Messages

1

Sports / Re: Cars cars cars (and some bikes)

« on: May 16, 2013, 07:52:10 PM »

I always find it difficult to 'See' the shot when it comes to the close up detail shots of cars and bikes.

I look at some of the great shots on here of all these cars and bikes and say to myself "What a great shot; I don't think I would have ever 'seen' that.

Anyways, here is a recent attempt.

Nothing special.  My mother-in-law is selling this bike and I decided to be a little creative with it.  I recently bought the 50 1.8 so I could learn to shoot with a shallow depth of field, which I tried to employ here.

I would appreciate any feedback to improve the results. 

I'll start with my own critique.

I have a bunch of reflections in the shots - me, the neighbor's house, trees, etc.  Is this something where you pull out a diffuser, etc to block the reflection - or pick a different location?

I'm guessing reflectors would enhance some lighting.

I'm not thrilled with the bokeh on this lens, but then it's a cheap lens so I wasn't expecting the world.

I'm wondering if I am picking the best point of focus in the shots and the best perspective, in terms of making it interesting.  I know there is no right or wrong answers in the world of creative, but there are maybe best practices.

Having a shallow depth of field for OOF is something I never had before, and I really like playing around with it.  For these types of shots I think it makes them much more interesting.

2

Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: Advice on 1st flash

« on: May 14, 2013, 09:31:59 PM »

I have the 430 on my personal camera and we have one I use on our work camera as well (both T3i).

Very satisfied with it.  I've played around a bit with using it off camera at home and at work.  Definitely trial and error with the results, but it is a really nice option to have.  They give you a little plastic base to mount the flash on when using it off camera.  Combined with being able to twist the head left or right as well as rotating it upward, it gives you many options.

The only other flash I can compare it to is the Vivitar on my old T70, but nonetheless, I like it very much.

If you've never used an external flash, I think you'll be pleased with the results compared to the pop up flash.  The T70 did not have a built in flash and I always thought it would be so nice to have the option of not carrying around the external flash.  My 300D had the built in flash and I used it that way for 7 years before I bought the T3i and then used that for another couple of months before buying the 430 because I thought I didn't need it.  Now that I have it, I almost never use the built in flash.  I now don't see the lack of a built in flash on the bigger bodies as a drawback because I much prefer the external flash regardless of size.  It just produces better results and the recycle times is much faster than the built in.

For what it's worth, my co-worker has been around photography along time (not a pro but an active participant in the local photography club which recently hosted a convention in Niagara Falls), and he was the one that picked out the flash after comparing it to the other Canon flashes and considering our needs (our company produces large industrial furnaces that we photograph - up to 60 ft long - mostly for use in manuals and other uses).

I'm sure the 580 and 600 are even nicer, but I don't think you'll be disappointed with the 430.

I for one would rather have that then a used unit unless you could feel really confident in what you were buying.

3

Lenses / Re: What other lenses for my 60D

« on: May 14, 2013, 01:22:16 AM »

Still deciding...

Looked through your pictures of the hotel.

If this is typical, looking at your lens settings, I'd say the 30 mm will not be wide enough.

Also, I'm not sure how beneficial a fast aperture will be for those shots as you will be sacrificing depth of field.

Are you shooting handheld?  Personally I would use a tripod for those shots but given the environment you may not be willing to carry a tripod.  A monopod is a great option for such situations.

It all depends on the look you are after, but for that type of shooting I would want a long exposure, long enough to require a tripod.  For some, HDR would be ideal (again, depends on what you are after).  I don't know the screen name, but there is someone on here that shoots incredible HDRs of old buildings like that hotel, but they are out west somewhere.

If you are shooting handheld, then probably the Canon 17-55 f2.8 IS.  You definitely want IS if you will be shooting handheld.  The 2.8 might still get you enough depth of field and will buy a little over a slower lens.  If you are shooting on a tripod then the fast lens and IS don't mean as much.

Also, the slow focusing in low light shouldn't be much of an issue with architecture as you can manually focus it since they are static objects.

Another thought is that I don't think the Sigma 30 mm is stabilized and most of your exposures were below 1/50 sec meaning you would need a tripod (or monopod).

4

EOS Bodies / Re: Recommendations for XTi replacement

« on: May 07, 2013, 07:15:52 PM »

Sorta sounds like the 6D is what you really want.

However, I would suggest buying your primes now and wait to see what the bodies do.

Adding 3 primes to your collection will be like a new camera anyways.  It will open up a new world (assuming you are not shooting with a fast prime now).

You'll have plenty to keep busy learning the new lenses to be bothered worrying about the body.

That body is more than capable.  I was using a 300D up until last year.

5

Lenses / Re: Need advice taking pictures of jewellery

« on: May 03, 2013, 12:34:22 PM »

I am guessing that the reason some images were darker than others is because you are using macro which sounds like an auto setting.  The camera is likely reading the light different and changing exposure accordingly.  You can confirm by looking at the data in the images.  This is why I think manual settings are better for such things.

6

Lenses / Re: Need advice taking pictures of jewellery

« on: May 03, 2013, 12:28:24 PM »

I'm NOT a professional, but let me say this much.

I would use a tripod for sure.  Typically this means turning off the IS as it can I believe actually cause issues on a tripod, but either way you won't need it.

Use the camera's timer to fire the trigger unless you have a remote trigger.

Not sure about the 1100D, but on some cameras you can minimize or select a timer of 2 secs instead of the standard 10 that might become tiresome.

The blue cast I believe is a white balance issue.  Others will likely advise better as I'm not that well versed here, but your owners manual will explain how to set it manually on your camera.  Again, not sure about the 1100D, but you can typically save these white balance settings as custom settings so you don't have to redo it in the future.  I am guessing that what the ring is sitting on is white.

I would advise manual focus.  I believe (and others will hopefully agree/disagree) that what you want is to focus at the front of the object, so in your examples it would be the diamond.  You would then manually set the aperture to something small like f11, but you'll need to experiment.  The small aperture (bigger number) will give more depth of field.  I would try to keep your ISO low, an with a tripod this should not be an issue as you can use long shutter speeds.

One thing to keep in mind, the light is not likely changing (particularly if you use artificial light), so once you find the right combination of shutter speed, ISO and aperture, it should be good for everything for that shoot.

One more thing.  Again, don't know about the 1100D, but on the T3i I use live view for these sort of things and it will let you magnify the image 10X to confirm focus prior to shooting.  I find this much easier on static objects.

7

Software & Accessories / Re: How to achieve this amazing editing effect ?

« on: April 24, 2013, 01:37:13 AM »

That photo is taken by Rarindra Prakarsa. Love his work. You can find more info about his style in Facebook and photo.net I believe. I think there are tutorials and articles explaining his workflow, I can't remember where i saw it but google can help you there.

As has been noted, this photo is not the work of Rarindra, but check out this work from his site and compare it to the original image from Arment.  In particular look at the trees between the boat and the background.

http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=9970997

8

Lenses / Re: 24-105L or 70-200L f/2.8?

« on: April 12, 2013, 12:50:10 AM »

Judging by your equipment list at the bottom of your posts, it looks as though you may have gone ahead with the 24-105.

Just an FYI, Canon has the 70-200 f2.8 (non IS) refurbished for under $1000.  I don't recall if that was one of their 15% off sales or not, but just something to keep in mind for when you are ready for that purchase.

9

Lenses / Re: $1000 budget, need lens recommendation for Canon t1i

« on: April 12, 2013, 12:37:36 AM »

Have you thought of upgrading the body? Like getting the t2i or t4i?

Given the budget, I don't think that is the best bang for the buck.  I don't believe there is that much of an advantage to the current crop sensors over the T1i.  The budget is better spent on better glass/flash/tripod.

10

Lenses / Re: $1000 budget, need lens recommendation for Canon t1i

« on: April 12, 2013, 12:31:28 AM »

I primarily agree with Neuroanatomist, in general terms.

What I would suggest is to look at the photos you already have and look at the general focal lengths you are using.  You also said the ISO performance wasn't satisfactory.  What f stop would bring your ISO into a better range?  If you need to go wider than 50 mm frequently and f2.8 will be fast enough, then the Tamron 17-50 is likely the best bet because of the versatile range.  If f2.8 is not enough, you will need a prime and need to have a solid understanding of what range or ranges.  This, of course, assumes either you will be shooting these low light shots handheld and/or you are shooting people (who have the audacity to move) in these low light shots (it sounds like that is the case).  Otherwise, slow glass isn't a big deal with a tripod. 

The 50 mm are wonderful, but you mentioned tight indoor shoots so that may not work as well as you hope.

11

Lenses / Re: Canon 70-200mm F/4L or Canon 70-300 f/4-5.6 USM or other suggestions?

« on: March 24, 2013, 12:49:14 AM »

+1

I have the 70-200 2.8IS and I have borrowed the F4 version for comparison.  The L series glass is great and I highly suggest it.  If you need the additional reach, you could pick up the 1.4 Teleconverter when you have the budget and get out to 280 @ f5 which is pretty close to 300 f5.6.

Wouldn't it be 280 @ f5.6 (f4 x 1.4 = f5.6)? 

12

Lenses / Re: Canon 70-200mm F/4L or Canon 70-300 f/4-5.6 USM or other suggestions?

« on: March 21, 2013, 10:52:10 PM »

had a Rebel T1i before this camera...I've taken some beautiful photos from this camera, but the shutter speed was annoying at times as well as other features I did not have.  I take a lot of photos of babies and toddlers, and wanted a super fast shutter speed   

Not sure I understand this.  I have the T3i and up until last year I had the 300D.  I have a 4 and 6 year old son and daughter and now a 1 1/2 year old super energetic dog.  I have yet to find the shutter speed to be a limitation.  Buffer depth in RAW, noise when I push the ISO and constantly fighting for more light (and pushing the ISO) yes, shutter speed, no.  I have the opposite problem.  It all depends on the type of photos your shooting, which brings me to my point.

Take a look at what you are shoot and what you want to be shooting.  If you are routinely shooting at high shutter speeds, then the IS won't be of much benefit.  You need to be 1 over the focal length on FF, so with the 70-200 F4 non IS, that would be 1/200 of a sec on the long end.  If your needs will be at or above that, technically you should be fine without IS.  The beauty of the 5DIII is that you can push the ISO higher than I can and get favorable results if you do find yourself in lower light.

No doubt the IS is better (the 70-200 f2.8 IS is even better, but it's $2200), it's what I want.  But I have lower ISO capabilities until I upgrade (lenses first for me) and I am routinely in low light when I use longer glass.  In your situation you may not need it.  Besides, the $600 you'll save is a good chuck toward a 24-105 and if you do decide later to get the IS, the non IS will hold most of it's value.  Just check used prices on them.

The other thought is that if you do decide on the 70-300L, the slower aperture won' t be an issue with the high ISO capability of the 5DIII and what sounds like good lighting that you are shooting in.

With such a snazzy camera, it would be almost criminal to saddle it with a 70-300 non L, but if your so inclined I have the highly coveted  75-300 IS that I would gladly trade for your 85 1.8.   

13

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Which camera brand you actively use, other than Canon?

« on: March 14, 2013, 07:29:36 PM »

Panasonic GF3

Great when an DSLR is too big.

[quote
Here are some photos from RX1:
http://albums.phanfare.com/isolated/nkq0gb6m/1/5981795
[/quote]

Cool pictures.  We have a similar place in Rochester, NY called the Museum of Play.

I took my GF3 there and it was the perfect fit.  I didn't want to haul around a DSLR while chasing two kids.  The GF3 comfortably fits in the pocket of a light coat, even with a zoom lens.  It focuses relatively quick and the live view makes it easy to take pictures at odd angles.  I saw a lot of parents walking around with DSLR and I did not regret my choice.  On other trips I took the DSLR and it was all good, too, but for those types of events I really think the mirrorless cameras are great.  I use my DSLR far more, but I love the GF3 when you don't want a big camera.

My co-worker just went on a two week trip.  He has a Nikon DSLR and a Olympus DSLR as well as 2 MFT Olympus cameras.  He took the MFTs and one of the DSLRs and said he never pulled out the DSLR.  He loves his MFTs.

A stat in the recent photo mag said something to the effect of 2/3 (or something) of MFT owners have DSLRs.  Not sure if those are folks using the MFTs as a second camera as myself or those migrating away.  I took it as the first scenario when I read it, but in retrospect, could be either I suppose.

14

Lenses / Re: Buy EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS II now or wait until September?

« on: March 13, 2013, 07:32:36 PM »

I think the 55-250 is a worthwhile upgrade over the 75-300 for at least three reasons: IS, sharper and better images, and a newer design. I

To be clear, my 75-300 has IS, but I believe the IS on the 55-250 is better as it is of a newer design.

So the advantage might also be how sharp it is by comparison.  They are so cheap, it seems like a good hold over lens compared to living with what I have.  I also wonder if the 55 might be a little nicer as the 75 is often too long.

I imagine the slow focus and focus hunting will be no better.

Does anyone know of any comparisons between these two in terms of sharpness?  The 75-300 IS isn't on Photozone or the Digital Picture.

Thanks for the replies!

15

Lenses / Re: Buy EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS II now or wait until September?

« on: March 12, 2013, 08:16:51 PM »

I would suggest you have a look at the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS. It is the best "non L" telephoto that Canon makes other than their "DO" version which is quite a bit more expensive. If you have the money, the f/4L IS is a fantastic lens.

I'm aware of the 70-300 IS as well and have read good things about it.  I didn't mention it because I thought I was throwing too many lenses out there.

I guess I wonder if the 70-300 IS would be enough of an upgrade over the 75-300 IS to make it worthwhile as opposed to living with it until I can get the L with IS.  Would it be a better choice than the 70-200 w/o IS?  I suppose it depends where and how you are going to use it.  Better optics and faster focusing vs IS. 

Too often I find myself needing more light.  I'm finding it better to push the ISO since I prefer noise to blur, but noise is not so great either.  The real answer would be the 70-200 F2.8 IS and even better with FF, but that's more down the road.

Like I said, I'll likely get the 85 1.8 first since it will offer good range and fast optics that will fill alot of my needs and function as good portrait lens as well.

I'm constantly learning how to pull more and more from my equipment as my skills grow, so it's all good.  Even the best equipment has it's limitations.  The challenge is how to make the most of it and have fun doing it!