For me, the vast difference between film and digital

[Allen Mead]

I have been compairing the photos that I took at the Catalunya WRC in both 2004 and 2005.

In 2004, I used an EOS300 35mm film SLR with a 70-300mm packaged lens. A lot of them seem over exposed or blured or I had been too keen to squeeze the trigger and not got the car in the frame as I would of liked. Admittedly, these shots were taken using the point and squirt 'sports mode' on the camera. I had only just got into taking photos, especially on cars.

In 2005, I embraced new technology in the form of my EOS 20D and my 70-200mm f4 L series lens. Ok, some shots are still blured and I haven't quite got the cars in the frame as I'd liked, but, I think that my picture taking has imporved vastly. I'm shooting things in JPEG for the mo until I can purchase a few more cards, then I will swap over to RAW.

Take a look here; http://www.allen-mead.co.uk/


Let me know what you think.

[Hubble]

Some nice images there Allan, but I think you would be better displaying less images, as many of them are just of the same car 2-3 metres further along the road. Concentrate more on quality than quantity. Also when shooting cars with lights on, shoot either in manual or use the exposure lock button, that way the images will not be under exposed as with the Scooby ones. I have used 20D's for the past year, and been very pleased with the results.

I wish you luck with the 20D, PM me if you want any pointers at all.

[DWA]

I would agree with Phil "Hubble" , about quality rather than quantity, and using exposure lock when car headlights are on, or at least play with image in Photoshop to get a more balanced exposure. Regarding JPEG versus RAW for the future suggest that you might like to read the thread about this currently in discussion. My own view is that RAW is not required for 99% of shots of motorsport. Just increases costs, both in £ for storage and time to process.

[Allen Mead]

Thanks for the comments guys, much appreciated!