September 30, 2014, 03:59:27 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 - Chuck Alaimo

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 65
1
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Says Higher Resolution Sensors Are Coming Soon
« on: September 27, 2014, 03:18:26 AM »
I don't want or need the 7d2 - 10 fps is way too fast..and I prefer the FOV of FF.

You can always jack the frame rate down. You have the high speed and low speed continuous modes, so when you don't want to rip out 20 frames a burst, you can always drop down to three or four per second (and I think it's configurable on the high end models...I don't think the 7D allowed it, but the 7D II definitely should).

i am sure it does, and i am sure it has a silent burst too which is throttled down...the bigger aspect is i don't need a crop body, FF has it's claws in me.  I favor splitting the lines more for MP count (too much is not always needed) and low IS quality...  and yeah, i'd rahter other things like higher sync speed than burst.

Yeah, I can understand that. I have uses for crop, but there are ultimately ways of mitigating the need. I can always get closer to my subjects, for example...and if I can get close enough, FF will always win. One advantage that the 7D II can offer that I don't think the 5D III or 1D X could ever really compete with is the ability to get long equivalent focal length at a faster max aperture...allowing the use of more than just the central cluster of AF points at the much slower f/8. The 7D II could achieve an effective 1344mm focal length (FoV equivalent) at f/5.6. At best, FF cameras can achieve 1200mm f/8. The added AF power the 7D II can offer at a very long effective focal length is intriguing.

honestly.... 1344mm focal length... i so have no NEED for that...want...sure...i do like shooting the moon at times...but i really have no bird shooting desire...and...while i do like putting the couple far away from me at times and shooting with the 70-200...for what makes me $$$...no need at all...

on a side note...i just sold a $1000 piece that was shot on...my old 7d...don't even own that now, nor do i still own the lens i it was shot with (the old 244-70mm 2.8)....go 7d...still earning after being sold...lol

Congrats on the sale! Must feel nice.

I don't generally need that kind of focal length myself. I use 1200mm on the 5D III, but usually it's to get headshot closeups of shore and wading birds and waterfowl. I'm usually at 840mm on the 5D III and 600mm on my 7D for birds. I'm usually at 600mm on the 5D III for wildlife (much better FoV than the 7D ever offered). I've used 840mm, and even as much as 1680mm (2x + 1.4x) on the 7D for astro stuff, but at that level diffraction is really kicking in, and I'm better off with a proper large aperture telescope.

for me...that's so the kind of stuff of...when i have extra cash to play around with sure...bu right now...i am 40 years old...3 years into launching my biz, recently married, and...i have a 3 day old son now!!!!...so yeah, i do have to clearly separate needs from wants.

2
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Says Higher Resolution Sensors Are Coming Soon
« on: September 27, 2014, 03:04:40 AM »
I don't want or need the 7d2 - 10 fps is way too fast..and I prefer the FOV of FF.

You can always jack the frame rate down. You have the high speed and low speed continuous modes, so when you don't want to rip out 20 frames a burst, you can always drop down to three or four per second (and I think it's configurable on the high end models...I don't think the 7D allowed it, but the 7D II definitely should).

i am sure it does, and i am sure it has a silent burst too which is throttled down...the bigger aspect is i don't need a crop body, FF has it's claws in me.  I favor splitting the lines more for MP count (too much is not always needed) and low IS quality...  and yeah, i'd rahter other things like higher sync speed than burst.

Yeah, I can understand that. I have uses for crop, but there are ultimately ways of mitigating the need. I can always get closer to my subjects, for example...and if I can get close enough, FF will always win. One advantage that the 7D II can offer that I don't think the 5D III or 1D X could ever really compete with is the ability to get long equivalent focal length at a faster max aperture...allowing the use of more than just the central cluster of AF points at the much slower f/8. The 7D II could achieve an effective 1344mm focal length (FoV equivalent) at f/5.6. At best, FF cameras can achieve 1200mm f/8. The added AF power the 7D II can offer at a very long effective focal length is intriguing.

honestly.... 1344mm focal length... i so have no NEED for that...want...sure...i do like shooting the moon at times...but i really have no bird shooting desire...and...while i do like putting the couple far away from me at times and shooting with the 70-200...for what makes me $$$...no need at all...

on a side note...i just sold a $1000 piece that was shot on...my old 7d...don't even own that now, nor do i still own the lens i it was shot with (the old 244-70mm 2.8)....go 7d...still earning after being sold...lol

3
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Says Higher Resolution Sensors Are Coming Soon
« on: September 27, 2014, 02:07:59 AM »
I don't want or need the 7d2 - 10 fps is way too fast..and I prefer the FOV of FF.

You can always jack the frame rate down. You have the high speed and low speed continuous modes, so when you don't want to rip out 20 frames a burst, you can always drop down to three or four per second (and I think it's configurable on the high end models...I don't think the 7D allowed it, but the 7D II definitely should).

i am sure it does, and i am sure it has a silent burst too which is throttled down...the bigger aspect is i don't need a crop body, FF has it's claws in me.  I favor splitting the lines more for MP count (too much is not always needed) and low IS quality...  and yeah, i'd rahter other things like higher sync speed than burst. 

4
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Says Higher Resolution Sensors Are Coming Soon
« on: September 27, 2014, 01:36:38 AM »
The important thing is Canon's admission its customers need more MP.

I wouldn't interpret it this way, imho Canon just stated the obvious - *some* (select) applications like studio or maybe landscape work might need higher resolution, just as higher dynamic range only benefits just a part of photogs. In no way they're up to questioning their past product policy, so certainly no killer 5d4 in sight.

I'm curious to understand who wouldn't benefit from higher DR?

Everybody can benefit in certain situations.  But there is a difference between wanting it and needing it.  Some people need it, some just want it, and some don't care.  It's like having a car that can do 110 miles per hour.  If the fastest you ever drive is 65 miles per hour, then you're all set as your car does a splendid job of going 65 miles per hour, and it's reliable and has a bunch of other features you like.  Now your neighbor comes along and he says his car can do 150 miles per hour.  Wow, that is an awesome spec, clearly better right?!  So you start to feel jealous and think about buying the same car as your neighbor.  But will it make a difference in your life such as when you drive to work?  Well, there are in fact situations in which it may be a benefit to have the neighbor's car.  But you may also rationally conclude that your car serves you extremely well and will continue to do so, even though it's "limited" to just the old-style 110 miles per hour.

I don't think anyone here is ever going to complain about an increase in DR. In fact when Canon leapfrogs Sony on DR, we will all be boasting  ::)
I'm not jumping ship for anything I've seen yet in other DSLRs. But video stuff from Sony looks promising.

that's why i compared them to religious zealots, because even if you are in the middle, not actively pro or against...you are against because you are not gun ho pro....

5
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Says Higher Resolution Sensors Are Coming Soon
« on: September 27, 2014, 01:33:39 AM »
Honestly, if the pro DR crowd wasn't always on their soap box in every topic here, telling us all that we're just plain idiots if we don't see the truth of the holy grail in the exmor sensor andthat canon sensors are just plain so terrible that it would be a miracle to ever get a decent shot (some have said here in the past that the only thing canon files are good for is posting to social media@!!!).  It's rather preachy, like religion.

This is pretty much how I feel. It seems to have got worse over the last few months. Like, if only they shout enough, we'll see the light. How can we not? It's so blindingly obvious! But it's just not a priority for me. I don't like being called a fanboy or an apologist by association just because I'm not upset about the same thing some other people are.

what i love is how it's now....if we aren't crying about how bad canon is then we are anti DR...like we want less DR...lol.  If canon is watching this forum or other forums then the math geeks would find that many don't care, some have reasonable needs, and then there are like 5-10 people that post so much that it makes it seem like hundreds want want want...but when it comes down to it, money talks.  if the haters were serious they'd not be hating and just be buying a sony or a nikon.  they aren't switching ,in fact many are getting their toes wet with the A7r and not liking it ....lol.  But, even jrista loves the DR doesn't but like the A7r enough to buy... 

6
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Says Higher Resolution Sensors Are Coming Soon
« on: September 27, 2014, 01:24:41 AM »
Well, look what I saw this morning

Weasel words like "soon" remind me of the current "year of the lens", only to just hear that new L primes have been moved far into 2015. I do believe Canon will sell a very expensive studio high-mp 1dxs soon, but I don't see them replacing their whole current lineup with 6d and 5d3 anytime "soon" with high-mp updates.

The 6D and the 5DIII are still sold well. The pricedrop phushed both cams again. Maybe there is an near replacement, but i do not think so too. Another reason why Canon will hold such a replacement back, is the 7DII. I think, they will wait until the 7DII hype is over (let us say 1 year), then maybe they announce an successor of the 6D or 5DIII. An near announcement of an very high priced 1DXY will not depress 7DII sales.

Remember he difference between being announced and being release.  In the year of the 1dx, the 1dx was announced in November, and the 5d3 wasn't announced until March - but the 5d3 was released and available within a month of announcement while the 1dx wasn't avaialble fort he general public to buy until summer of that year.  If they follow their own history, yeah, we may very well see the official announcement for the studio soon, that is of course if this thing is gonna be around by the summer of 2015.

Also, I am kind of hopeful that they will split the line - have the 5d series be about event work, low light work, and then have a big mp body in a 5d style shell.  This won't interfere with either because this would hopefully be a totally different beast --- I would be real happy with a 40 MP canon that only has a burst rate of 2 fps.  If i were to ever buy such a camera, maximum burst rate would not be a big concern to me (do you really need 10 fps to shoot a landscape image, or a model in a studio shoot (would your strobes ever have a chance in hell of keeping up with 10 fps?????).  the 1 series big mp would get a larger buffer and thus greater fps, but even there i don't see the point ---splitt he lines I say...I would love to have the extra bump for about 20% of my work - the remaining 80% though will never see print, or if it does, it's a 4x6 or in an album...so all that extra mp just means extra HD space is needed....

Yesssss, this would be a senseful decision, if Canon does so. Agree and hope that it comes true...
I would like to see an "low Fps" camera with an superb IQ and some more MP. And for sports the 7DII, as I do not want to spend 6000€ for an body....

i think you misread what i said a tich, i want the 5d4 to focus on improving the basic stuff in the 5d3 - and unlike others here, I actually don't really need it to be a revolutionary upgrade - it can be an incremental evolutionary upgrade across the board improved AF (it doesn't need much, just add more cross points and the -3EV center point, incremental evolutionary upgrade), A digic 7 may help the IQ woes at lower ISO, I'd be happy with 22MP too - again file size for some of us is an issue (hence why I'd loveto see a split in the lines), increase that sync speed to at least 1/250th - more would be great though (like 1/500th), add that built in intervalometer !!!!

I don't want or need the 7d2 - 10 fps is way too fast..and I prefer the FOV of FF.  But yeah, I would totally love to have a big mp body with more DR for ---like I said in the original post about 15-20% of my work.  Posed shots with bride and groom in midday light, the first dance, the rings and the engagement shoot is where that would be used.  For the rest though (that 80-85%), no need at all for big mp or more DR - the snapshot of uncle tim and aunt jane won't be printed to 30x40, if it is printed it would be a 4x6. 

What would be bada$$ --- if canon could find a way to turn pixels off for mraw and sraw (as opposed to the lossy way they are converted.  Then I would be begging for the 5d4 to be big mp's.  But without that, nope, i'd rather have the workhorse and the fine art body as it were.  That's just me though.... 

7
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Says Higher Resolution Sensors Are Coming Soon
« on: September 26, 2014, 09:48:39 AM »
Well, look what I saw this morning

Weasel words like "soon" remind me of the current "year of the lens", only to just hear that new L primes have been moved far into 2015. I do believe Canon will sell a very expensive studio high-mp 1dxs soon, but I don't see them replacing their whole current lineup with 6d and 5d3 anytime "soon" with high-mp updates.

The 6D and the 5DIII are still sold well. The pricedrop phushed both cams again. Maybe there is an near replacement, but i do not think so too. Another reason why Canon will hold such a replacement back, is the 7DII. I think, they will wait until the 7DII hype is over (let us say 1 year), then maybe they announce an successor of the 6D or 5DIII. An near announcement of an very high priced 1DXY will not depress 7DII sales.

Remember he difference between being announced and being release.  In the year of the 1dx, the 1dx was announced in November, and the 5d3 wasn't announced until March - but the 5d3 was released and available within a month of announcement while the 1dx wasn't avaialble fort he general public to buy until summer of that year.  If they follow their own history, yeah, we may very well see the official announcement for the studio soon, that is of course if this thing is gonna be around by the summer of 2015.

Also, I am kind of hopeful that they will split the line - have the 5d series be about event work, low light work, and then have a big mp body in a 5d style shell.  This won't interfere with either because this would hopefully be a totally different beast --- I would be real happy with a 40 MP canon that only has a burst rate of 2 fps.  If i were to ever buy such a camera, maximum burst rate would not be a big concern to me (do you really need 10 fps to shoot a landscape image, or a model in a studio shoot (would your strobes ever have a chance in hell of keeping up with 10 fps?????).  the 1 series big mp would get a larger buffer and thus greater fps, but even there i don't see the point ---splitt he lines I say...I would love to have the extra bump for about 20% of my work - the remaining 80% though will never see print, or if it does, it's a 4x6 or in an album...so all that extra mp just means extra HD space is needed....

8
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Says Higher Resolution Sensors Are Coming Soon
« on: September 26, 2014, 12:47:13 AM »
For most photographers, the answer to the whole problem of the 500nm process is, "Well, that's no problem.  Did you look at the photographs?"

I keep seeing this or statements like this.  "You can't tell the difference in the final product!"  Yeah, no duh.  You can't tell what tools were used to build the house you're living in either but that doesn't mean that all tools are the same and that they don't matter.  I'm sure I could show you tons of pictures taken with 20D's or D90's and you wouldn't be able to tell them apart from 5DIII's and D810's.  The end product isn't how you judge the tool, its how you judge the craftsman/artist. Cameras are tools and the photos are what are produced by photographers.  Any craftsman or artist would like to have the best tools available, not because it affects what you see in the final product, but because it makes the job easier.  I don't understand why people seem to be willfully misunderstanding this.  AF makes your job easier.  Accurate TTL metering makes your job easier.  Frame bursts and fast shutter speeds make your job easier.  You can't see any of that in a picture, but it sure is nice to have, right?

One last thing about this interminable argument and then I'm out because it is pretty dumb at this point - have all of you that are saying that more DR isn't necessary, lifting shadows is for bad photogs, etc, actually manipulated the Exmor side by side with the Canon?  RAWs have been made available here in several threads.  I didn't care at all one way or another about this debate until I actually looked at the files.  Its literally night and day.  Once you see what the Exmor is capable of in post, the thought that immediately came to mind was "Holy S___ I wish my camera could do that!"  Its nuts.  I don't think its possible to really appreciate the difference unless you do it yourself.

I fall into the camp of, would I say no to more DR from my canon?  No, of course not.  I really doubt that any of those here who are saying it's not that big of a deal are like anti-DR.  Would I take more, of course I would!  But, that doesn't mean that I'm swearing at my screen with every file I edit, because the work I am doing doesn't demand super intense shadow lifting.

Honestly, if the pro DR crowd wasn't always on their soap box in every topic here, telling us all that we're just plain idiots if we don't see the truth of the holy grail in the exmor sensor andthat canon sensors are just plain so terrible that it would be a miracle to ever get a decent shot (some have said here in the past that the only thing canon files are good for is posting to social media@!!!).  It's rather preachy, like religion.  Sorry, not all of us need to push shadows 5 stops in post.   

Like you said, you can't tell what tools were used to build the house your living in.  If Canon sensors were as inferior as the pro DR folks would have us all believe then yes, you would be able to tell the difference.  But, to continue the house metaphor, you give the same budget and material to 2 architects with differing styles of building - take it to the extreme, one ultra modern vs one specializing in Victorian style homes.  the results would then be very different. 

Sorry, but the sensor alone only matters in sensor tests.  If we all only shot that still life setup we always see on image IQ tests then yeah, the sensor wins.   but this is the real world and there are potentially thousands of factors that go into a final image - the sensor is only one of them.... 

9
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Says Higher Resolution Sensors Are Coming Soon
« on: September 25, 2014, 11:59:12 AM »
No offence AvTvM your the type of customer that won't be happy with any camera.

wrong. I bought the Canon EOS 7D the first day it became available, paid full MSRP and was *quite happy* with it until I sold it 2 months ago. It was clearly *the best* APS-C camera when it came out in fall of 2009 and it did not cost an arm and a leg or a kidney. Do you see any Canon offering in 2014 which manages to score on both of these 2 parameters. I don't.

I'll be happy again with a Canon camera, once it is a "best-in-class" FF-sensored MILC in a body sized liked Sony A7 ... plus matching lenses ... at reasonable prices.  8)

And no, I am not the only one, who wants this.  ;D

I would tend to agree with tom here.  If what you say about the 7d is in fact true, the 7d2 should be a fine camera for you as it fits a lot of your criteria - it does look to be the best APC body on the market today, and it's price isn't outrageous by any means.  But, why am I even saying this because you moved the goal posts all of a sudden by adding a 3rd parameter - now it has to be FF, has to be mirrorless, has to have a totally redesigned body and a new set of lenses with a new mount for said lenses ---- and you want extra features that just are not feasible (like built in RT trigger).   So yeah, if i were in charge of marketing and research, I would not be listening to you because you move the goal posts too much - if I were a canon R&D person, and listened to you - I would be authorizing a huge expenditure in creating he fab process for a whole new line of bodies - Even if they matched things spec for spec, by the time the whole process is done, your wish list will have grown --- which is why it does very much seem like no matter what happens - you will not be a happy customer.  Just get yourself a dang A7R, and go use it and see if having the vast majority of your wish list makes ya happy...

10
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Says Higher Resolution Sensors Are Coming Soon
« on: September 25, 2014, 11:45:44 AM »
NO, I am not "turning a general statement into a personal issue", nor am I "taking offense".  Nor am I saying there is just "one single person on the face of the planet who wants more DR in a Canon camera".  These are points I am not making, yet these are points to which you've addressed your long reply.

I tried to be clear in specifying what I am disagreeing with (not "taking offense").  I disagree with statements like:

"Canon sensors, from a technological and fundamental IQ standpoint, are lacking."
"Technologically, Canon sensors DO lag behind the rest."

You keep saying these things as if they are some universal truth.  They aren't.  They are true for certain photographers in certain situations, not for everyone.  There are plenty of photographers who don't perceive this "lacking" or "lagging" because their work is not about maximum DR and doesn't rely on maximum DR.  For those photographers, Canon sensors are doing a great job, and they are choosing Canon sensors to do their job.  The list of renowned and skilled photographers choosing and using Canon is long and deep and covers an extremely diverse range of photographic situations.  You can repeat what you are saying "technologically", but it doesn't reflect what they are doing photographically.

Your still taking issue with TECHNICAL FACTS. That's what they are. We aren't talking about perceptions of IQ here...were talking about the technical facts. TECHNICALLY SPEAKING...Canon sensor technology is WAY behind the rest of the industry. That is a FACT.

That FACT does have an impact on their IQ. If you personally don't need the ability to push shadows, fine...however, that does not change the FACT that Canon shadows are WAAAAY noisier than the competition, by as much as a factor of ten. It's a FACT. Not an assumption, not a perception...it's a FACT.

Again, that isn't something personal, it isn't something perceptual. Your taking issue with something that just is. You seem to think that what some photographers achieve seems to have some impact on whether the technology is old and outdated or not. It doesn't. Your taking issue with an immutable. Canon sensor technology is out of date, and it DOES NOT offer the same capabilities as modern or cutting edge sensor technology. You can work the data to extract the most out of it, but there are things you can do with a senor that has more DR that you cannot do with a Canon sensor.

It's just a simple fact. You don't have to like it, but I'm not going to stop saying it because you don't like it.

as lots have pointed out ---DR levels out as ISO's rise and if your bread and butter is mostly shot between 800-6400 then canon sensors are not lagging or lacking at all - go past 1600 and the canon out performs the exmor.    Someone here said a page ago this:


Currently, Sony sensors that Nikon uses have a slight disadvantage at ISO >1000 but that seems to be fixed with the A7R. With these sensors you could basically shoot everything at ISO100 and lift in post which gives a lot of headroom to recover highlights.



To me, the really raises my hackles.  So the solution is now to underexpose and push in post?  While yeah it's easy enough to batch process stuff in lightroom, it's still time that needs to be spent correcting for an issue that ---on a canon you won't have because you can push the ISO a bit more.

something I find really funny about all this is that this is a fear of shadows?  Personally, I try to use shadows as much as possble in my images because it leadsto a more dramatic mood.  I also use other things like off camera light to increase the difference between the light and the dark.  I find that pulling all the shadows into the light just leads to boring images, or, something that looks more like a comic book or an over the top HDR - if that's your style then fine, go with it but it's not for everyone.  Different tools for different jobs. 

Would I say no to more DR, of course not.  but for the work I do, it's not a make or break issue.  And there are lots of folks in this camp too.  But at this stage in the game, with the sheer amount of posts now about this issue, from a handful of people - no matter the topic really is is just getting out of hand.  Should this site be renamed the DR envy forum? 

11
6D Sample Images / Re: Anything shot with a 6D
« on: September 25, 2014, 02:33:59 AM »
my son, born 9/24/14..no PP, jpeg export via 6d wifi.  which is a PIA....  canon does need to make that process easier....but why am i saying that...i am a dad...say hello to lucas!!!!!

12
from my exp at least it's an industry norm for full timers to be VERY slow with delivering photos to clients. I've known of some to put pull the memory cards from the event and put them on a shelf. (They typically buy new cards for every event) then after a couple months they get around to post work with the files. Obv that isn't everyone, but that has been something i see alot of. I'm part time. I'm faster than they are. I have backup, and my backup has as backup. i wouldn't worry to much about what equipment they use. within reason.
  If i were you i'd try and get 2 shooters. As much as the lone shooter would like to be in 3 places at once(shots of the guys getting ready, girls getting ready, and reception area(and this one usually is't ready until moments before they arrive, so it's tough)/wedding venue) it's just not going to happen. that's right, quotes inside quotes!

   i have been to weddings where the photographer is a disaster. Once the the guy was on the verge of being drunk. he spent most of his time "chimping", and fussing with his camera. Apparently that guy was very inexpensive so he got the gig.i was just there as a wedding guest. I get almost all my work as a "hired gun". That's one of the reasons i don't post photos here or anywhere else. It's just not that cool. My pay is on the lower end of the grand scale, but for the hired gun work i usually do, i'm near the top. it's cool though, with my schedule i can't devote a lot of time to it all anyway. having a second full time job is good for the bills while the photo thing is just side money, and i do enjoy making good photos for people and seeing young couples being so happy on there wedding day. on the other hand if i woke up tomorrow and i had 12 jobs i'd have to make some changes.

With their budget, 2 shooters and 1 video just isn't going to happen.  Most second shooters get between $150-500 for their time - if your thinking 1k for photo and 1 k for vid...wow, your getting a beginner as a primary and someone who is just handed a camera in green box mode as a second. 

Even if the photo budget goes to $1500 (leaving $500 for video), getting 2 shooters would put you in dicey territory.

Mind this too - the problem with judging them by past performance.  Established shooters with a past performance to show will be on the higher side. I'm not sure what the market is like in your area but where I live if your charging 1 k, you may only have one or two weddings to show - or, you may only have second shooter experience to show.  Not saying these shooters won't or can't be good or great (all good or great shooters start somewhere).  so if past performance is going to be a big factor in your decision then your looking at being on the higher side of the budget for photo. 

To the person I am quoting - I have seen the opposite, being a guest at a few weddings and watching the photographer put forth the bare minimum (mind you, these are weddings which used a friend photographer who shoots on the side - not going with me because they wanted me to be a guest...) - take 2 shots - then lens cap on, mull about, talk to guests, set the camera down....lol.


13
EOS Bodies / Re: Am I the only one excited about the new 7D mk2?
« on: September 22, 2014, 01:12:19 PM »
Unless you're a sports/wildlife photographer, I don't think it's worth the difference in cost between the 70D.
Unless they're a sports/wildlife photographer (which is unquestionably its intended target audience) why would anyone even express an opinion about the 7D Mk II?

It's like a farmer whining about a new Ferrari because it won't pull his plough very well through muddy fields with those smooth little wheels...

The 7D Mk II is what it is - and it will be game-changingly good at that.

+100

14
EOS Bodies / Re: Am I the only one excited about the new 7D mk2?
« on: September 22, 2014, 01:09:28 PM »
I feel as if (and this only my opinion which is worthless) the ones doing the crying are not the people who the 7DII is aimed for.

You have landscapers moaning about only 20Mpix and the usual DR nonsense.

Then you have videographers banging on about the lack of 4K.

Meanwhile sports / wildlife photographers are quietly pre-ordering. If I was a sports photographer I'd be pretty excited to have the 7D II either as a back up or main camera. I have a feeling once some solid reviews come around and people get to feel how easy the camera is to work with (loved my 7D ergonomics) things will calm down.

I thought the 7D was an amazing camera but on paper when it was compared to say a 60D there didn't seem to be all that much different. Once you actually use the 7D you start to realize that it's a beast and is built to last. The IQ was it's Achilles heel but hopefully that issue will be addressed to a satisfactory level and what we'll get is a highly refined machine!

+1... I really like the idea of the 7d2, but am not excited because I don't have much use for a sports style body. 

15
What gear will they shoot with?
Is this their full time occupation?


Not sure I understand why these two items would be important at all?

Who cares what gear they have if you like the pictures?  The final product is all that matters to the customer.  If you like the final product that the photographer produced in other weddings, you will probably like the final product for your wedding.  A photographer can have the latest, most expensive gear, but if you don't like their final product, that photographer is not right for your wedding  -- regardless of the gear.

The same applies to the second item.  Who cares if it is their full time or part time employment -- if you like the type of photographs the photographer takes?  This is why it is so important to carefully review past work.  A full time photographer can take photographs you don't like just as easily as a part time photographer... and vice versa. 

There are so many more important considerations when selecting a wedding photographer.  A wedding photographer is a business of which taking pictures is but one aspect the customer is paying for. Which gear they use and whether they do this full time or part time are not, in my opinion, high on the list.

Past performance is.   And past performance is independent of gear and employment status.

Do you like the way this particular photographer shoots weddings?  There is no such thing as a good wedding photographer.  Only wedding photographers that are good for a specific customer.  Not all wedding photographers the same and it is important to choose one that is right for your wedding.  A wedding photographer that worked well for one wedding may not work well for yours.  It is a personal service.  That's the advantage of hiring a professional.

I think as time goes on, we will be seeing fewer photographers that can exist solely on wedding photography.  I think the part time photographer will be becoming more common as the industry continues to be over saturated. I, personally, would not discriminate against a photographer solely on the fact they have another job (whether photography is the primary or secondary job).

I will discriminate past on past performance.

there are a couple relevant answers to the gear question - Gear is just too all inclusive but asking if they have backup systems (aka 2 bodies) is important.  No one wants their primary camera to die on the day of a wedding, but, even with a top of the line camera sh!t happens.  So does the photographer have a backup camera is a very important Q.

Full time vs part time - this can also be important, of course it does not truly make a difference - but - it may be a psychological reassurance - a full time, established photog whon't just take the money and run for instance.  But also, turn around time.  If your full time gig is photography your turn around times may be a bit different than someone who shoots weddings on the side while also working a full time job (40 hours a week punching the clock somewhere else means that's 40 hours of the week that they are not working on your wedding!) 

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 65