January 26, 2015, 03:50:17 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 - keithfullermusic

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 26
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D3 focus for birds in flight
« on: October 26, 2012, 04:37:24 PM »
That's a good question - last week I tried some birds in flight (not really my main interest but thought I'd try something slightly different) and was using the 5D3 with 300mm f2.8 IS and Kenko DG 300 1.4x TC, 9-point expansion, silent shutter continuous drive and AF tracking mode 5. I didn't take too many shots but didn't get any keepers. I put this down to:

1. Need more practice - I normally do portraits/city/landscape type stuff so flying things are harder for me.
2. Using the 1.4x TC maybe slows the communication to the lens meaning it isn't responding quickly enough using AF mode 5. I used the same body/lens/TC at an airshow and AF mode 2 after reading about airshow photography on another site. Whilst I did get some very good shots, overall I wasn't impressed by that tracking mode for aircraft (prop and jet).
3. Uh....something less obvious.  ???

Hopefully our friends on this site will share their wisdom soon!

i would not use silent mode for this.  it just slows down the shot.  i only use silent when i'm close to animals or at a quiet event.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D3 focus for birds in flight
« on: October 26, 2012, 04:36:04 PM »
this depends:

if there is a busy background i usually use zone or center expansion, but typically zone.

if i am shooting birds with the sky as the background i just use straight out full auto focus.  this works flawlessly in those cases because the only thing for the camera to focus on is the bird.

Canon General / Re: Canon Can't Even Make a Billion Dollars Anymore
« on: October 26, 2012, 12:56:12 PM »
everyone thinks that they are a business expert all of a sudden now that these numbers came out.

one of the biggest problems is that Canon is based in a country whose currency is rising compared to the markets where they sell products.  that means that even if they sold the exact same amount of everything, and spent the exact same amount they would still pull in less revenue and less profit.  on top of that, the world economy is down which means less disposable for most consumers and less business to business sales.  together, that equals less sales.  to top it all off, smartphones are completely eating up the point and shoot market.

people - canon is not taking huge hits because you think the new 5d cost too much.  its not because you think the 24-70 costs too much.  these prices are very equal to what their predecessors were in terms of japanese currency - but now the rest of the world's is worth less compared to what it was, so things cost more.  also, canon sells a lot more than just 5Diii's and 24-70 ii's...

1D X Sample Images / Re: 1dx + 400mm 2.8 @Axalp Switzerland
« on: October 24, 2012, 11:14:21 PM »
Those are some of the sweetest shots I've seen of planes.  Ever.

Lenses / Re: New 50mm f/1.4 lenses are metal throughout?
« on: October 22, 2012, 06:14:20 PM »
Why does everyone want a heavy metal lens that would cost like 3 times as much?

i'm just going to repeat what everyone has been saying - faster shutter speeds.

1/400-1/500 is not fast enough for action.  you want at least 1/1000 for things like football (at least).

the shots don't look like the lens missed - they just have motion blur.

Mine quits all the effing time, so I don't even try it anymore. I have the latest eos utility and I'm running Lion, which is up-to-date.

I've heard amazing things about this - http://www.cheetahstand.com/servlet/the-38/Cheetah-Qbox-24/Detail

If I end up getting a softbox, this is the one I'll be getting.

And, why would you not want to buy anything from this guy?!?!

Lenses / Re: Canon should change name to Coma
« on: October 10, 2012, 12:00:50 PM »
I'm on an iPad, so I'm not going to go look at all those sites right now - i will later when I get to a computer.

However, are you saying that all canons are total cram at sky shots?  I find that hard to believe because I've seen some INCREDIBLE ones from the 5D ii & iii.  I've also seen the most amazing time lapses ever shot on the mark ii.

I'm not trying to dismiss what you're saying, but to me it sounds like you're stating that no canon camera can take a good star shot.

5D MK III Sample Images / Re: Ultra long daytime exposures - 5D mkiii
« on: October 09, 2012, 09:41:28 PM »
what gel are you using?  brand?  price?  link? 

these have always been some of my favorite types of shots, but i ain't spending 80 bazillion dollars on a square piece of glass from Lee (don't care how good it is).

Lenses / Re: A final goodbye to my 50mm f1.4 lens
« on: October 09, 2012, 03:02:57 PM »
While the 24-70 ii seems like an amazing lens, it does not replace the 50 1.4.  When I have that thing on I tend to stick around 1.6-2.2.  This is for the nice bokeh which 2.8 cannot replicate (unless you are super zoomed).  Also, 1.4 vs 2.8 is completely different in low light.

I'm not saying I wouldn't rather have the 24-70ii, but it does not replace the 50 1.4, but I can see how the 35L does.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Once you go "L" you'll never go back....
« on: October 04, 2012, 12:58:32 PM »
The 50mm 1.4 & 100mm 2.8 have got to be some of the sweetest lenses out there, and neither are L.  But, there are no other non-L lenses that I have my eye on.

i shot a wedding a few weeks ago with the 5d3.  the lighting was terrible and i pretty much lived at f/2.8, ISO 6,400-10,000 while using a flash - and the pics turned out fantastic.

of course i would have preferred ISO 100, but it wasn't a possibility.  It's better to have slightly noisy shots that are properly exposed and sharp (no motion blur) than to have the opposite.


I would recommend against renting a camera that you've never used before for this wedding - especially one that is so different from your 7D.  The last thing you want to be doing is worrying about settings and focus systems and wondering how the images will actually look once you put them on your computer.

My first week of using the 5D3 was a big learning experience.  I found the ISO's I could use in different lightings in order to get good looking shots.  I figured out which AF systems I wanted to go with during different situations.

For the first week I had it, I was getting held up thinking about settings.  After a few months, it became second nature and I don't have to spend any extra time fiddling with buttons because I know what things will look like, and I know where the buttons are.

Also, the metering is a little different on the 5D3 than other Canons that I have used.  I find that it tends to underexpose, and the histogram confirms this.  If there is harsh contrast you will almost always have to bump up the exposure compensation nearly +1.  It's like the 5D3 won't allow for ANY blown highlights when set to 0 - not even a single street light.  This might not sound like a lot, but unless you're shooting in full manual all the time be ready for this.

Then there is the problem with lenses.  I know people might yell at me about this, but the nifty 50 looked like garbage on FF in certain situations.  If there is any harsh contrast you are going to get HORRIBLE chromatic aberration - and I do mean horrible (even when stopped down).  It was beyond repair in LR.  I loved my nifty-50 on crop, but I ended getting rid of it and got the 1.4 instead and it's like a different galaxy.  My point is that at least one of your lenses will act very different because more of the glass is included in your picture.  I used the 24-70 on it for a wedding I just did, and I made sure to spend about 3-4 days with it before bringing it on a gig - and I'm glad I did because I found some sweet spots after trying everything.  I wouldn't have been able to do this if I just tried it for the first time that day.

I remember having a conversation with a friend after I had my camera for about a month, and what I literally talked about was how I would have been in deep dookie if I rented a 5D3 and used it for a wedding before spending a few weeks with it.  I would have missed moments fooling with things, I would have had blurry or noisy shots because I wouldn't have been sure what ISO's would look good in certain lightings, and certain shots would come out like garbage because I would not have been taking into account how my lenses act on FF.

If you feel comfortable with a new camera, different layout, different focus systems, different capabilities, and literally something that makes your pictures look different (crop vs. FF) then by all means rent it - it's an incredible camera.  But my honest suggestion would be to either use it for at least a few days and try it in just about every setting you can think of before the wedding or just stick with your already sweet 7D and just rent some more glass.  I'm sure you will end up just renting it, and I'm also sure that you'll get some amazing shots - but you'd double the amazing shots if you used it for a week or two before taking it into battle.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 26