Bill J, <BR> <BR>How much post-processing work do you do in PS? I'm still very much a new user with my DR, but I don't seem to get near the crispness that you do. <BR> <BR>Some of it I feel is the cheap glass that I'm using. Here it is: <BR> <BR><a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&amp;A=details&amp;Q=&amp;sku=29 7847&amp;is=REG" target="_blank">http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&amp;A=details&amp;Q=&amp;sku=29 7847&amp;is=REG</a> <BR> <BR>We tried to get something in the beginning to cover a wide range, but maybe getting a more "specific" lens (i.e. 70-200 for example) would be better with the less elements and pieces in the lens? Any suggestions in a "reasonable" price range? ($300-$500) <BR> <BR>Any opinions? Where would I go about selling my current lens? I know B&amp;H has a trade in but they didn't offer much for it. <BR> <BR>Thanks, <BR>Jarret

watch for the double posting but anyway i would definatly recomend the 70-200 F4L... great lens and very sharp.

Even a lens like that Sigma should give you reasonably sharp pics when downsized for the web. Most of the bad shots I've seen posted here are out of focus or have motion blur/ camera shake (not Bill's by any means!). Good post processing can help make any shot look better on the web but only if it's right to begin with. Stay away from the wide and long end of that lens and don't use it's wide open aperature if you can help it and you'll get the best it has to offer. If you can't get a 1000th of a second shutter to "freeze" the action then turn up the ISO. And remember it's not impossible to get camera shake at 200 mm plus even at fast shutter speeds so hold it steady when you're shooting long. <BR> <BR>Here is a shot at 300mm and 100% actual pixel crop from it to show you the detail you can get even with out sharpening. These are from jpegs straight out of the 20D off a tripod just experimenting. I can't wait to shoot some wakeboarding with this cam. <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/191736.jpg" alt="full shot downsized for the web"> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/191737.jpg" alt="100% crop (actual pixels)">

It seems to be a great wakeboarding setup so far Rich (20D +70-200 2.8 L IS) <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/191750.jpg" alt="Matt Clendenon Hootchie">

Another to show that AI servo actually works on the 20D (as opposed to my old rebel) <BR> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/191756.jpg" alt="Leif Lacey">

Thanks guys. <BR> <BR>Yeah, I've heard good things about the 70-200 L IS, but at $1,600 I think it might be a little too pricey for my pocket books! <BR> <BR>Any other lens suggestions?

The Canon 70-200 f4L or the sigma 70-200 f2.8. I've got the Canon 70-200f2.8L without IS which is a great sports lens also. Nice pics Shelby, I need to get my rig back out into the boat too! That lower pic could use a little work with the shadow/highlite tool in PS. Both just great captures! <BR> <BR>

Your right about the second pic Rich, I'll try it. <BR> <BR>I'll also second the suggestion of the 70-200 f4 L Canon, it is a great lens for its price and much lighter than the 2.8 L IS. A very capable wakeboard lens. I just needed the 2.8 for other things. <BR> <BR>I'm sure the 70-200 2.8 Sigma is good too, but I have no personal experience with it, and I always prefer Canon Lenses with Canon bodies if I can afford them. <BR> <BR>You'll have fun with whichever you choose and that's the main thing!! <BR> <BR>shelby

Thanks for the opinions. I might look more into the 70-200 f4 L lens. It isn't cheap either but I'm learning how much it's the quality of the glass that's going to help your pictures. <BR> <BR>What settings are you guys using usually for wakeboarding shots.

<a href="http://www.wakeboarder.com/display.phtml?id=553" target="_blank">http://www.wakeboarder.com/display.phtml?id=553</a> <BR> <BR>This article should tell you most everything you need to know. I found it very helpful.

Jarret, I normally shoot at 1/2000 @f4 ISO 100 during the day, and I have the Canon 70-200 f/4L lens. I highly recommend it, nice sharp lens and reasonably fast - and not too expensive. <BR> <BR>As for the amount of post-processing I do, it all depends on the shot. I usually add some sharpening and adjust the brightness and contrast as needed. I'm basically a beginner when it comes to PS so I don't usually try anything dramatic plus I want to keep the pic as original as possible. <BR> <BR>Here's a nice little article that explains sharpening and the USM filter which I found very useful. <a href="http://www.seittipaja.fi/data/Photography_lessons/Processing/Lesson_2/_Sharpening.html" target="_blank">http://www.seittipaja.fi/data/Photography_lessons/Processing/Lesson_2/_Sharpening.html</a> <BR> <BR>

Thanks for the info guys...and Bill. I actually have read that article on Wakeboarder.com and it helped a lot. <BR> <BR>Guess I need to buy some new glass!

Here's an example of my workflow with a shot from the Rebel. Unfortunately it was taken on an overcast day so it's not great lighting. <BR> <BR>Here's the original image straight out of the camera just resized. <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/192114.jpg" alt=""> <BR> <BR>First, a 100% crop of the original image no changes made. <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/192115.jpg" alt=""> <BR> <BR>the same crop after "de-fogging" using USM set at 20%, radius of 60, and 0 threshold <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/192116.jpg" alt=""> <BR> <BR>the same crop shrunk to about 30% of original size (which is about how much I shrink originals before posting). Saturation increased 5%, brightness and contrast adjusted slightly, and sharpened using 160%, radius 0.2, threshold 2. <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/192117.jpg" alt=""> <BR> <BR>And finally the pic as I would crop it for posting using the same settings as above. <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/87667/192118.jpg" alt=""> <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR>Jarret why don't you post a pic or two after running them thru a similar workflow and see how they look. <BR> <BR>

Bill, <BR> <BR>Thanks for the info. I'll give it a shot and post something out here. You're photo looked pretty darn good straight out of the camera! <img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/clipart/happy.gif" border=0>

Nice Work Bill!