February 28, 2015, 07:35:58 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 - mitchell3417

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5
Lenses / Re: Best general purpose lens?
« on: June 04, 2012, 12:55:47 PM »
17-55 is a must. You've got to have the wide end, especially for the subject matter you stated. I've had mine for over a year and dust is not a problem. It's an awesome lens.

I think JPEG is great and time saving. I don't think it should be used for critical client work such as weddings, portraits, landscapes, etc...

I never shoot JPEG, but I have to say that I'm considering more and more because it does save time. Even if that time doesn't add up to much in one day, it does over the span of years..

Lenses / Suggestions for Full Frame Lenses
« on: May 20, 2012, 12:21:56 PM »
Just picked up my first full frame camera. I have a 5D Mark II and a 50 mm f/1.4.

I'm all about iq, and want high quality glass. Something that can handle my new camera. I'm coming from a 7D with a 17-55 and a 10-22. That's not necessarily the focal lengths I want to stick with though. I want more length for portraits.

I mainly shoot portrait photography, along with the occasional wedding. When I do shoot a wedding I rent a 70-200 2.8 IS and absolutely love it. I hardly take it off my camera. I would buy one but i dont shoot enough weddings to justify the expense.

So my biggest need is a good portrait lens. Right now I'm considering the 100 L or the 135 L. I am open to other suggestions. My budget is <$1400.

My next purchase will be a wide angle lens and then a long time from now I will get a 70-200 2.8.

On the first one her face is not properly exposed which contributes to the noise. It also seems like the first one is a touch out of focus. I would personally dial up the ISO 2 stops and the aperture a stop. This gives you a better exposure on her face, which you seem concerned about, and it gives you more depth of field for more sharpness.

The camera might be front or back focusing slightly. Did you micro adjust your lenses.

EOS Bodies / Re: NEED HELP W/LENSES: What should I get next...?
« on: May 17, 2012, 01:23:34 PM »
1. 70-200 2.8

It's gorgeous and is perfect for weddings and portraits. I know everyone says that, but there is a reason they say it. IT'S TRUE!!!!

24-70 is a range that's not flattering to people. I avoid it like the plague because for portraits and weddings it just doesn't set the subject apart.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS Rebel T4i/650D Specs [CR2.5]
« on: May 17, 2012, 01:20:17 PM »
The autofocus is going to be 10 times more usable. sounds like a great camera and a perfect backup for a 7d.

EOS Bodies / Re: Loss in Resale Value of 5D Mk3
« on: May 17, 2012, 01:19:13 PM »
Canon acknowledged the 'issue' (I'll stop short of calling it a bona fide problem).  They offered to fix it, for free.  What, you now expect them to refund part of your payment as well?  New buyers here probably care a lot more about 'affected' bodies - even then, a significant number of people indicated that they have no intention of send their camera in for the fix.

nuff said

EOS Bodies / Re: Sold my Nikon Gear
« on: May 17, 2012, 01:18:03 PM »
5DII is still a great camera. 1500 is a lot. great decision. glad you made a decision.

before i even read the review i saw the photo of the three cameras discussed.

missed focus and bad noise...i wonder what camera was used to take that shot! not sure if you should be reviewing cameras if that is the kind of photography you are offering up to represent the 3 cameras you are reviewing....

That's his photographic style. A lot of his pictures are shot with that style. It's a branding decision IMO. Plus, he's a video guy and doesn't do professional stills work.

While he does not outright declare a winner - I think he prefers the 5d Mk3 followed by the D4.
He says at the end of the video the D4 pretty much shouldn't be considered for video because of it's crap resolution. He clearly doesn't like that better than the D800. Also, the short film he shot with the cameras he used the 5DIII and D800 only. No D4. And of the two, he says he mostly used the D800. Just sayin'.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 7D Mark II Info? [CR2]
« on: May 14, 2012, 04:00:36 PM »
sounds good. hopefully i'll go full frame before that happens.

EOS Bodies / Re: My 5diii review..
« on: May 14, 2012, 12:12:49 PM »
Nice review Phil. You say you are not a pro - did you charge to shoot the wedding? If you did then I would say you are a pro, no?
His point was he's not a pro REVIEWER.

He's a pro photographer.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: My first wedding Help!
« on: May 07, 2012, 08:48:11 AM »
with that kit i'd have the 50-150 on the camera all day...

The 50-150. is going to be your bread and butter. It's really hard to catch a facial expression or feel close to the action with a 17-55mm. The only time I would use that is for large groups if you can't get far enough back or for a few establishing shots during the ceremony.

I have a 17-55, love it. But when I shoot weddings, it doesn't see much action.

I think Canon just doesn't have the high DR sensor built yet. I think they are working on it. I think it will happen eventually, or else they will fall further and further behind Nikon in sensor technology. I think they are giving us the best that they have to offer, but they can only offer it if they have the means to mass produce it. Canon will come out with a high MP camera in 2013. The question is whether or not it has dramatically improved DR at ISO 100-400. If it doesn't then Canon has failed for too long in this area. The resolution of cameras is great right now and I think DR and high ISO performance are the two areas Nikon and Canon should be focusing on. Right now Nikon is kicking Canon's but in terms of DR. The same can't be said for Canon and their high iso performance. They are barely beating Nikon in that. So I think Canon is showing us their hand. They just don't have the Ace of Dynamic Range. It has escaped them so far.

EOS Bodies / Re: LR4.1 RC to blame. Check this out!
« on: May 01, 2012, 08:42:39 PM »
Let me be the idiot to say that I don't see the problem here. As a crop shooter I would love to bring that much out of the shadows.

That would be sweet if canon went full-frame or aps-c mirrorless only. Add a cheaper full frame and and high MP full-frame and that completes that line.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5