originally asked about the 400D, but no problem Dave, I am too much of a gearhead, and am always happy to talk excessively about equipment! :-) If Bruce goes for the Nikon, I suspect it will be a fine camera for him.

Mike B in OKlahoma · Post by **Mike B in OKlahoma** » Sat Jun 09, 2007 3:42 pm

DaveW wrote:
I think I would have liked to see all the insect in shot Mike or an even closer crop of the head. Nice picture though.

Your wish is my command, Sahib!

whole insect (albeit from a different angle and a nearby but different setting:

http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... ght=#15488

the above has a nice little bit of behavior in the fluids the butterfly has released (explained by Rik in thread)

closer crop of head (yet full frame!)

http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... ght=#15395

I am rather pleased with this extreme closeup shot.