December 22, 2014, 06:09:05 PM

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 - pwp

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 109
31
Technical Support / Re: Do I Need $ 634 US Dollars Light meter ?
« on: October 19, 2014, 12:52:51 AM »
Call me crazy, but if you are shooting digital, the need for an accurate meter is much less even in studio, because you can shoot, review, adjust, 10 times in 2 minutes. 
And you can probably pick up a used meter on ebay for $20-50 that will get you within a half stop of the high end meter you are looking at.
And last, even a super-duper high end meter is not going to give you a perfect exposure because we all have some personal taste in what we want to see. Are you shooting a scary Halloween scene, where you want it extra dark?  Toothpaste commercial, where it has to be extra brute etc? 

On the other hand is this the last piece of the puzzle in $100K studio where you intend to make a living or enjoy your retirement?  Is this going to provide the inspiration you need to shoot that piece of art that will hang in a gallery and earn a ton a $$?  Go for it.
You're crazy  ;)

I use an incident light meter a fair bit. Knowing where the 'correct' exposure is for a given lighting situation is really useful, at least for me. It also gives a clearer picture of where the histogram should sit in relation to the latitude of the camera.

When I use my Sekonic meter these days it's usually either during a shoot with seriously technical lighting where increments of 1/10 stop across different parts of the shot are worth being aware of. I also use it to get a quick sense of the shape of a multi flash lighting setup ie exact ratios. You can eyeball it but with a flash meter and an assistant you can get the shape right very quickly.

A flash meter is no longer the ultra-critical item it was in the film-era, but it's still useful item with a permanent place in my bag. Surapon, there are probably a lot of extremely high quality light meters up on eBay/Craigslist/Gumtree as photographers find that they are no longer using them.

-pw

32
Software & Accessories / Re: Hello Windows 10
« on: October 18, 2014, 11:02:34 PM »
This seems like a good opportunity to mention that I loathe Windows 8.1.
I run two workstation-class PC's, identically set up, saving the work out to a server. If one system goes down, I can just swear for a while, roll to my left and keep working with little loss. My top-specced Windows 7 machines were brilliant, lasting over four years. I usually swap over after three years.

The just-built smoking-hot Premiere Pro-ready PC's are Window 8.1. What an awful OS. Clearly Steve Bulmers parting practical joke to the PC users of this nice blue planet. I'm almost certain to write-off a day or two to go back to Win 7. Win 10 sounds like a hugely improved OS, they need to consign Win 8 to history ASAP, back in the naughty corner with Win ME and Vista.

I'm platform agnostic with a two Macs as well as the PC's. OSX is very nice, but it's hard to get anything like the bang for your buck in a Mac compared to a custom built PC. In the unlikely event that Windows 10 is another epic-fail, it could be time to build up business and get a couple of top-specced Mac Pros.

-pw

33
Past OSX updates have given EOS Utility users some grief.
Overall Yosemite looks like a very solid update, especially if you have iOS devices as well.

-pw

34
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D MkII RAW sample images
« on: October 16, 2014, 12:53:18 AM »
Pushing those sample images out may have been a bit of a mistake by DPR. They don't really tell us anything.

I'll be sitting tight waiting for some properly shot and properly processed 7DII RAW files processed with a shipping version of LR or ACR before making judgements. The 7DII is firmly on my shopping list.

-pw

35
EOS Bodies / 7D MkII RAW sample images
« on: October 15, 2014, 06:45:31 PM »
DP Review has updated the 7D MkII samples gallery after they got hold of an early build of ACR 8.7.
Check it out here:
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/7693022340/raw-conversions-added-to-canon-eos-7d-mark-ii-real-world-samples-beta

-pw

36
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 15, 2014, 06:37:56 PM »
Neuroanatomist, here's a "pro" microscope for you: http://phys.org/news/2013-01-three-photon-microscopy-biological-imaging.html
Image the full thickness of a live mouse's cortex! But you must have seen this - I put it up here for the entertainment of other geeks.

Cool stuff!

Kinda my point, though...where is it called 'pro'?  I have scopes costing from $1,000 to $800,000 – none of them are called 'pro microscopes'.   ;)

Must be time to trade-up Dr Neuro...

-pw

37
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 15, 2014, 07:19:18 AM »
Clearly it has to say "pro" in the name of the camera.
So... canon pro-1 must be the only canon pro camera, right?
Canon Pro-1! Whoa! (Rhymes with Pro...) Now there's a killer of a camera. This is embarrassing, but I had the misfortune to know someone whose neighbors brother-in-law actually had one of the ten or so of these cameras that were sold in this country.

-pw

38
Lighting / Re: Flash equipment for Portraits & Events
« on: October 15, 2014, 01:22:35 AM »
I prefer Canon speedlites, but get whatever suits your budget.
Even though I use Profoto studio flash, I've also been using a Canon 580EX (on camera) for many things. I bounce from walls, ceilings, and walls & ceilings (combined). It gives a very natural look.
You're right, skillfully used bounce flash can look just like available light.
It's simple really, whatever you aim your flash at becomes the light-source.
Most offices have low, white ceilings.

-pw

39
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 15, 2014, 01:17:15 AM »
I think manufacturers decide which are the pro models, whether it be a set of knives, a camera or laptop (though in the latter they are called business models rather than pro).
Errm, being pedantic for just a moment...I have a Macbook Pro laptop. Must make me a pro! Whoo-hoo!
This is an entertaining thread!  8)   I hope the OP has got something out of it.

-pw

40
Lenses / Re: Is my Canon 24-70 f/2.8 II ok?
« on: October 14, 2014, 11:33:00 PM »
pwp, is your lens also noticeable sharper at the tele end compared to the wide end?
No, not noticeably. With most zooms there will be some variation from the wide to tele extremes.
I'm no pixel peeper, but what I do notice is consistently, usefully sharp shots and happy clients.

-pw

41
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 14, 2014, 08:33:41 PM »
It has to have the word "pro" written on it. If those three letters are missing, it is not a "pro" camera.

That's funny!  ;D

Too many folks here are equating a 'pro camera' with a 'pro photographer'. 

That's right. Put me behind the wheel of a professional race car and I'd probably smash it at the first corner. 1DX ownership will make most photographers deliriously happy but it won't turn anyone into a pro.

Ahhh....the minutia of definitions, it's the pixel peeping of language.

-pw

42
Lenses / Re: Is my Canon 24-70 f/2.8 II ok?
« on: October 14, 2014, 08:17:21 PM »
I agree, you need to get the shutter speeds up for meaningful test results. At the very least, test with the camera on a good tripod and use a cable release.

FWIW my copy of the 24-70 f/2.8II is so good I've sold my 24 f/1.4II, my 35 f/2 and my Sigma 50 f/1.4. It comfortably outperforms these three primes.

-pw

43
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 14, 2014, 06:32:25 PM »
OK, I'll come back to this one. While "the person holding it" is the first and extremely accurate answer, for the OP it's a fairly glib answer too.

I look to a pro-grade camera to be well enough made and have adequate performance benchmarks and ergonomics to not get in the way of the process of achieving great images. And that will vary according to the sort of projects you're likely to take on. When I'm working well, the camera almost disappears from my consciousness and I'm just getting the images.

So while a 5D3 will deliver in spades for an events projects or most commercial projects, it's not necessarily going to suit a sports shooter or news shooter who will look to a 1DX class of camera, one that will hack the daily grind in often robust conditions and in any weather. Some advertising, high-end art and landscape shooters genuinely need medium format. For some the perfect working camera will be a high megapixel Nikon with a tilt-shift lens.

I saw a piece on TV about a news shooter working in Afghanistan who carried four or five iPhones, swapping over the sim card to the next iPhone as the battery ran flat. He could be highly unobtrusive, almost invisible. He could do a quick edit sitting in a car or truck and send images to his news-service instantly, all from the iPhone. So the iPhone is the perfect "pro" camera for him.

-pw


44
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: So what makes a camera a "pro" camera?
« on: October 14, 2014, 06:14:14 PM »
The person holding it.
+1  Hah! These were the exact four words that formed quickly for me as soon as I saw the thread subject line.

-pw

45
EOS Bodies / Re: \
« on: October 13, 2014, 06:37:10 PM »
I would use a Camranger or a DSLR controller along with a tablet if dual pixes is introduced on the next full frame. That screen is still too small, and touching the camera may introduce additional shake (unless you don't care).
This is why I am not screaming about the lack of touch screen and swivel. I wouldn't use them if I had them; just like pop-up flash.

Yep, Camrangers are a great shooting companion for just about any sort of project. Every home should have one!

I felt much the same as you about small touchscreens until I started shooting with the Panasonic GH4. This camera completely changed my viewpoint on touch screens. When it's as well implemented as the GH4 screen, you'd never ever go back.

Much of the time I shoot the GH4 on a rig with a lightweight HDMI external 7 inch monitor. I'm watching the external monitor while making changes on the touchscreen. When you're on a tripod, with a subtle touch, the touchscreen is sensitive enough to not introduce shake. Mostly I use the touch screen between shots to make quick adjustments.

-pw

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 109