December 19, 2014, 03:11:03 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 - brianleighty

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 18
31
Lenses / Re: Wedding where you can't move
« on: August 27, 2013, 10:27:47 AM »
Can you hide a camera or two and use a remote trigger?

Any chance of just doing an re-enactment?  Bride should know what you're working within, so as long as expectations are set, you should be fine.
Yeah, I'm going to meet with the coordinator to see if I can have a remote camera somewhere. Not a bad idea with the re-enactment but we only have one hour before hand (don't want to see each other) and 30 minutes after during which we'll running to try and get the formals done. Sigh people seem to underestimate how formals take. Yes, they are aware of it but I'll reiterate after I found out what I'm actually working with.

32
Lenses / Re: Wedding where you can't move
« on: August 27, 2013, 12:16:21 AM »
Also, I haven't done a site scout yet but if I am super far back, do I rent something longer than the 70-200 I normally rent or just have wider shots instead? Appreciate the advice.
I would use a wide focal length range for some variety, perhaps 24mm to 200mm, or even 16mm to 200mm.  As for needing anything longer than a 70-200 -- that depends entirely on the location.
Thanks for the input. I understand it depends on location. Would you say if you can get full body head to feet that that's tight enough or is more needed?

33
Lenses / Re: Wedding where you can't move
« on: August 27, 2013, 12:01:53 AM »
If you can employ one, a 300 f/4 is no more to look at than your 70-200.  A 300 /2.8 might be a bit of a distraction.

Jim
Since you brought up the 300, another option I've been toying with is the 100-400. Obviously not quite as good optically but it does have a broad range. For around $19 more than renting the 70-200 I could rent the 100-400 and 135mm f/2 or perhaps even better the 85mm 1.2 to bring back some of the 70-100 range lost by not having the 70-200. Been wanting to try that one out as well but always stick with the 70-200 for it's versatility.

34
Lenses / Re: Wedding where you can't move
« on: August 26, 2013, 11:49:10 PM »
Yeah, was looking at the 300. I'm assuming you're talking about the 300 f/4 IS correct? My main question was do I go with the 70-200 with an extender or on a crop body for the zoom flexibility or go with the 300 f/4 for the better image quality and faster AF( if I'm using an extender).
If you can employ one, a 300 f/4 is no more to look at than your 70-200.  A 300 /2.8 might be a bit of a distraction.

Jim

35
Lenses / Wedding where you can't move
« on: August 26, 2013, 10:00:49 PM »
So I have my first wedding coming up in a few months where I can't move position. There'll be both me and my wife so at least there'll be some variety but I'm definitely used to moving around for variety. My question for those that have dealt with this is should I try to get as much of a focal range as possible to vary things or just focus more on just catching the best moments? Also, I haven't done a site scout yet but if I am super far back, do I rent something longer than the 70-200 I normally rent or just have wider shots instead? Appreciate the advice.

36
Lenses / Re: Sigma 35 1.4 vs Sigma 18-35 1.8
« on: August 26, 2013, 09:55:49 PM »
I rented the 35 1.4 a few months back, and it was fantastic.  My rental of the 18-35mm 1.8 comes in today, looking forward to comparing the two.
Bradford any input on how it went. Just curious. I ended up buying the 35 1.4. Haven't gotten to use it too much but got a lot of work coming up in the few months. Got a great deal so I can't complain ($780)

37
Lenses / Re: Sigma 35 1.4 vs Sigma 18-35 1.8
« on: August 12, 2013, 10:40:22 PM »
I got my 35 f1.4 a few months back and it rarely comes off my camera. I don't have the Sigma 18-35; I do use my Canon 16-35 a fair bit, though mostly only at 16-20. The Sigma 35 is not small, but not too big either. It delivers excellent images and has quickly become my favorite lens.
Thanks for the input. I think the 35 1.4 is more practical for me. I guess I was just looking for an excuse to rent the 18-35 to try it out but the two weddings I've shot with a 35mm prime I've gotten a lot of use out of it. The zoom is nice but it doesn't cover a large range and I can use the 70-200 for that by stepping back some. My minds made up. The 35 1.4 is my next lens. I'd get the 70-200 2.8 is ii but that's currently out of my price range :). I'll just have to keep renting that one.

38
Lenses / Sigma 35 1.4 vs Sigma 18-35 1.8
« on: August 12, 2013, 08:59:23 PM »
Was curious if anyone has both that can comment on which they think is better. I leaning towards the 35 1.4 since I'm mostly full frame now but a zoom is nice.

39
Lighting / Re: YN-622C multiple on camera flashes
« on: June 28, 2013, 07:43:04 PM »
From "The Other YN-622C User Guide" p.10:

Two-Shooter Setup (John UK technique)
A second shooter can share augmenting flashes. There is a problem – preventing the zooming and firing of the other camera’s on-top flash.
•   Camera 1 set to E-TTL or Manual, and Firing Group A:B at some ratio/power.
•   On-camera 622 set to Remote mode and Group C, with an on-top flash.
•   Camera 2 set up the same.
•   Enhancing flash stand with remote 622 set to Group B, plus flash.
•   When either camera takes a shot, it's on-top flash is treated as Group A, the augmenting flash as Group B, and the other camera as Group C. Group C is not enabled in Firing Group A:B, so does not fire.

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B77OmmGIg0gMVFpqNkpBYXBHajA

Awesome!!! I seriously missed that. Thank you sir.

40
Lighting / Re: YN-622C multiple on camera flashes
« on: June 19, 2013, 08:34:55 PM »
Brian,
I imagined this was for events like weddings, gatherings, one-room meetings. I -- personally -- would have wanted a manual flash lighting the room attached high (best) or on a light stand placed inconspicuously. (I keep a weird set of clamps and hardware for this.) I would not want that level to change, although of course throughout the space its level will be different.  Then I would try to have my on-camera strobe act as fill to a light that appeared to be ambient but was actually from that "room-bounce" or "room-direct" unit. Having two people able to use that wrap-around light in a neat idea and I hope you can make it work.

I have been avoiding ETTL. Pure fear, lack of experience, I admit! So I cannot tell you if ETTL is retained with one of these splitters.

So this setup is two senders and two receivers. I use Odin, still learning all its capabilities. I think if I were to do this it would require a separate Odin controller, and I never asked what just a controller costs.

Hope you can find a good solution for your particular needs.

Thanks Jonathan. Yes this is mainly for weddings. The issue obviously is that a chapel can be quite large so unless you can position the "ambient" light far enough away the falloff can be pretty quick and if you can put it far away you're giving up light output and softness in exchange.  I have done something similar to what your describing. Instead of Speedlights I used a Alienbee bounced off the projector screen. It worked pretty well. Only think I might have done different is using two instead of one so I could have one on each side. If you're interested the ceremony shots are were shot this way here:
http://leightyphotography.com/weddings/crystal-and-jeremy

The main issue I had here was that since it was manual I didn't have ambient light output adjusted automatically and was close to having quite a few of the shots blown out. Hence my interest in checking out doing the same sort of thing but with speedlights.

41
Lighting / Re: YN-622C multiple on camera flashes
« on: June 15, 2013, 09:11:30 AM »
So I did some more messing around last night. The closest I've been able to find is doing A:B C and setting the on-camera flash to 8:1 and the other oncamera flash at 1:8. This means it'll obviously still go off but at least it won't be as strong so might be able to make it work. Not perfect but at least a little better than before. Let me know if anybody has a better idea.

42
Lighting / Re: YN-622C multiple on camera flashes
« on: June 14, 2013, 11:37:44 PM »
Interesting... I looked into cables to split a while back but everything I read said that TTL would only work if one cable was connected. Regardless... a setup like that would get more pricey as 3 is just the start and if all goes well I may eventually add more which then means I have to have a receiver for each. If there doesn't end up being any way around this then I'll probably end mainly just using these for macro photography like I have for the past several months. It works great for single camera setups but it'd be nice if it could work with multiples as well.

43
Lighting / Re: YN-622C multiple on camera flashes
« on: June 14, 2013, 02:30:28 PM »
Brian,
So we understand exactly what you need:
Two photographers with flash on their cameras are depending on a third flash that lights up the area. The issue is the shared channel that will fire the second photographer's flash, and shared status of this third light (not ready/recycled in time to be available when needed.)

Would one more flash -- so background is illuminated by a dedicated speedlight -- fix this problem? Assuming two channels available on Yongnuo... Seems like a reasonable-cost solution as you can go with a simple even manual only unit if bouncing. Yes, you have to find two attachment spots or have two stands. Not OK in some event venues. But way more flexible.

Don't know the Yongnuo triggers' capabilities, sorry.

Thanks Jonathan, you got it mostly right. Recycle time is part the equation as well but the main thing is the light from the secondary cameras flash messing with the main camera's shot. I have considered just doing off camera and would absolutely love that since it would drop the weight I have to carry by quite a bit but unfortunately I haven't had good results in testing this. It basically boils down to I want two cameras to be able to share a third flash but not have the two camera's flashes affect each other.

44
Lighting / Re: Flash that will endure over 2000 continuous shots?
« on: June 14, 2013, 12:59:36 PM »
Another option nobody has mentioned. You said you're using the on camera Flash. I assume you're saying that the flash drains the batteries on the camera pretty quick? If the oncamera flash is sufficient for your purposes, what about just getting an adapter to run your camera off of AC power? You still have the flash recycle time but if you're not firing at full power I don't see that being much of an issue.

45
Lighting / YN-622C multiple on camera flashes
« on: June 14, 2013, 12:51:52 PM »
So I've run into an issue and am not sure if there is any way around this or not. My goal is to have on-camera speedlights with a yn622c in between on each. A third flash will be used to bring up the ambient level of light. The issue I have is if camera A fires, camera B fires its on camera flash which could pose unexpected results. I was hoping there was a channel that was shared by all like on the the cheaper yongnuo triggers but I don't see anything like this. Is this just a limitation of the system or is there something I'm missing? Thanks.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 18