April 17, 2014, 06:51:17 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
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.

Just about to pull the trigger on a 5D Mk III to replace my 40D as main body.
I currently have a couple of Sandisk Extreme 60mb/s 8gb cards.
I was thinking of getting a 32GB for the 5D Mk III. And hope to use it for both stills and video capture.
So do I just get a Sandisk Extreme 60mb/s 32gb card or would i be better advised to pay extra now for a Extreme Pro 90mb/s ? Is the extra cost really worth it? Will I be dissapointed with the performance of the 60mb/s cards? Or how about going all out and getting a Lexar Professional 1000x card? Are these as reliable as Sandisk?

So many questions  :)

You can't go wrong with either SanDisk or Lexar for CF cards (I own several of both brands). Having said that if you can afford to I'd highly recommend investing in the fastest cards you can (preferably the Lexar 1000x... and it looks like B&H has a pair of Lexar 1000x 16GB cards on sale currently for under $150) as you'll appreciate their ability to quickly clear the camera's buffer.


+1 for the statement, but -1 for research: Unfortunately the 6d has *not* the 1dx/5d3 center af point (double-cross @f2.8), it doesn't even have the 60d/650d/... single-cross point) - it's the same as the 5d2!

It actually has a cross type sensor with improved sensitivity to -3EV compared to the 5D2's -2EV. So it is not the same as the 5D2.  Until someone gets their hands on the camera and compares the AF who can say how it will perform?

It will also be interesting to see if it has the improved focus control for the new lenses that Roger has documented. 

This is a feature of the 5D3 and 1DX that Canon's marketing departmnet is failing to exploit.  With the new lenses the phase detect AF of the camera is as accurate as the contrast detect.   

Yes, the center point is a cross type with sensitivity from -3 to 18 EV... however the other 10 are not cross type and have sensitivity of +0.5 to 18 EV. Granted we haven't seen the performance of it yet, but looking back at Canon's previous product history this tells me that while the center point may be better than the 5D2 everything else will be worse. Even the 60D has 9 all cross type points including a center double cross type point.

Honestly, I think Canon has some big issues right now in their lineup across the entire field... the 6D of course being the biggest issue.

Logically I think most people would expect two things when it comes to what products a company offers and how they are priced...

1. As pricing increases in the product line so do the features and capabilities of the products being sold.
2. Products are typically made to suite a certain consumer market group (consumer market group could be skill level or even the the type of photography/environment that the camera is suited for).

Currently Canon doesn't do either of those. For example lets look at X-Sync Speed...

60D - 1/250 sec
7D - 1/250 sec
6D - 1/180 sec
5D3 - 1/200 sec
1DX - 1/250 sec

There's no reason for the 5D3 and the 6D to have lower X-Sync Speeds than the 60D. Another example AF points...

60D - 9 points, all cross type, center double cross type (0 to 20 EV)
7D - 19 points, all cross type, center double cross type (-0.5 to 18 EV)
6D - 11 points, center cross type (center point -3 to 18 EV, the rest +0.5 to 18 EV)
5D3 - 61 points, up to 41 cross type (-2 to 18 EV)
1DX - 61 points, up to 41 cross type (-2 to 18 EV)

So the 6D's center point works to -3 EV, but the rest operate a +0.5 EV and they're not even cross type (worse than 60D)... ?

Build quality appears to show a similar trend with the 7D looking like it's more robust than the 6D... and the 7D has a 100% viewfinder and a pop-up flash.

I'm not sure who the 6D really is for. The 7D is overall a better camera on paper for an advanced amateur. The 6D has a very basic AF system (possibly the same or marginally better than the 5D2); has a slower continuous frame rate and max shutter speed than the 60D and 7D; isn't made to withstand extreme environments; doesn't have a extremely high MP sensor; doesn't sync with studio strobes above 1/180 sec; and the list continues.

The only things it does have on the 60D and 7D appears to be ISO, Digic 5+, built-in WiFi, and built-in GPS (you could say MPs as well 20.1 vs 18, but the difference is so small what does it really amount to).

The 6D seems like a product that will trick people who don't know much about cameras into buying a more expensive product that they think is better, but really isn't.

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D 1DX joystick problem with sports
« on: September 19, 2012, 10:26:10 AM »
As someone who owns Nikon and Canon gear I was very happy when Canon added the joystick selection for AF points (like Nikon does) as I found Canon's old selection method slow and confusing, but it did have some issues. First, on 1D bodies or gripped bodies the joystick wasn't accessible when shooting in the vertical postion up until the 5DIII and the 1DX. Now that we have two joysticks for each shooting position my only real issues with the joysticks are...

1. Size and Sensitivity - On both my 5DII and now on the 5DIII I find that the button sometimes centers vs moves in the intended direction I'm trying to select (especially when trying to move in a diagonal direction). I'd imagine making the button slightly larger might help with this.

2. Single AF Point Movement Per Button Press - Currently if I want to move up three AF points I have to hit up on the joystick three times. This introduces more opportunities for issue #1 to happen (press the wrong direction or worse accidentally return the AF point to the "home" position). Instead it would be nice if you could press and hold the joystick in a direction and your selection would continue to move until you released the joystick in addition to the current one button press method.

Pages: [1] 2 3