Chainsaw photography

Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
O no not the nut lol. That's the only one I didn't care for.


Fixed it for ya. Tapatalk picture edit software.

4bddf3ef-f72b-e91d.jpg
 
The honey weiss is the other one they had. I'll try some more of the flavors next time I stop in. I don't think the closest grocery store has it:msp_mad:
 
Thanks for the suggestions. What would be different between the 40D and T2i?

It's funny, I used to be really into photography in high school and shortly after but got distracted along the way. But after following this thread for a while and having a photographer take some pictures for my new website with her $2000 Nikon, the itch is returning.

The trouble is, I don't know squat anymore. :hmm3grin2orange:

I really want to be able to take those cool cutter pictures like Tzed does!

My flash setup. Two big fugly SB-900s, an SB-800, and an SU-800 commander on the hotshoe. All setup to do macro here. I also use them with umbrellas/softboxes for portrait work. I really enjoy using the CLS units.


Studio by zweitakt250, on Flickr

Thanks for the compliment! My gear is a big part of my technique, but the shots can be made on a much tighter budget. A true macro lens is the most important item. Bought mine used for $260.#


let me tell you Tzed has serious amount of $$$$$$ tied up in his gear including that 300 2.8 lens which i would love to have a canon copy in my line up.

$$$$$$$ is right, but I tried to keep the cost down by buying used gear. My DSLR was $1500, the original owner paid $4700. My 300-2.8 was $4200, originally $5800. My only new lens is my 24-120 f/4. The truth of the matter is that you can get 80-90% of the shots I do for about 15% of the money. It's that last little bit that gets ya!!!
 
$$$$$$$ is right, but I tried to keep the cost down by buying used gear. My DSLR was $1500, the original owner paid $4700. My 300-2.8 was $4200, originally $5800. My only new lens is my 24-120 f/4. The truth of the matter is that you can get 80-90% of the shots I do for about 15% of the money. It's that last little bit that gets ya!!!

you know better then i do, good glass hold there value very very well. unlike bodies hahaha.
 
The newer bodies are not as bad. The D3s is holding value quite well since the introduction of the D4.

ill like to get a hold of the new d800, but being a canon shooter, ill just have to wait and see how the 5d mark 3 is going to stack up.
 
Canon

I'm thinking of a digital SLR and wondered if you guys would have some recommendations. I'm not going to go crazy but would a good quality camera at a decent price. I still have my old Canon EOS Rebel. Would the lens off that still work so I could go body only?

I've always wanted a Nikon but doubt i will spend that much.

TIA

I have always been a Nikon guy BUT The Canon's have just been so much better to me.

I would say a 60D. Love the one I have.
 
Last edited:
40D can shoot 6.5fps vs T2i's 3.7

T2i is a current model where as the 40D is 2 product cycles old (current being the 60D which i hate)

40D is 10.1 megapixel vs 18.1 of T2i.

T2i does video where as 40D does not.

T2i uses sd card, 40D is still compactflash.

T2i like a toy compared to 40D in terms of build quality.

I would take the 40D over any current rebel out.

which model rebel do you have?

you can pull of most of the shots you've seen on this thread with correct lighting and setup.

good glass and nice body will make things easier to accomplish but arent necessary.

and glass will always be a bigger factor for picture quality then body.

let me tell you Tzed has serious amount of $$$$$$ tied up in his gear including that 300 2.8 lens which i would love to have a canon copy in my line up.


It's an EOS Rebel S II. I think I got it in the mid-80's. The lens is an EF 35-105mm 1:4.5-5.6.

Local shop has a 40D for $399 which after checking through eBay, doesn't seem to be too bad of a price.
 
It's an EOS Rebel S II. I think I got it in the mid-80's. The lens is an EF 35-105mm 1:4.5-5.6.

Local shop has a 40D for $399 which after checking through eBay, doesn't seem to be too bad of a price.

thats a fair price for a 40D.

if thats the only lens you have, you dont have that much invested in ef lenses.

its an old kit len which shouldnt prevent you from going with another brand like nikon if you choose too.
 
After toting around a 166, I shouldn't probably mention the weight of the 40D but that thing seems to be a heavy sucker. Also, after playing rugby for far too long, I don't have a lot of range of motion in my wrists so the camera didn't seem to feel real comfortable with the way the grip set up is. Not bad, just not ideal. But not sure if that would be much difference with any other camera.
 
After toting around a 166, I shouldn't probably mention the weight of the 40D but that thing seems to be a heavy sucker. Also, after playing rugby for far too long, I don't have a lot of range of motion in my wrists so the camera didn't seem to feel real comfortable with the way the grip set up is. Not bad, just not ideal. But not sure if that would be much difference with any other camera.

go into local camera shop and try out all the other bodies and find one that works best for you. like i said i wouldnt narrow my choices just before you have the older canon gear.
 
Tried out several cameras today and nothing felt better than the 40D. After looking at the prices on eBay, the shop's prices were looking better and better. That was compounded when one of the staff walked up as I was talking to the guy who was helping me and he said, "We have a 40D?!? And that's all we're selling it for?"

They have a 10 day return policy so I'm going to do some shooting and make sure it is what I want.
 
40d is very nice body, i think youll end up keeping it. get any new glass with it?
 
Not yet. I'm thinking of starting with the 50mm f1.8 (unless I can find a heck of a deal on a f1.4) for low light. Saw several selling them on eBay for $109.
 
Back
Top