March 01, 2015, 07:34:14 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - dshipley

Pages: [1] 2 3
Canon General / Re: What is your Least Used Piece of Gear?
« on: August 11, 2014, 10:59:26 AM »
Fun car and great for hauling gear to shoots...

All of this...
• ThinkTank Airport International v2 (fully loaded)
• Profoto D1 Air 500/500/1000 Kit
• PCB 2x Einstein e640+VML Kit
• Large Tripod & 2x Light Stands in Softcase
• Laptop Bag
• 2x Scrim Jims (frames + panels)
• 5x C-Stands in Hardcase
• Sandbags (multiple)
• Dufflebag (full of lighting modifiers/reflectors/gaff tape/etc)
• RocknRoller Multi-Cart

Easily fits...

Very impressive cargo capacity and AWD to boot!

Also has a twin turbo v6 and a manual transmission.

Canon General / Re: What is your Least Used Piece of Gear?
« on: August 11, 2014, 10:15:49 AM »
The worst so far was when I brought home my current car which was a somewhat extravagant purchase.  I ended up saying it was her birthday present knowing full well that she'd never drive it.  She was all excited but as I thought - a few days of dealing with two seats, limited trunk space, and really harsh suspension took care of her desire to drive the car.  It's been my 'daily driver' ever since ;D

Don't keep us in suspense ... what did you buy?
A Porsche, but nothing fancy compared to other members of this forum.  I told my wife I was going to buy something sensible this time around like a Honda Accord or something...but I love cars 8)

Fun car and great for hauling gear to shoots...

All of this...
• ThinkTank Airport International v2 (fully loaded)
• Profoto D1 Air 500/500/1000 Kit
• PCB 2x Einstein e640+VML Kit
• Large Tripod & 2x Light Stands in Softcase
• Laptop Bag
• 2x Scrim Jims (frames + panels)
• 5x C-Stands in Hardcase
• Sandbags (multiple)
• Dufflebag (full of lighting modifiers/reflectors/gaff tape/etc)
• RocknRoller Multi-Cart

Easily fits...

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Adopting a MF system.
« on: July 22, 2014, 10:09:36 AM »
I have been saving my monies for along time to adopt a MF system to replace one of my 5D3's for dedicated Staged Photo usage. I have a budget of 8K to start a system and this is what I liked so far.

What I'd Like out of the system

1. Sync Speed
2. Prolonged Shelf life. (How long can I use it before no Backs work for it or other pitfalls.)
3. Repair & Upkeep Costs
4. Len's Selection vs Pricing
5. ??? Anything else I should consider?

Hasselblad H2D + 39mp Kodak Back + HV90x Viewfinder + 80mm HC F/2.8 - More or less around 8K.

Or should I consider Phase One? They're alittle more pricey though...

Alot of options but I'd like to know what system I should choose.

If you're serious I would contact PhaseOne and see about requesting a demo.

I assume you're considering MF not for pixel count but more for the dynamic range and look the larger sensor provides... if so I suggest you pick up a used kit with an up-to-date body, one good (high sync capable) lens, and a lower MP back. You should be able to pick one up for a reasonable price within your budget and doing so minimizes the risks of moving into MF.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Anyone own both Canon and Nikon
« on: July 22, 2014, 09:51:47 AM »
I've owned/shot both system professionally. Either system is plenty capable and really the biggest factor for landscapes between the two really comes down to Nikon having the 14-24 f/2.8 and the Exmor 36mp sensor while Canon has more TS-E lens options.

Now, if you're only shooting landscapes the 14-24 f/2.8 isn't a huge deal as Canon bodies can use the lens with a lens adapter (I did this many times back when I owned a 5D2 and the 14-24 f/2.8).

So ask yourself the following...

1. How much does the difference between the two sensors matter to you?
2. Do you plan to/would you like to use TS-E lenses? (If so Canon might be the better choice)
3. Do you have any family, close friends, etc that are already invested into one system? (It's always nice have the option to be able to borrow/try out gear if they'll let you).
4. Will you only be shooting landscapes? (If not the 5D3 is, in my opinion, a more well-rounded camera body than the D800/810)

Lenses / Re: Your lenses for weddings?
« on: January 16, 2014, 07:06:58 PM »
(2) 5D3 w/ Grips


And sometimes the 24-70L II

Lenses / Re: I NEED HELP CHOOSING LENSES for mostly video and some photo
« on: November 25, 2013, 07:07:58 PM »
(mostly video and some photo)
I want a prime and a telephoto zoom lens
Im thinking 60D with:
40 MM 2.8 or 50 1.8
and for the telephoto a 70-200 F4 IS or a 70-200 f4 non IS or are there other options for telephotos?
or options for anything else?

What body do you have? From a video perspective, if you don't have one that takes advantage of the STM I'd consider some other options that are more friendly to manually focus. While both the 50 1.8 and 40 2.8 are good little lenses they aren't the greatest to manually focus.

My personal opinion/preference with second/backup bodies is to first and foremost have two bodies that are exactly alike (currently I shoot with gripped 5D3s). I find having two of the exact same cameras a tremendous benefit... Same sensor characteristics, control/button layout, batteries/chargers, menus, etc.

Lenses / Re: When to use a 35mm and 50mm on full frame...
« on: November 01, 2013, 10:59:37 AM »
I use both very often when shooting people & events (quick fyi: the majority of my shooting is with primes and all of my camera bodies are full size, pro or gripped, with full frame sensors). Here's the main factors that I look at when choosing to use one or the other...

Space - If it's crowded and space is tight I typically am using the 35mm more than the 50.

Look - Both of these focal lengths create different looking photos... for example the 50mm will provide more foreground/background compression/separation than a 35mm as it is slightly more telephoto. I find myself gravitating towards the 50mm more (if I have the working space) when shooting portraits of one or two people as, in those circumstances, I typically prefer a more telephoto look. I will say for personal photography (i.e. taking photos of my family activities) if I could only take one lens it would be my 35L as I haven't found a situation in everyday shooting where it couldn't be used to appropriately document/tell a story.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon D610 yes D600 minor upgrade!
« on: October 09, 2013, 09:46:34 AM »
Nikon really dropped the ball with the D800 and D600. Canon have really picked up their game with the 1Dx, 5DIII and 6D. The new 610 specs look very much like a feature plugged responce to the 5DIII and 6D.
For my wedding work, the 5DIII's quiet mode shutter is a game changer. It's good to see Nikon finally catching up with this, as usual a little late to the party. Hello cmos, hello full frame, hello live view, hello movie mode...and now hello quiet shutter mode.

It's not good that a camera in this price bracket and feature bracket has needed a warm over so quickly, but I guess that's a responce from the disasterous sales issues. How long will Nikon owners put up with this type of customer care or poor product development. The lack of silent mode is quite a biggie in the post 5DIII world.

1st DSLR with "live preview" - Olympus E-10
1st DSLR with video recording - Nikon D90

All of the brands have their good and bad. A few that come to mind quickly for Canon...

• RGB color metering - The 1DX finally has it... Nikon has been doing this in all of their cameras since the late 1990s.
• Spot meter via selected AF point - Only in the 1D series... Nikon allows this in all of their bodies.

At the moment Nikon and Canon both produce products that are so closely matched it really is more a matter of photographer preference.

Contests / Re: Gura Gear Giveaway!
« on: December 07, 2012, 04:11:12 PM »
I want to win!

This is a purely hypothetical question but I'm guessing many of you have thought about it once or twice.

I'm curious if anyone else would consider a DSLR designed, dedicated and optimized solely for still photography  worthwhile / desirable?

Quite simply: If you could get better still images from a camera without video, would you buy it?

-  Would you buy it instead of a hybrid model with video features if it produced better still images?
-  Would you buy it if the images were the same but it was designed differently for still photography use?

Does anyone else think compromises might exist in hybrid DSLR designs in order to offer HD video on the same sensor?

-  Would a sensor designed for dedicated still photography perhaps offer better specs, IQ, sensitivity, speed, [insert other perceived benefit here]?
-  How much better would a dedicated still photography camera perform if it didn't have to produce video as well?
-  Would the CPU, processing and firmware possibly be less complex, more efficient and stable?
-  Would the control layout and ergonomics, menus, etc be easier to use and offer more versatility and/or control?
-  Is it possible that video features have delayed R&D while engineers work out new challenges due to the hybrid designs?
-  Do you think video increases the price of the camera?  Is it logical to think a dedicated still camera might cost slightly less while still offering better images?

Just thought I would throw it out there to chew on.  Might make an interesting discussion.  Thanks for your time.

Cameras dedicated solely to photographic image quality already exist... they're called Medium Format DSLRs.

If we're talking about 35mm (Full Frame) and smaller DSLRs you're still looking at cameras that are optimized for photography over video. So while current DSLR sensors do allow video they do so without making any concessions to photographic quality. There are many ways that sensors in current DSLRs could be optimized specifically for video capture, but doing so would lower the sensors photography advantages.

As many other people have mentioned I would also suggest picking up the 5D2 over the 5D1 for the added benefits it provides.

You mentioned wanting to pick up a 70-200 f/2.8L IS, but you might also consider selling a few of your current lenses as your focal lengths will change when moving to full frame. Lets take a look at what you currently have and the focal lengths that they are on your T3...

28 f/1.8 (~45mm)
50 f/1.4 (~80mm)
100 f/2.8L IS Macro (~160mm)
24-105 f/4L (~38-168mm)

You might not be satisfied with the quality of the 28 and the 50 on a full frame camera as your current T3 only is using the center of the lens (image quality tends to be best in the center of a lens). If you're shooting portraits and landscapes and prefer zooms you might consider selling all your lenses except the 100 f/2.8L IS Macro and buying a used 24-70 f/2.8L or if you don't need f/2.8 you could always just sell the 28 and the 50 and pick up a used 70-200 f/4L IS.

EOS Bodies / Re: How often do you go through a body? Why do you upgrade?
« on: November 01, 2012, 09:45:43 AM »
I upgrade/buy gear based on a number of things...

1. What I'm primarily shooting
2. If the quality of my images are being limited by the item
3. If the item will improve my productivity (time=money)
4. If maintaining/repairing the item becomes more expensive than investing in a new item
5. Product update cycles/life cycles/price cycles

My Body History:

2005 - Nikon D50
2006 - Nikon D70s/Nikon D100
2007 - Nikon D70s/Nikon D100
2008 - Nikon D3/Nikon D70s
2009 - Nikon D3/Nikon D70s
2010 - Nikon D3/Nikon D70s
2011 - Canon 5D2/Nikon D3/Nikon D70s
2012 - Canon 5D3/Nikon D3/Nikon D70s

Currently I use the 5D3 (gripped) as my primary body, the D3 when I need speed, and I don't really use the D70s (emergency backup).

Lenses / Re: What lenses do you own?
« on: October 16, 2012, 04:07:03 PM »
1. Lenses (I'll just list my Canon lenses):
  • 35 f/1.4L - I love this lens. Great for almost any kind of photography especially where you need to capture a subject along with the environment.
  • 85 f/1.8 - Great portrait lens and performs wonderfully for its price. Is one of my favorite focal lengths, however, since buying the 135L I find I use it less and less.
  • 135 f/2L - My primary portrait lens and by far one of the best lenses in terms of value. It performs exceptionally well.

Next on my list is the 50 f/1.2L as I'm getting tired of renting it.

2. I've been "into" photography for almost 8 years and have been working as a professional for 6 years.

3. Advice:
  • Shoot and critique or have someone critique your work often (never stop learning)
  • Equipment doesn't make a photographer, but the right equipment can make a job easier
  • Buy only the equipment you NEED, rent everything else
  • Network, get to know and learn from other creative people in your area
  • Make mistakes, just don't make them more than once

That is why "most" shoot raw. so they can adjust everything in post.
Same is true for video if raw is a option then there is no need for cinestyles.
This is not true.  Red and the Blackmagic cinema cameras shoot in RAW and they also shoot very flat.  I am interested in a knowledgable answer to this question too, as I want to expand the dynamic range of my DSLRs.

Short Answer: The appearance or look of RAW files are always the result of some kind of software or hardware processing. It is completely up to the processing of said hardware or software that determines how the image/video looks.

All RAW file types are different (some more than others and some less than others), but in both still and video RAW files contain the uncompressed or compressed Bayer Sensor Data along with some other items (metadata related to camera settings, type, etc). In order to see a preview from either requires demosaicing of the Bayer Sensor Data. So depending on demosaicing process (along with any other processes that are carried out along with it... white balancing, noise reduction, etc) you end up with an actual image (or preview).

RAW files from still cameras tend to have a processed JPEG within the RAW file wrapper for fast previewing purposes. So your camera that has essentially provided the demosaicing and other processing for previewing on the back of the camera. This is why changing your Picture Style while shooting RAW will still change what the preview image looks like on the back of the camera. Also, once you open your RAW image in software the software is providing the demosaicing and other processing to render the preview you see on screen.

RAW files from video cameras typically don't have transcoded previews within the RAW file wrapper for fast previewing and therefore require some sort of transcoding to preview. When previewing the footage on camera the camera is again doing the work while software does this if previewing on a computer.

Pages: [1] 2 3