October 20, 2014, 07:32:25 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 - brianleighty

Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 18
196
Lenses / Re: 70-200 2.8 + 2x teleconverter vs 100-400
« on: August 29, 2012, 01:39:34 PM »
Thats amazing clarity for a TC, lookat that Iris .  Nice shot

A side benefit of the combo is the extra blur your get a wider apertures by merely adding a TC... since you are now shooting at 400mm, you can get very nice background blurs when you want to.
Just to confirm, you're not saying the 70-200 with 2x TC has a shorter depth of field than the 100-400 at the same aperture and zoom setting correct? Just that 5.6 at 400mm has a smaller depth of field than 5.6 at 200mm correct?

197
Lenses / Canon 35 1.4 with extension tubes
« on: August 28, 2012, 06:20:01 PM »
Does anybody here use the Canon 35 1.4 with extension tubes? I see the lens has a floating system which is supposed to make it better for closer focusing. I realize a Canon 100 2.8 IS is a much better option for true macro work but for the occasional shot, I'm wondering if this might be a possibility for ring shots with a pleasing background.

198
Software & Accessories / Re: Canon Direct Instock Alert Tool
« on: August 24, 2012, 03:27:30 PM »
I noticed that button only two days ago, I am not ready to buy anything, and given the curious ups and downs of the site, I wonder if it will be reliable.
Still, it looks like a improvement, but may nale catching a popular lens difficult, since a thousand potential buyers will be notified once they place a few lenses in stock.
Yeah for some reason their store always seems slow. I'll have to setup more notifications on Canon's side and see which is faster there's or mine. I have a feeling if I changed my script to check every minute then I could easily beat there's but I'm leaving at every 5 minutes for now.

199
Software & Accessories / Re: Canon Direct Instock Alert Tool
« on: August 24, 2012, 01:07:34 PM »
So I decided to go ahead and make this script. Unfortunately right before I was going to release it Bryan Carnathan informed me that Canon now has a notify button on the store. It looks like this button is only on some of their products though. It also appears there is a delay between when a lens is back in stock and when it send out the email. I still need to research this some more but so far my scripts email has been arriving before Canon's. So I figure with Canon having a 15% off sale of their refurbished lenses I'll go ahead and put the link out there and you guys can use it if you want:

I noticed that unlike what Canon normally does of having a discount code, this time they just have it applied automatically which has me wondering if I should also have the script email a person if the price of the product drops. Thoughts anybody?

200
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: What size Softbox
« on: August 23, 2012, 08:42:27 PM »
So I currently have a 580exii and 430 exii and am currently using a gary fong diffuser on each. I'm looking to improve the softness of the light by starting to experiment with a softbox. The one I'm looking at is:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0089JYJ1U/ref=ox_sc_act_title_1?ie=UTF8&smid=AL7LHK6Q9LVTS

Some of the reviews mention it only being good for one person. I'd like to be able to use it with groups as well. Will this not work for that due to the angle of light transmission? Thanks.

Please don't take this the wrong way (I know everyone takes things personally on the internet), but it sounds as if you need to understand a little more about light before you start buying more gear.  Check this link out for some softbox basics.  I only caution you on your purchase because of my own experience; I've bought tons of gear only to learn later that it wasn't what I needed.  Buy once - buy right.

"Softness" is created by increasing the size of the light source relative to your subject.  This is why bare speedlites, no matter how close they are positioned to your subjects, produce hard shadows.  This is why the sun, a tiny spot in the sky, creates really unflattering light when it is at high angles... the shadows just kill portraits.

So, by increasing the size of the light source relative to your subject, you create a softer light that can "wrap" around body features.  This fills in shadows, and creates gradients from light areas to dark areas, which is that "soft" look everyone comes to know from a softbox.  This is why people are saying your 24" softbox may only be good for one person.  At that size you can only place it so far from your subject before it becomes a point source.  With that dimension you wouldn't get much use out of it beyond a key light for headshots, or maybe a gridded rim/effect light in a full body shot.

As I mentioned, a softbox will end up being a point-source if it's far enough away from your subject.  This is why those on-flash softboxes really don't have a significant effect for shooting event candids.  Going from a 2"x3" bare flash, to a 6"x10" soft box, is still a point source when you're 10'-12' from your subject! 

Now, come full circle to your question about lighting groups of people.  I wouldn't worry about softboxes and instead simply worry about trying to light them evenly.  Large reflective, or even shoot through umbrellas, are good for this kind of work.  Don't get me wrong, you can make softboxes work with groups, but like keithfullermusic pointed out, yer gonna need a few of them.

I do a lot of event work for DU, and two Alien Bee B800s with 42" shoot-thru umbrellas do the trick every time...
2012 August Hood Presentation-41 by Daniels at University of Denver, on Flickr
Thanks justsomedude. No offense taken. I understand the whole principle between light softness and distance and size. I'm fairly new to flashes but went to school for video and so the same principles apply for most things including this. The reason I was asking was I wasn't sure if there was an issue with the angle of the box not being wide enough. So it sounds like just about any box will work, I just might have to put it back further (which I understand hardens the light, but it'll still obviously be bigger than my gary fong on camera thus it'll still be an upgrade).

201
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / What size Softbox
« on: August 22, 2012, 09:00:34 PM »
So I currently have a 580exii and 430 exii and am currently using a gary fong diffuser on each. I'm looking to improve the softness of the light by starting to experiment with a softbox. The one I'm looking at is:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0089JYJ1U/ref=ox_sc_act_title_1?ie=UTF8&smid=AL7LHK6Q9LVTS

Some of the reviews mention it only being good for one person. I'd like to be able to use it with groups as well. Will this not work for that due to the angle of light transmission? Thanks.

202
Lighting / Re: YN-622 Reviews?
« on: August 21, 2012, 11:07:08 AM »
my only yongnuo product is a yn-560, and i've had zero problems with it.  also, it was like $60, and is a fast recharging, quiet, and powerful flash that can be triggered optically by a flash using either manual or ettl.  can't beat it for the price.
Speaking of the yn-560. Does anyone know what amount of control you'll be able to have with something like that with this product. Will you be able to change the power of it from the camera? If so, that makes those a huge bargain.

203
Lighting / Re: YN-622 Reviews?
« on: August 20, 2012, 09:31:43 PM »
You know, I'm curious, they say this can't be used to trigger a camera trigger. Could you not use the PC port to do this? Is it because it would mess up the camera or that it's not a contact closure mechanism?

204
Lighting / Re: YN-622 Reviews?
« on: August 20, 2012, 09:23:01 AM »
http://www.lightingrumours.com/feature-guide-to-the-yongnuo-yn-622-for-canon-2672
Its not hands on yet AFAIK but more details than on the yongnuo site.

I just sprung for these and YN-565EX on thephotogadget.com
the YN622 was only $98, the ones I saw on ebay were $10 more...
Yeah, I saw that already. I'd like to see some real hands on with it though. Would love to hear your opinion on it when you get it. It seems like a good option for me but as I said, I don't have the cash to just try it out. It needs to what I need it to. I had read somewhere that it wasn't going to have a test button but I'm glad to see it got added. Overall it seems like a good choice but we just need more info on it before we buy it.

205
Lighting / YN-622 Reviews?
« on: August 19, 2012, 02:30:39 PM »
Anybody know of any reviews of the Yongnuo YN-622? It's for sale on ebay but I can't find any reviews for it. It looks promising but I don't want to buy it without some input.

206
Lenses / Re: Lens recommendation to replace 18-135mm IS
« on: August 13, 2012, 03:59:48 PM »
If you're thinking long term then the 24-105 is also excellent and obviously has IS and better focus system. I'd buy an ultra wide angle to make up the loss in wide angle shots. I bought the Sigma 10-20 for around $420 and have been really happy with it overall. Either lens will be MUCH higher quality than the 18-135.

Actually I ended up getting the 24-105L and a Tokina 12-24 II. Price ended up just about $150 more than the 17-55 by itself, so I think I ended up with a better overall package.
Not only that but the 24 105 is full frame compatible. Good choice.

207
Lenses / Re: Lens recommendation to replace 18-135mm IS
« on: August 13, 2012, 01:38:27 PM »
Alright so just reading your post real quick I thought 24 105. But then someone pointed out you already have the 100 macro IS which is a great lens BTW. So as long as you're willing to switch lenses to get that 100mm range then you probably could go with the 17-55. I've rented both that and the Tamron 17-50 VC and non-VC versions. I ended up buying the non-vc model. The VC version was definitely less sharp than the Canon and non-VC. Some could argue the Canon is SLIGHTLY better than the non-VC but I think the biggest difference between these two probably comes down to the auto focus. The Tamron's isn't that great but it'll get the job done. I don't use this lens as much since going full frame but when I did use it, unless I wanted the 2.8 depth of field I'd stop it down 4.0 which sharpens it up a lot. If I was in your position, I'd go for the Tamron. It's a really nice piece of glass for the price. If you're thinking long term then the 24-105 is also excellent and obviously has IS and better focus system. I'd buy an ultra wide angle to make up the loss in wide angle shots. I bought the Sigma 10-20 for around $420 and have been really happy with it overall. Either lens will be MUCH higher quality than the 18-135.

208
Lighting / Re: Multiple Flashes During Wedding Ceremony
« on: August 02, 2012, 03:25:12 PM »
Judge Joe Brown - Cheap wedding photographer
Wow, I liked that video.
Never been into weddings, even though my friends are keep asking but this video is interesting.
So if there are so many photographers - and due to that large number probably so many good ones too - how come these people can shoot 100s of weddings?
Now I would think that this was staged but the sad thing is that all I have to do is search for the area where I live and I see half a dozen snappers like this....
Because people are cheap and/or don't actually investigate thoroughly. My wife and I have only shot 5 weddings as the main photographers but I still take it seriously and rent the necessary equipment to make it work. I look around at other people's work compared to their price and charge the same price as the aweful ones but do a lot nicer work. In a few years though once I've built up my portfolio though, I'll obviously raise my rates and so people will think my rates are "too high" for how little work I do. It's one of those areas where if you want good pictures, then perhaps money shouldn't be your first determiner.

209
I think by compatible they're saying it's compatible with ttl or more likely e-ttl mode. That doesn't mean you can access it via the menu though. It just means it's smart enough to send out a pre-flash for metering so you don't have to do everything manually. That's my best guess.

210
This is just me personally but I had horrible troubles with white balance with anything other than DPP. I used to hate it but the more I've learned it the more I realize you can do a lot of things in it, it's just not always obvious how you do it.

It is free (unlike Nikons) and you always know it's going to have the quickest update for new cameras if that matters. Maybe at some point I'll test the others again but it makes sense that Canon's software would do a better job since unless I'm wrong, all the other companies have to reverse engineer the RAW files since they don't have access to Canon's code. The only thing I hate is no auto-save and it does occasionally crash but as with every program, command-s is your best friend.

Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 18