Messages

3316

Lenses / Re: Lens recommendations for real estate interior photography please

« on: December 28, 2011, 12:14:09 AM »

There is a lot of advice here to take in. I can tell you that I've done high-end RE photography for several years now on homes from $1 million - $50 million USD. I did it for a long time with a 50D and Tokina 12-24 crop lens. It's focal view was that of a 19mm on the 50D. I would shoot straight on to avoid post processing distortion if I could, but still had to correct for barrel distortion. You can correct for keystoning in post, but it just stretches everything out. Sometimes you have to do that to "see" over objects in the room. I've done it plenty (shame on me).

I just upgraded to a 5DmkII FF and 17mm TS-E. It has enough view to get the tightest of rooms. I think the 14mm would be too wide. I find that the 17mm TS-E distorts the view more than I sometimes like. The plus is it doesn't have the barrel distortion of my Tokina and I don't have to correct keystoning.

I use HDR techniques on a tripod at twilight when the ambient light of the house can take over. I bring a box of light bulbs and replace any compact fluorescent bulbs so my light balance is consistent. I lock my white balance down to about 3000K, F11 and use Exposure Blending in Photomatix Pro for a very natural, realistic view of the space. I have never had a client say anything other than they love the shots. They don't ask HOW I process the photos, they just love the results. Better than them coming in with an on-camera flash and snapping away.

Setting up lights would take too long and take away from what the lighting designer intended (on higher-end homes). I can shoot an average house in 45 minutes to an hour, but spend 2-3 hours in post. Some bigger places may take multiple trips because twilight only lasts about 45 minutes.

If you are not doing this full-time, on high-end properties, you would probably get the most benefit from the 17-40 or 16-35, as you could use it for more... enjoyable shoots. I've heard good things about both but don't own either. I'm surprised to hear that even the 16-35 is soft in the corners (I've read that about the 17-40). How much more than the 17-40?  I would rent both and see if one out-performs the other (I will).

I would be very interested to hear a detailed description of how you use photomatix to achieve realistic looking results setting etc. While i like HDR and have a fascination with it I am over photomatix and the sameness of the results, I've been using it for a while now. got any examples you would care to share?
also the 16-35 while one of my favourite lenses has too much distortion for this use without post correction

3317

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Travel / carry bags

« on: December 28, 2011, 12:07:24 AM »

I have tons of bags.  They look great in the store, and it isn't until I use them that I find out what I don't like.

I have found that some don't hold tripods, and some hold them on the side.  Both bad if you need a tripod.  In the latter case, when you put the pack on your back, it is always pulling to the heavier side.

That said, I am currently using Thinktank Airport Takeoff.  I like it because it converts to a roller or back pack.  It fits all overheads, including international flights.  Great quality.

sek

speaking of think tank i recently got the belt which i use with some peak design captures, it works really well

is there anything you dont like about it? looks pretty good, i have a lowepro sling but i've been finding perhaps a backpack might be better and having wheels is a good idea too

3318

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Travel / carry bags

« on: December 27, 2011, 10:04:55 PM »

speaking of think tank i recently got the belt which i use with some peak design captures, it works really well

3319

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5d Mark 2 Battery Life

« on: December 27, 2011, 06:50:46 PM »

I have a grip but never use it, I shot a wedding recently and after about 1200 shots with the 5DII with genuine battery over about 10 hours the battery indicator was at about 1/3rd full still. its pretty impressive. on the other hand with similar use my 1DIII still showed an almost full battery.

3320

Lenses / Re: lens advice for kids on stage and some wildlife

« on: December 27, 2011, 06:29:15 PM »

I would go for a f/2.8 lens to help the AF in low light (OP has 50D and 5DII)

I would go for an IS lens as on stage 1/125 is fast enough but not really fast enough for the 200 end.

On that basis I would go for a Canon 70-200 f/2.8, either mk1 or II, depending on budget

Ah yes excellent point that difference between f2.8 and f4 lenses on AF performance is massive!

3321

Lenses / Re: lens advice for kids on stage and some wildlife

« on: December 27, 2011, 06:22:43 PM »

second hand 70-200 f2.8 non IS sell at reasonable prices.
I know SIGMA and TAMRON both do 70-200 f2.8 lenses after my experience with
the sigma 85 f1.4 I would definately have a good look at the sigma if you want to save some money
if it's anything like the 85 it will be awesome.
I have had bad experiences with Tamron in the past so i wouldnt waste my time considering that

3322

Lenses / Re: Lens recommendations for real estate interior photography please

« on: December 27, 2011, 06:14:54 PM »

I have yet to see a realtor who truly knows how to take RE photos.  It is not as easy as it looks.

Oh so true. Its funny how people assume the quality of images is more about the camera and not the person driving it then they wonder why the expensive DSLR they just bought isnt taking any better photos than their point and shoot

3323

Lenses / Re: Lens recommendations for real estate interior photography please

« on: December 27, 2011, 06:10:35 PM »

why would you use a 60D and not a 600D? I cant see a single thing the 60D has for this type of shooting that the 600D doesn't? just wondering if there is something i dont know about thats all

3324

Lenses / Re: New Photographer. Need suggestions :)

« on: December 27, 2011, 05:58:17 PM »

i dont know if any1 could help me but is a 60d or 7d good enough to shoot weddings? or would i need to look at maybe the 5d?

I use a 5DII and a 1D3 however the 1D is heavy I am thinking about getting a 7D and 17-55 f2.8 to use instead as its much lighter then the 5DII i would use the 70-200 f2.8 or the 85mm 1.4
I think the 7D is a very capable camera especially with good glass.

3325

Lenses / Re: 24-70 or 24-105

« on: December 27, 2011, 05:55:33 PM »

well I have the 24-105 and typically i find i rarely shoot wide anyway, group shots of people f5.6 to f8
landscapes or buildings architecture f8-f16.

even shooting portraits at f4 it's pretty good at least you dont risk utterly messing up focus, its really an awesoem all round lens, if i want faster in that range i will typically use my 50 f1.4 or 16-35 f2.8 for more specific things however i rarely use my 16-35 at 2.8 its usually stopped down alot but IQ is amazing with this lens

3326

Lenses / Re: lens advice for kids on stage and some wildlife

« on: December 27, 2011, 05:50:27 PM »

I'd go for the 70-200 2.8 (non is). I don't think f/4 will do well for stage shots, unless the stage is incredibily well lit, which sadly is a bit of a pipe dream for photographers. Just make sure you shoot in RAW, and whatever lens you get you'll be able fix those pesky skin tones you get from the dodgy lighting.

Thomas.

I agree the f2.8 non IS is going to be better than the f4 IS since neither of your intended subjects are going to be stationary the IS will provide little benefit, and form previous threads shooting birds at fast shutter speeds would be better to have IS off anyway.

3327

Lenses / Re: Lens recommendations for real estate interior photography please

« on: December 27, 2011, 05:46:30 PM »

Thanks - some great sounding advice here! I've also considered going even cheaper e.g. 600D with 10-20mm but something is telling me I'd be better off with a 5D MkII (or III ) and winging it with my 24-70L. Decisions, decisions!

Seriously have a look at the 600D and the 10-22

total cost for the above is around $1300 thats half the cost of a 17mm TSE the 600D will do absolutely everything you need it to for interiors

My friend that does this all the time with the 60D swears by the 10-22 due to lack of distortion
I also just got my mum and dad a 600D for xmas and its a pretty impressive little camera for what it costs
the flip screen and built in flash control is excellent i set it up and had it driving all my 580II flashes in about 30 seconds. Even the image quality off the 18-55 kit lens was better than i expected. It makes me want a 7D even more now.

Another thing you should consider is 2 exposures expose the interior and the outside and just mask the exterior exposure over the blown out highlights, its not HDR and looks good and its not very hard to do, I use topaz remask to speed up the process of maskingbecause you dont have to spend alot of time geting the edges correct as it can calculate it all pretty well

good luck

3328

Software & Accessories / topaz discount

« on: December 27, 2011, 05:37:13 PM »

for anyone interested in the topaz bundle I got an email with a 30% discount code valid until 1/1/12

"YearEndSavings"

hope that helps anyone looking at getting it

3329

Software & Accessories / Re: Tripod w/ Spiked Feet and Air Travel?

« on: December 26, 2011, 08:58:26 PM »

Coming back in October this year at Tokyo Narita airport only problem i had was the lenght of my tripod a security guard measured it and said it was to long to take on board so i screwed the head off they measured it again it's OK know, did not worry about spiked feet at all

do you remember what the length threshold was? was it the tripod itself or the bag included

3330

EOS Bodies / Re: 5d mkiii insanity

« on: December 26, 2011, 06:51:44 PM »

Hi Neuro, and happy holidays.

I have yet another opinion question for you.  I took the plunge and purchased a 5D2 body.  You suggested 16-35mm f/2.8L II to me previously for this body.  Would you recommend it over the 24-70mm f/2.8L II?  I have the 70-200 2.8 IS II and want a wide angle zoom.  Reasons?

Thanks.

sek

Yeah, but you really should have waited for the 24-70mm f/2.8L II...   

i would recomend the 16-35 especially since you have the 70-200 i would also recomend the 50mm f1.4 to fill that gap and use the bipedal zoom to go between 35 and 70 those 3 lenses give you alot of coverage and awesome felxabiliy