<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Three Five Photography &#187; Photography Technology</title>
	<atom:link href="http://threefivephotography.com/category/photography-technology/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://threefivephotography.com</link>
	<description>Photography for the new Pro, BY a new Pro</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Aug 2010 05:05:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Tech Review: Olympus E-P2 w/ 17mm f/2.8 &amp; VF-2</title>
		<link>http://threefivephotography.com/2010/06/tech-review-olympus-e-p2-w-17mm-f2-8-vf-2/</link>
		<comments>http://threefivephotography.com/2010/06/tech-review-olympus-e-p2-w-17mm-f2-8-vf-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Jun 2010 20:00:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Walt</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Camera Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Photography Technology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://threefivephotography.com/?p=293</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It&#8217;s the vector that modern photography is taking &#8230; digital. Recently, over the last 4 months all of the photo labs in my area have either gone out of business or went dry (which means they no longer develop in house). As such, I was having to send off all my rolls of film for [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s the vector that modern photography is taking &#8230; digital. Recently, over the last 4 months all of the photo labs in my area have either gone out of business or went dry (which means they no longer develop in house). As such, I was having to send off all my rolls of film for up to two weeks to get developed. Much to my dismay, I came to the decision to move into a strictly digital setup. My main camera is a Nikon DSLR so digital wasn&#8217;t new to me. Over the course of a week, I sold all my film-based cameras (other than my Polaroid land Camera 450) and bought the Olympus E-P2 bundle w/ 17mm f/2.8 Prime M. Zuiko lens, and the VF-2 electronic view finder (EVF). I don&#8217;t want to bore you with a huge write up on how I decided on the Olympus E-P2, but after some serious research I decided on the E-P2. If you&#8217;re really curious the primary reason I chose the E-P2 is its High ISO capability and in-camera (vs. in-lens) image stabilization. </p>
<p>Hit the link for the rest &#8230; <span id="more-293"></span></p>
<p><strong>I. Basics/Features</strong></p>
<p>I purchased the E-P2 bundle from Adorama.com for an excellent price. As usual, Adorama provided ultra-fast shipping and I highly recommend them for all your camera needs. As for the camera, below are the specs on the camera purchased &#8230;</p>
<ul>
<li>Olympus E-P2 DSLR (yes, the camera is tech. a DSLR)</li>
<li>Micro 4/3rds Sensor</li>
<li>12.3 Megapixels</li>
<li>Shutter speeds from 60 secs &#8211; 1/4000 sec including Bulb</li>
<li>3 frames per second</li>
<li>In-camera image stabilization</li>
<li>3&#8243; 230k rear LCD</li>
<li>Autofocus Tracking</li>
<li>Contrast Detection AF system</li>
<li>ISO 100-6400 (100-1600 for Video)</li>
<li>Dual control wheels</li>
<li>Supersonic Dust reduction</li>
<li>RAW capable</li>
<li>720p, 30fps video recording w/ stereo sound</li>
<li>Multiple Aspect Ratios, 4:3, 2:3, 16:9 &#038; 6:6</li>
<li>Face recognition</li>
<li>8 in-camera Art filters and 14 scene modes</li>
<li>Multiple Exposure with Image Overlay ability</li>
<li>Mini-HDMI Out, which allows you to control your camera from your TV remote</li>
<li>Hot shoe adapter</li>
</ul>
<p>
Bundle Included:</p>
<ul>
<li>VF-2 Electronic Viewfinder</li>
<li>M. Zuiko 17mm f/2.8 Pancake lens (22.5mm deep)</li>
</ul>
<p><center><A href="http://www.adorama.com/?kbid=65523"><br />
<img src="http://www.adorama.com/artworks2/banners/affil/Adorama_2010_468_60.jpg" border=0></a></center ></p>
<p><strong>II. First Impressions</strong></p>
<p>When I first opened the E-P2 box I was impressed with how well it was packed. Everything was in an individual plastic bag and then wrapped in foam sheets. The E-P2 itself was heavy with an overall feeling of solid construction. Buttons are firm in their respective slots and not loose at all. Command dials were solid feeling as well with no wiggle room. In fact, I believe the upper command dial is made of metal.</p>
<p>The &#8220;black&#8221; color of the camera is more like a dark grey, but not at all displeasing. Great chrome accents help to pull across the retro feel of the device.</p>
<p>The overall solid feeling of the E-P2 does not carry over to the VF-2 electronic viewfinder. Compared to the E-P2 the VF-2 feels flimsy and poorly made. The outer shell is matte plastic and doesn&#8217;t match the color of any of the plastic on the E-P2 itself. But, don&#8217;t let the cover fool you, the VF-2 is a top-notch device functionally speaking.</p>
<p>The M.Zuiko 17mm f/2.8 lens feels well made with good heft to it. It is not at all loose when placed in the body and feels well mated to the E-P2. The chrome color matches well with the E-P2.</p>
<p>The body seems a little smaller than the cheaper consumer targeted E-PL1, which might be an issue at first if you are like me and possess large hands. Although, with this being said, everything is in good relation and using the E-P2 with large hands is not at all impossible. I would suggest getting a good strap to prevent dropping the E-P2 if you do, in fact, have large hands &#8230; if you have them, you know what I mean.</p>
<p><strong>II. Interface</strong></p>
<p>The interface on the E-P2 is a little clunky for such a high end camera. It seems horrid at first, but cycling through it for a day or three will allow you to learn it quite well. Its not really all that bad and the initial shock of the interface probably comes from my experience with full scale Nikon DSLR interfaces.</p>
<p><strong>III. Performance</strong></p>
<p>So, now we get to the brass tacks of the matter, the performance of the E-P2. One of the biggest complaints people have regarding the E-P2 is Autofocus speed. It is true people were very accurate in their assessment of the auto focus on the E-P2&#8217;s predecessor the E-P1. However, the E-P2, along with the recent Firmware release has significantly fixed this AF issue. In good light the E-P2 can autofocus in less than 1/2 second by my own unscientific calculations. In low light the AF can hunt a little longer than I like, so if you shoot primarily in low light the E-P2 might not be the best option for you. Olympus should consider releasing a low light AF assist add on that attaches to the hotshoe and fixing this issue in the E-P3.</p>
<p>Another complaint on the E-P2 is the low definition rear LCD. Since these cameras do not have a viewfinder images are composed on the LCD or through the VF-2 EVF. Because of this fact, the lower quality LCD is an issue that people have grumbled about. Personally, I haven&#8217;t found an issue where the lower quality screen has impeded my ability to take a good shot. Although, I can understand the issues people have with a cheap performing LCD in a 900.00 camera body. </p>
<p>The LCD is a perfect segue into my impressions of the VF-2 electronic viewfinder. While it might be made of cheap feeling plastic the LCD inside of it is OUTSTANDING. I would challenge anyone to be able to see the pixelation in the VF-2. It is crystal clear and color reproduction are top notch. My personal opinion is not to buy this camera without the VF-2, it is well worth the cash.</p>
<p>The M. Zuiko 17mm f/2.8 lens that came with my E-P2 is an upgrade from the normal kit lens (the M. Zuiko 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6). While it is a good lens it does not hold a flame to the exceptional Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 lens that also fits the Micro 4/3rds mount on the E-P2. In my opinion, if you can&#8217;t get around it, go with the 17mm f/2.8 over the 14-42mm kit lens, if you can swing the cash just buy the E-P2 body and the Panasonic 20mm f/2.8 separately (MSRP $299.00) </p>
<p>The battery for the E-P2 is accurately described at being able to power the camera through roughly 250-300 shots. This is roughly what a 4GB SDHC card will hold. As such, I would advise that if you plan to shoot more than a few hours, perhaps on the streets, to purchase a second battery to have on hand.</p>
<p>Lastly, I wanted to address the Flash Sync on the E-P2. Officially it is listed as 1/180, however, in my experience my E-P2 was able to fully sync at 1/320 sec. Others I know have reported being able to sync at higher speeds, some as much as 1/500th sec. The camera is fully capable of using remote triggering devices for off-camera lighting. I tested the sync speed with a set of Cybersyncs from Paul C. Buff with no misfires.</p>
<p><strong>IV. Art/Scenes</strong></p>
<p>The E-P2 has a great mixture of special artistic settings that you can use to create some amazing shots. While I won&#8217;t go over them all and post samples, I did want to touch on a few of them that I think are amazing.</p>
<p>The cross process and lomo settings are just great, very artistic and works really well. However, when using the Art settings the viewfinder tends to become staggered and it slows down my shooting process.</p>
<p>Multiple exposures are just awesome on the E-P2. You can use any image you&#8217;ve shot to create a double exposure or chose to shoot two shots back to back. BUT, here is the kicker. When you are shooting a double exposure the E-P2 actually overlays the previous image over what you are seeing through the EVF. This allows you to line up the second image to perfection. This is a superb way of creating double exposures.</p>
<p><strong>V. Accessories</strong></p>
<p>So, now that you know about the camera, lets talk accessories. A leather case for the E-P2 is strangely absent from Olympus&#8217; lineup. There was one for the E-P1 but it is oddly gone with the release of the E-P2. Perhaps this is because Olympus is preparing to release an updated model or they just decided not to move forward with the product any longer, either way its disappearance means you&#8217;re left looking for cases elsewhere. There are numerous options out there for these camera&#8217;s due to their popularity so don&#8217;t settle for the first one you find. Look around and find something that matches your personality.</p>
<p>Another fun accessory for the 17mm f/2.8 lens are the 37mm augmentation lenses meant for camcorders. Usually selling for less than $30.00 USD, these lenses come in a couple different styles. Wide angle, fisheye, and 2x telephoto are three of the more popular, easy-to-find, types.</p>
<p>Lastly, you can not talk about Micro 4/3rds cameras without talking about the plethora of adaptors available for the E-P2 and other Micro 4/3rd cameras. Everything from modern Nikon/Canon lenses to 80 year old C mount lenses designed for early motion picture cameras, you&#8217;ll find an adapter for. As a Nikon shooter the first thing I bought was a Nikon adapter. It is important to note that fully manual lenses are the best options to use due to the lack of aperture control in the E-P2 for old lenses. Also note that you need to set the camera to shoot without a lens so it doesn&#8217;t look for the electronics of a normal lens. This ability is one of the things that draw people to the E-P2. Everything from 25.00 CCTV C-mount camera lenses to 10,000.00 Leica f/.90 M mount lenses can be pulled from storage and used again. In some ways the E-P2 is being considered the &#8220;poor man&#8217;s Leica M9.&#8221;</p>
<p><strong>IV. Conclusions</strong></p>
<p>Overall, I have to give the Olympus E-P2 a 4.5 / 5 rating. The .5 loss comes from the low quality LCD, lack of AF assist lamp, and clunky interface.</p>
<p>The VF-2 receives a 4.75 / 5 rating with a quarter point knocked off for the light weight plastic housing.</p>
<p>The M. Zuiko 17mm f/2.8 gets a 4 / 5 rating. This is because the lens just isn&#8217;t as sharp and contrasty as a photographer would like, although it is an overall excellent lens it is not quite up to par with the E-P2.</p>
<p><strong>VI. Sample Shots</strong><br />
<center><br />
<img src="http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1231/4734595174_104b143c87.jpg" alt="Cross Processed" /><br />
<br />
<img src="http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1255/4733952367_a19564a57b.jpg" alt="B&#038;W" /><br />
<br />
<img src="http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1198/4734598636_920ae7bf31.jpg" alt="B&#038;W" /><br />
</center><br />
<br />
<center><A href="http://www.adorama.com/?kbid=65523"><br />
<img src="http://www.adorama.com/artworks2/banners/affil/Adorama_2010_468_60.jpg" border=0></a></center ></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://threefivephotography.com/2010/06/tech-review-olympus-e-p2-w-17mm-f2-8-vf-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why photographers DON&#8217;T need the iPad &#8230; yet!</title>
		<link>http://threefivephotography.com/2010/02/how-photographers-dont-need-the-ipad/</link>
		<comments>http://threefivephotography.com/2010/02/how-photographers-dont-need-the-ipad/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Feb 2010 20:56:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Walt</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Photography Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[apple]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[editorial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ipad]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[photo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[photography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wedding photography]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://threefivephotography.com/?p=208</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Some other bloggers in the blogsphere have been posting like long winded madmen about the most holy iPad. Before I get into my argument on why the iPad ISN&#8217;T something a photographer should pursue without serious forethought, I should throw out a disclaimer. I am a huge Apple fan. I&#8217;m writing this post on my [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Some other bloggers in the blogsphere have been posting like long winded madmen about the most holy iPad. Before I get into my argument on why the iPad ISN&#8217;T something a photographer should pursue without serious forethought, I should throw out a disclaimer. I am a huge Apple fan. I&#8217;m writing this post on my new Apple Bluetooth keyboard which is connected to my 3 week old Macbook Pro, which is sitting beside my iMac, which syncs with my Apple TV, which I can control with my iPhone. Needless to say &#8230; I like Apple. I have been for the better part of 7 years when I bought my first Apple laptop, a 12&#8243; Powerbook G4 1Ghz. Now that that is out there, lets get started, hit the jump for more &#8230; <span id="more-208"></span></p>
<p>As most people know by now, Apple announced the iPad on Jan. 27th to much applaud and fanfare. Going so far as to call it evolutionary and &#8220;magical.&#8221; However, after the announcement there were many naysayers who were expecting a tablet style laptop, not a Supersized iPod Touch. Or the more humorous &#8220;4 iPhones Taped Together 1.0&#8243; &#8230; at least on 4 iPhones Taped Together 1.0 I could multitask. </p>
<p>Personally, Im on the fence. I can see some potential, but I think it will be many months before we see really significant movement of iPads and iPad targeted apps. With that being said, lets take a look at this device from the photography side of things.</p>
<p>#1 Use of the iPad for Photogs: Sleek On-Site Portfolio</p>
<p>There you have it people, all laid bare, one sentence, no going on and on about potential. 500.00+ base price, PLUS a possible 130.00/year for 3G access &#8230; for a photo album. You see, potential is important, but potential energy hasn&#8217;t manifested itself yet. Unless you convert it to something useful, it just sits there. Besides, 500 bucks will buy a nice prime lens.</p>
<p>Yes, Im aware of the add on that *might* allow you to offload images from your camera or SD card &#8230; the latter throws the Pros out right off the bat. And even if they did support CF, a 64GB device isn&#8217;t nearly enough space. If I can only view images, again, there are much better products to fill that gap. For instance, Epson&#8217;s line of portable backup/image viewer drives. Look and backup at the same time, for less money than the iPad.</p>
<p>For other uses, such as web, email, and audio/video &#8230; there are cheaper and more robust alternatives to the iPad. One of those choices is the newly released Asus Tablet netbook. Some might scoff at the idea of a netbook, but a tablet netbook offers all the functions of the iPad along with the ability to shoot tethered in the field, offload new images, and isn&#8217;t restricted to draconian DRM rules.</p>
<p>In short, Im officially recommending that photographers abstain from buying the iPad for at least the foreseeable future, at least for professional uses beyond a portable portfolio. With that being said, I have a good feeling, given the past, that Apple will rapidly make strides to enhance the iPad to a level where photogs might be able to get enough use from it to justify the price tag. But until then &#8230; enjoy that new prime lens.</p>
<p><center><A href="http://www.adorama.com/?kbid=65523"><br />
<img src="http://www.adorama.com/artworks2/banners/affil/Adorama_2010_468_60.jpg" border=0></a></center></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://threefivephotography.com/2010/02/how-photographers-dont-need-the-ipad/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Dust and Pollen and Sensors &#8230; Oh My!</title>
		<link>http://threefivephotography.com/2009/04/dust-and-pollen-and-sensors-oh-my/</link>
		<comments>http://threefivephotography.com/2009/04/dust-and-pollen-and-sensors-oh-my/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2009 19:00:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Walt</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Photography Basics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Photography Technology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.threefivephotography.com/wordpress/?p=105</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Dust &#8230; composed usually of dead skin cells or pollen, it is always around us. We breath it in every day, we dust it from our furniture, and even take medicine for the allergies it may cause. But, something we as digital photographer should know is that dust on a sensor is a horrible thing. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dust &#8230; composed usually of dead skin cells or pollen, it is always around us. We breath it in every day, we dust it from our furniture, and even take medicine for the allergies it may cause. But, something we as digital photographer should know is that dust on a sensor is a horrible thing. Hit the jump to read about how to find and eliminate sensor dust.<span id="more-105"></span></p>
<p>Sensor dust is usually only seen at smaller apertures due to the corner to corner sharpness that comes from the deep depth of field. Because of this, there is a good chance you have sensor dust right now and aren&#8217;t aware of it. The best way to test for it is to set your camera on the smallest aperture and shoot a picture of a white piece of paper or a blue sky. If there is dust on the sensor there will be small dark blobs on the image. Now you have to make a choice &#8230; is the dust particles small enough or few enough that it isnt going to mess with your images. However, if you take a look at the picture below you can see what a single dust speck is capable of.</p>
<p><center><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/23868612@N02/3285641922/" title="Lake Shot ... AGAIN by Abraxsis, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3573/3285641922_71c83e645f_o.jpg" width="1000" height="1000" alt="Lake Shot ... AGAIN" /></a></center></p>
<p>Can&#8217;t see it? I didn&#8217;t circle it for a reason, it will give you a better idea of what dust can do. If you didn&#8217;t see it, then you might not need to worry so much about the dust on your sensor unless the specks are usually large or black. However, if you spotted it right off, then you should keep reading for your options in removing this image quality killer.</p>
<p>Most camera manufacturer will void the warranty on your camera if you touch the sensor with anything but air. In fact, air is the only approved self-fix for this issue. Before you run to get the can of air you use to blow out the computer, know that you should NEVER use canned air for cleaning the sensor. NEVER. If you try it, you do it on your own accord. The issue with using canned air products is that it is not a truly dry source, simply turn a can upside for a second, flip it back and pull the trigger. If you look closely a fine mist will come from the nozzle before clean dry air. This quick burst of liquid will leave a residue on the sensor, which basically ruins it for taking images. Time to send it to the Pros cause you messed it up. The second reason, which isn&#8217;t as common, is that small particles of &#8220;material&#8221; can get lodged inside that little narrow tube. When you pull the trigger, and it happens to come loose, you are basically firing a little tiny air cannonball into your sensor. You don&#8217;t want that do you? OK, now read on to make sure you don&#8217;t go an muck things up.</p>
<p>Your primary weapon in fighting the lil&#8217; dirt devils is a source of filtered dry air. By far the best product for this is the <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Giottos-Rocket-Blaster-Air-Blower/dp/B0013J0502/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&#038;s=electronics&#038;qid=1239239742&#038;sr=8-1">Giottos Rocket Blower</a>. This is the product that most pros use. For less than 20.00 you&#8217;ll have an excellent piece of equipment that will last and last. Keep an eye out for a more detailed review of this product at a future date.</p>
<p>OK, first things first. You&#8217;ll need to find the &#8220;Mirror Lock Up&#8221; option on your camera. Every DSLR has this option in one form or another. Some cameras use this as a way to eliminate the vibration of the shutter action, while entry level cameras include this option for the purpose of sensor cleaning. Either way, you should charge your camera battery to 100% before attempting any of the following. The new cameras actually have a protective measure that won&#8217;t allow you to use the mirror lock up with a lens unless the battery is charged to 50% or more.</p>
<p>Alright &#8230; Giotto Blaster, Check. Battery charged to 100%, Check. Mirror Lock Up activated, Check. Were ready to get started. A tip to the following is to perform the cleaning in the room of your home with the least free floating dust, which is usually the bathroom. This is due to the steam from your shower pulling the steam out of the air.</p>
<p>Now, with the camera opening pointing DOWN activate the shutter. With Mirror Lock Up on, this will cause the shutter to open up and lock in the open position. Take your Giotto Air Blaster and insert to nozzle into the opening, while not touching the sides or the sensor. Squeeze the bulb with a quick sharp action to insure a strong blast. Remove the nozzle and then allow the bulb to refill, by doing this you eliminate sucking the dust you just dislodged from the sensor back into the bulb. Repeat this 4 or 5 times and then turn the power off to your camera to close the shutter. Now repeat the test with the smallest aperture and the piece of paper/sky. You should see a significant reduction in dust spots. </p>
<p>If, by some chance there are still spots go back and repeat the cleaning process. After a few times, if there is still dust in the images, then chances are you have dust that is pollen, which is usually sticky in nature. In this event there are products that allow you to clean your sensor, but personally I don&#8217;t recommend them because, as said before, they could void your warranty. So for stubborn dust &#8230; send the camera to the manufacturer.</p>
<p>Hopefully this post helps everyone who has dust issues get better pictures. See you next time! </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://threefivephotography.com/2009/04/dust-and-pollen-and-sensors-oh-my/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>FlashPost: Get Lightroom Images into the iPhone</title>
		<link>http://threefivephotography.com/2009/04/flashpost-get-lightroom-images-into-the-iphone/</link>
		<comments>http://threefivephotography.com/2009/04/flashpost-get-lightroom-images-into-the-iphone/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2009 01:00:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Walt</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[FlashPost]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Photography Technology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.threefivephotography.com/wordpress/?p=101</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Lightroom is a pretty swank software suite. The iPhone is the ultimate phone/PDA/iPod/Internet Device/everything. But, did you ever think that your iPhone could be a perfect on-the-go, quick view, portfolio? Of course you have, but the question is how to get your RAW files into the iPhone. The process is easier than you might think [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lightroom is a pretty swank software suite. The iPhone is the ultimate phone/PDA/iPod/Internet Device/everything. But, did you ever think that your iPhone could be a perfect on-the-go, quick view, portfolio? Of course you have, but the question is how to get your RAW files into the iPhone. The process is easier than you might think &#8230; Hit the Jump for More.<span id="more-101"></span></p>
<p>While there are no direct upload vectors for Lightroom to iPhone there is a way to work around this deficit and get your best images into the iPhone. Note: I am a Mac user, so the instructions I am giving here pertain to Mac OSX, however they should be easily ported to the PC platform. </p>
<p>1. Locate your Pictures folder. On the Mac this is usually found under your Username. Create a Folder named &#8220;iPhone LR Upload.&#8221;</p>
<p>2. Go into Lightroom and Export the images you would like on the iPhone into the folder you just created. They should be in JPEG format, and I usually reduce the Quality to ~80 to save a little space.</p>
<p><center><A href="http://www.adorama.com/?kbid=65523"><br />
<img src="http://www.adorama.com/artworks2/banners/affil/Adorama_2010_468_60.jpg" border=0></a></center></p>
<p>3. The Lightroom Export will convert all your chosen images to jpg files and save them to the folder.</p>
<p>4. Next, in iTunes, under the iPhone synch options find the tab labeled &#8220;Photos&#8221;</p>
<p>5. Under the tab you will see a check box labeled &#8220;Sync Photos from:&#8221; with a drop down menu next to it. Open that drop down and chose &#8220;From Folder.&#8221; This brings up a Finder window.</p>
<p>6. In the Finder window navigate to your &#8220;iPhone LR Upload&#8221; folder and click &#8220;OK&#8221;</p>
<p>7. Make sure the &#8220;All Photos&#8221; option is checked under the &#8220;Photos&#8221; tab and proceed to Sync your iPhone.</p>
<p>After this, your Lightroom images will show up in a Folder called &#8220;Photo Library&#8221; under the &#8220;Photos&#8221; icon on the iPhone.</p>
<p>Enjoy!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://threefivephotography.com/2009/04/flashpost-get-lightroom-images-into-the-iphone/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tech: Nikon, Canon, or ???</title>
		<link>http://threefivephotography.com/2009/04/tech-nikon-canon-or/</link>
		<comments>http://threefivephotography.com/2009/04/tech-nikon-canon-or/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Apr 2009 01:42:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Walt</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Photography Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[canon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DSLR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nikon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[photography]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.threefivephotography.com/wordpress/?p=78</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[So, here I am again, and this time around I will be responding to a question that a few people have contacted me with. That question is the same one you will see on countless Photography sites all over the net &#8230; &#8220;Should I shoot Nikon or Canon or maybe something else?&#8221; Well, unfortunately this [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So, here I am again, and this time around I will be responding to a question that a few people have contacted me with. That question is the same one you will see on countless Photography sites all over the net &#8230; &#8220;Should I shoot <a href="http://www.nikon.com">Nikon</a> or <a href="http://www.canon.com">Canon</a> or maybe something else?&#8221; Well, unfortunately this isn&#8217;t such a clear cut issue. The first thing that a person needs to know is they are buying a photography system, not just a camera. Each brand has things it is particularly good at, things it fails at, and various pro lenses that might be better suited for certain things. Hit the jump for a few basic tips as well as my take on this burning question. <span id="more-78"></span> First off, let me say this, I AM a Nikon shooter and ,as of this writing, I don&#8217;t plan on switching. As such, you might find this post a little bias, but I will try my best to remain fair and balanced. </p>
<p>The first thing I tell people is about the fact they are buying a system, not a camera. In fact, I just said that, but let me explain a little further. When you go out to buy a DSLR it is kind of like buying a car, you don&#8217;t jut pick a brand and pick the first one in your price range. You test drive it, you find the one that you feel good driving, the one which handles the best for the type of driving you plan on doing, and you look at how much it will cost you in the future. You should do the same thing when choosing a camera. Go out to a camera store and see about renting the camera you are considering purchasing. You might end up spending a $100.00, but as they say you don&#8217;t want to be penny wise and dollar foolish. By going this route you get a good feel for the camera in your hands, and its operation. You may even find that a camera you hadn&#8217;t even considered turns out to be the best choice for you.</p>
<p>Next, you should look at the types of lenses available for the brand you ultimately chose PRIOR to purchase. What many first-time buyer don&#8217;t understand is that the camera body you buy is disposable. In 2 years, maybe less if you&#8217;re like me, you&#8217;ll be on the hunt for a new camera body. However, you&#8217;ll still use your collection of lenses. The other thing most beginner don&#8217;t realize is that lenses can be expensive, and by expensive, I mean EXPENSIVE. Some lenses can cost as much as 2x any of a line&#8217;s camera bodies. Hence why I say lenses are your primary investment when choosing a brand. Be sure to see which brand of DSLR have good quality lenses for what types of photographer, and be prepared to pay god money for them. They will last you a long time.</p>
<p>Third, and I can&#8217;t stress this enough, forget Megapixels. Unless you plan on blowing up images beyond 20&#8243; x 30&#8243; 6MP is more than sufficient for the average print. Invest in glass (aka lenses) over megapixels. I could wax long on sensor types, brands, and sizes; but, that would really miss the mark on what I want to get across here. So, let me sum it up in a nice neat package. If you buy a non-Professional level camera you&#8217;ll be buying an APS (or close) sized sensor. For professional grade cameras they will have a 35mm sensor, or what is known as a Full Frame sensor. Just like film, larger sensor areas leads to sharper pictures, more contrast, and a larger image size. </p>
<p>In short, test drive the camera you are planning on getting to really make sure it is what you want. Ensure the brand you choose has suitable, quality, lenses for the type of photographs you plan on taking, and don&#8217;t let any salesmen try to get you to buy a camera based on more megapixels.</p>
<p>As for <a href="http://www.canon.com>Canon</a> versus <a href="http://www.nikon.com">Nikon</a> verses Olympus verses Pentax versus etc. I generally like to keep it in the realm of <a href="http://www.nikon.com">Nikon</a> and <a href="http://www.canon.com>Canon</a>. These are the two primary brands you are going to come across in stores and in the field. Canon does however seem to be more prevalent but I usually attribute this fact to Canon&#8217;s entry level gear being slightly cheaper than Nikon&#8217;s. This isn&#8217;t meant to slight the other camera makers, it is just that I have zero experience with those makes and models. If they would like to send me a sample to review I would be happy to do so. Otherwise, this blog will remain in the boundaries of <a href="http://www.canon.com>Canon</a> and Nikon.</p>
<p>Now, I am going to give my personal opinion on this matter. I shoot Nikon because they fit my hands well, and I feel like it is a better made camera. Perhaps this is just a bias remark, but it is how I feel nonetheless. The build quality also extends into the higher end Pro level cameras were, personally, I think Nikon&#8217;s offerings are leaps and bounds beyond <a href="http://www.canon.com>Canon</a>. Again, this is my personal opinion, your&#8217;s may differ and that is perfectly OK. Just like tripods, the best camera for you is one that you&#8217;ll use regularly.</p>
<p>As for Nikon lenses, entry level to high end for Nikon tend to be better made. Of course, this is my own opinion, but I feel it comes from experience. I have done plenty shooting with various Nikon and Canon lenses. In all cases, I find the <a href="http://www.nikon.com">Nikon</a> to be better suited to the photography I choose to do. </p>
<p>I did a lot of research when I first decided to purchase a DSLR. I also took the time to visit several retail stores to feel the cameras in my hands, and to get a real feel which one was best for me. This is honestly the best suggestion I can pass on to those who are looking to entry into the exciting world of Digital SLR Photography.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://threefivephotography.com/2009/04/tech-nikon-canon-or/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
