orginal

after


thks

This post was edited by anx1ety on Aug 24 2008 05:58am

hmm so you just enhanced the original pic in Photoshop?

well as a good friend of mine once said to me, the reason why people buy an expensive DSLR is because they can learn more about photography and really learn to take advantage of what those sophisticated toys can do and I do agree with her course I am sure you can take a pic of with some cheap point and shoot camera and then enhance it in Photoshop so it would look almost just as good as those taken with DSLR. that's not really the point, its cheating I believe
nice shot though

This post was edited by Futurama on Aug 24 2008 06:38am

How u managed to overprocess it so much that that flower got some black outlines, so that the pic hardly seems even processed? Doesent even look like too much clarity..

I dont really get the point of this picture, yes i see a flower, but if u want to take plain flower shot, u should eliminate the surroundings much more(or make them blend in more). This way it looks more of a random snap shot, but so did everyones first pics

Too bad u chose nikons d40, its too stripped to be a desent camera imo. U cant even get a good af primes on it(hope they start making them).

This post was edited by Antichrist- on Aug 24 2008 09:50am

Stripped / primes? What does that mean? If you don't mind me asking

stripped as in taking af motor from body away, 3 focus points only and 6mp(not that mp matters much). Look here whats a prime http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_lens . U cant get lower f-number on zooms than f-2.8(there is primes with f-1), allso primes have much better image quality for the same price than zooms.

I think zooms are only good for really long focal lenghts, like 55-250mm

yeah I have heard that Nikon d40 is a very stripped down camera lol but its sooo cheap. think I can get one at half the price of a EOS 450D here but still if you are serious about photography you want a decent camera

Id get used 400d in second instead of new d40. u might even find used 30d at same price as new d40 or some older xxd even cheaper.

yeah I know! 400D is a so much much better camera and lol I am actually considering to get one in the future as a backup to my 40D because of its smaller size and the fact that the image quality is just as good as the much more expensive 40D

40d is much better on image quality than 400d, i had them both. But 400d manages to get just allmoast as good quality, when the situation(lights etc) is perfect. 40d has way better focus system, 14-bit raw processing and much better iso handling(allso noise isnt as ugly when it appears), those thing combined makes the overall image quality better.

If u want a back up camera, id suggest buying used 350d, thats same as 400d, but smalled lcd and 2less focus points, allso u can get one used for like 200 euros or less. I was allso coincidering of buying used eos-d60 for camera to rugged conditions(its not better sealed, but it wouldnt hurt so much if it broke down), would get one for 190 euros. But not sure if i should try to find a used 1d mark 1 instead, its much better sealed and could use it when its snowing with more ease.

yeah you are right the AF on 40D is better than any of the Rebel series dslrs and in combination with a decent lens you can actually take sharp pics even in very low light. lol but I think I probably need to learn more about photography before I get really serious with it course it doesnt matter what camera you use it is the person behind it
I have seen some "cheap" used 1D mark1 but dont know how good they are. do the older 1d have APS-C sensors or fullframe?