April 16, 2014, 07:02:26 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 - npherno

Pages: [1]
1
Lenses / Re: 70-200 for trip to Vegas and Grand Canyon
« on: March 22, 2013, 09:25:46 PM »
Packing for a trip to Vegas and Grand Canyon. Just wondering if it's worth taking along the 70-200. Trying to keep down the weight. Any thought?

Taking: 5D3, 17-40 f/4, and 24-70 f/2.8.

You might want to take the 70-200 for some sightseeing stuff in Vegas. I saw a shooter with one @ the Stratosphere taking shots along the strip. There is also the possibility of perhaps shooting some sights on a helicopter ride, where that range might be useful.

2
Lenses / Re: Best lens from my set for nightclubs?
« on: March 22, 2013, 09:19:40 PM »
Though in low light this could be another benefit, shoot at f1.4 for the shutter speed but get the dof of f4, win win. Unless you wanted very shallow dof!

Great idea.  1.4 or anything under 2.8 has razor-thin dof's.  Sometimes that's good, but often it would be preferable to get a little more dof while still enjoying the shutter speed possible with a wide aperture.  I'll experiment with this at a party we plan to attend tonight.

Thanks again.
Thank you to all the advice, particularly from those who actually read my post ;)

I don't have the 16-35L, and this would be a great lens for it. I don't have the cash for it at the moment.

RLPhoto - no idea why dance receptions are relevant to this...

LOALTD - I understand the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 is pretty good, but I have the 35L and so have no compelling reason to buy it. I keep reading about autofocus issues, even with the Sigma, and so went for the 35L instead and have been pretty happy with it.  I was hoping for the 35L II but this seems like a fantasy.

TrumpetPower!  - I do have the 40mm pancake but hadn't considered it - 2.8 is only one stop faster than f/4, and with the high ISO capabilities of the 5D3 I would choose the 24-105 f/4 over the 40 f/2.8.  The reason to go for the primes in this environment would be to get substantially more aperture. I love the colour rendition of the 24L. I do take your point about it being more easily passed off as amateur though. My 40mm stays on my camera a lot of the time when I'm doing street photography as it is less conspicuous.


Sorry, I responded before my morning coffee!

Out of your collection, the 24-105 will be fine, especially if you are shooting with flash. I dont own a 5d3, but my 50D hunts like crazy in some scenarios without the faster lens or flash assist. Barring that, I think the flexibility for the unexpected will be pretty well suited with the zoom.

Lets see some of your work when you are done, and please check out the link I posted earlier. There is WAAY more info on that link that can help you out with tackling how to shoot in clubs.

Thank you actually, you gave me a push to go out and shoot tonight...

Regards..

3
Lenses / Re: Best lens from my set for nightclubs?
« on: March 21, 2013, 10:00:05 AM »
Look here...
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=895331&page=283

I'd recommend the 16-35L, you are going to need the low light for some shots and wide angle for groups.

Regards..

4
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D X or Mark III Specs & Release Date? [CR1]
« on: February 03, 2012, 02:14:03 PM »
I would LOVE to be wrong, but how could this camera be real?  What differentiates it from the 1DX?  (ie. is there $4100 in difference?)

Not to be a hater, but I think this sounds more like a wish list... my wish list.. =)  IF it's true, I'll be ordering mine asap... if not than i'll go sulk in my room.

+1 on these.  It's a nice wish list.  Wishes don't often come true.  But Canon's goal is to make money, total profit is what matters, not profit per camera line.  This may represent a strategic shift - combine the 1-series lines to a single body to reduce R&D costs, put top technology in an 'affordable' camera that to the casual eye looks a LOT like the top of the line pro camera, which boosts sales of that 5-series model (a great price for a baby 1D X), and the unit sales of the 5-series more than makes up for lost sales on the 1D X.

If this is real, they are going to be very, very popular. After suffering with the banding and AF issues of various models this could be the one we have been waiting for.

5
EOS Bodies / Re: *UPDATE* 5D Mark III - February 7, 2012 [CR2]
« on: January 29, 2012, 02:42:08 AM »
61pt AF

CR-Guy: Do you believe any S___ in your inbox?


This will NEVER HAPPEN!

I do think 61-pt is somewhat of a stretch, but you never know.  He's been right many times before and has reliable sources and wouldn't CR2 this if he didn't think it was probable.  Everyone is saying these specs are unbelievable based on a price of $2500 (which I highly doubt will be the final cost).  But if the camera is $3000-$3500 it seems like it could be possible.

I agree that it's much more likely to get a variant of the 7D AF, but if it did come Spec'ed as rumored, and at a reasonable price, Canon would have a hell of a camera to sell. It would be like the D700 we wished we had.

Does anyone know how many D700's sold vs D3's? Im not sure about the specifics of the Nikon line, but perhaps the accountants at Canon rather sell volume rather than a limited number of the high-end?

6
EOS Bodies / Re: 5DIII will come
« on: November 18, 2011, 10:31:14 PM »
All this talk about AF systems again, so I'm sorry to grind on my personal favourite organ about this...

The 9 cross type AF system from the XXD line would have been acceptable on the 5D MkII, but Canon were either in a hurry, being cheap, or were genuinely taken by surprise by the D700's AF system.  The 5D MkII was redeemed by its sensor and its video capabilities.  The world has now moved on and Sony are in the full frame game as well; if Canon continue to cripple th 5D series, they will lose this section of the market to the competition.  Unless Nikon downgrades the D800's specifications from its predecessor (when was the last time that Nikon did this?) and Sony decides not to bother including the A77's technological advancements into a forthcoming FF SLT camera, the '5D with a new sensor' approach will fail.  If you're seriously looking to buy into this segment or upgrade your current 5D model, what would this strategy say to you: "buy a Canon, we're second best"?  This reflects down the whole product range, because consumers tend to look a level or two up the product line when they are purchasing to determine the brand's image. 

Canon must risk their 1D X sales by upping the specs of the 5D MkIII AF system, many people won't actually need it most of the time but that's not the point.  I live in the UK and my car (like most these days) has air conditioning, which is great for the few days a year I actually need it.  Try selling people anything other than a base model without A/C. 

Canon are competing in this market on a differentiation strategy, if their sensor isn't a lot better than the new Sony FF unit, what will Canon differentiate on? In my view, the 7D's AF system is the bare minimum for the 5D MkIII; let's not forget that the frame coverage of the AF points would be virtually the same as with the 5D MkII (just higher density).  If Canon are unwilling to go the whole hog and fit the new 61pt AF system to the 5D MkIII (and 7D MkII), they should develop a new AF system for these cameras; how about a 39 pt "low density reticular array".  ;)

I agree, but maybe the 7D AF will be adequate enough? You KNOW Canon isn't going to do better than that. I also think that besides the actual, you know focusing (only kind of important..Low light be damned if you cant get a AF lock), the sensor better rock. Sony/Nikon make "better" looking random noise at high ISO, and Canon should as well. Ive learned to live with banding on my 50D, but on a $2.5K camera, thats BS.

I have to say (and I can hear the detractors now regarding NEX processing and sharpness levels) my NEX-5 is WAY better at low ISO with noise than my 50D, shooting in RAW. Im still not too invested in Canon, I'd def switch to Nikon if the D800 was compelling.

7
EOS Bodies / Re: T2i vs. 60D vs. 5dMKII
« on: November 03, 2011, 08:12:33 AM »
Interesting debates. Thanks for the advice.

It sounds like the overwhelming recommendation is 60D.

Just to clarify since I wasn't clear. But my primary use will be video. I'll be looking to do narrative documentaries think "Inside Job" or any PBS or Michael Moore film.

Secondly I'd use it for sports for my students.

Finally I use it for stills.

Assuming the 60D still holds as my best for this what top 3 lenses would you suggest ... Sounds like a 50mm and small zoom lens?   I'd like to spend no more than a thousand on lenses. I also need suggestions for:

SDHC card
EXT Mic


i would buy the fastest lens for the available light you intend to shoot. Some people swear by longer lenses for portraits to prevent distortion off facial features. Personally I shoot portraits with a wide angle and it looks fine.
If you want natural light video, i would say get a 2.8f or less. Daytime shooting or lit scenes would change that though.

8
EOS Bodies / Re: T2i vs. 60D vs. 5dMKII
« on: November 02, 2011, 10:37:02 PM »
60D. You don't really state what your primary use is, but given what you have said, i would go 60D.

Why?

Autofocus. 9 Cross points may allow you to get shots you cannot get with a T2i.
Better controls. Canon Prosumer ergonomics are way better. You need hard buttons or get stuck mired in menus.
Better build quality. Magnesium body.
Auto ISO. Not sure if T2i has this.
Wireless Flash control built in. If you like photography and need a multi light setup, you will save $$ or be forced to buy wireless controllers.
Faster shooting speed vs T2i.

The 60D helps you get the pictures you want with less hassle, like other more expensive bodies. That said, if you are unsure at all I would not get a 5dII, just because the features (low light shooting, FF) might not be missed. If you really want a camera "you can grow into" the 7D is probably better served than the 5DII. 7D has better autofocus, and good video from what i've read. It also has wireless flash control, better AF, and built in flash (5DII has no flash), and faster shooting speed than the 5DII.

9
...Nikon makes cameras for photographers, and that Canon "nickel and dimes" their customers.

Exactly. For example, if you want to edit .CR2 RAW files with 'native' Canon software, they "nickel and dime" you by giving you DPP for free, whereas if you want to edit .NEF RAW files with 'native' Nikon software, they give you...oh, wait - you have to *buy* CaptureNX2.

Haha, well said, but at that level, who doesn't already own Aperture  or Lightroom? I am a Canon owner. I like my 50D. I think that one needs to be honest and admit that although one can say no product is perfect, Canon absolutely was stingy on the 5D AF. There a few other ways they were cheap.. Wireless controller not built into the body was a pain, No flash on 5D vs D700, etc. Small stuff.

10

 As noted, Canon also still needs to find a reason to make someone pay $8k for the flagship.

Durability and shutter cycles.

Much (much!!) better AF performance.  I bet they'll hobble the 5DIII's AF, just like they did with the 5DII.

Thats exactly what I am afraid of. It seems that Nikon has a chance to take the "bang of the buck" (not counting lenses and accessories) category if the D800 has competitive video.

I agree AF and durability of 5DMiii should not be close to that of flagship, but If Nikon can ship proper AF, and good frame rate, so should Canon. D700 Beats it in low ISO as well.

Bottom line is will Canon intermediate shooters who may not have much invested in Canon stick around if Nikon is significantly better "perceived" value, especially if D800 is released first, and/or the 5DMiii is not as good or better.

I think Canon is forgetting that perception is important in the marketplace, and I can say my current perception is that Nikon makes cameras for photographers, and that Canon "nickel and dimes" their customers.

11
If the 5DIII and 1DsIV will use the same sensor and the 5DIII improves substantially on the 5DII's shotrcomings (mainly AF), I would bet the 5DIII will be released a year or so after a 1DsIV, so the two will be differentiated by time.  If they are temporally close, or the 5DIII is released first, there will have to be a BIG feature gap, and I suspect that will mean a crippled 5DIII rather than a super-enhanced 1DsIV. 

So, which would people rather have?

1) A 5DIII that uses the same sensor as the 1DsIV and has a much better AF system than the 5DII, but is not released for over a year after the 1DsIV?

...or...

2) A 5DIII that offers a couple more megapixels than the 5DII, a slightly better AF system, and maybe 0.5 more fps, and is otherwise the same in most respects as the 5DII, but comes out this year?

While I agree with most points you all have made I think these are the central points.

Canon's issue is that they will absolutely sell more 5DIII bodies and cannot afford to lose them. At the same time they cannot further mess up their market segments. As noted, Canon also still needs to find a reason to make someone pay $8k for the flagship.

I agree the 1D(s) bodies will be first, but they will lose all the market momentum especially if Nikon drops the D800 soon. The D700 was stiff competition for the 5DII already with regard to pure stills. The 5DII sold as well as it did because of video. I think if Nikon adds nice video in the short term, then Canon may well lose many sales.


12
Canon General / Re: Will the new Sonys force Canon to rethink?
« on: August 19, 2011, 07:27:59 PM »
No, Sony cannot compete on lens selection as of yet. I think if they were to remedy that situation, they could make quite a splash quite quickly.

My gripes about Canon are the usual: I want less noise, and more AF points. I picked up an NEX-5 for a big P&S, and it obviously cannot do everything my 50D does, but it totally craps on the 50D image quality.

If the 5DmIII doesn't have much improved AF, and substantially better noise, I would definitely consider Nikon or Sony.

I think it's good that Sony is out for blood. It will push Canon, especially with the video stuff.

If Sony really wanted to go into the Pro Market, Canon should be very worried. Why? Because Sony has a LOT more cash than Canon does. They are a far larger company than Canon with a lot of muscle and know how. I think after the success of 5D2, Canon rode it a bit too long.

If Sony were to give Canon a rude awakening, it would be good for everyone.

I'm all for Mirrorless, especially from a video perspective. EVF are great since you can judge exposure unlike the OVF, where you have to rely entirely on the meter. Mirrorless is the future.

13
+1 for Carbon Copy Cloner. It is high quality, and does what you need. The others forgot to mention that it is FREE (donationware).

I just used it to install a new, larger, HD. Works  great.


14
Canon General / Re: Photographer Profile: Drew \
« on: February 22, 2011, 11:59:28 PM »

I find it hard to believe people still think that people like Rukes, Al Powers, or or even people like Ron Galella do not have a place in modern art. Obviously there are formal ways of shooting, and all rules are made to be broken.

People like Drew and Al Powers have literally made people pick up cameras and love to take photos. They have also been selfless in sharing what they know to help others get better.

And, as was already pointed out, judging by Ruke's success, he is doing something right. 

While I am on my soapbox, Please check out:

Nightlife threads on Photography on the Net
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=415099
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=895331

My Friend Srika's Page-His work is Stunning.
http://night-club-photography.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?5-Gallery&s=769633bb40cb692802f328e92cf30b5e
http://night-club-photography.com/forums/showthread.php?10-srika-s-photos-*NWS*

Al Powers-Las Vegas-A former club shooter "gone good". He rarely shoots clubs now. He has also switched to the dark side. :-)
http://powersimagery.com/blog/


Awwww thanks for stroking the ego a bit... i dont necessarily think ive "gone good", but rather "gone ok" still lots to learn and lots to work on. But if i inspire someone to pick up their camera and enjoy the craft then that freakin fantastic! Thanks again. and oooo the blog is soooo outdated. for recent stuff check out powersimagery.photoshelter.com :)


Hey Al, you and all the guys from the nightlife thread absolutely made me go out and take nightlife photos. I've learned a lot and still learning a ton, but I think I've learned a thing or two about shooting in low light.

I gotta find some places to shoot in NYC, Where I live, Photographers arent always welcome, and there are NO lights!


15
Canon General / Re: Photographer Profile: Drew \
« on: February 14, 2011, 11:45:42 PM »
"Any formal training in photography?
None at all."

It shows.


He's doing something right if he's hanging out with celebrities.


Its easy to hate the guy on top, huh?

I know Rukes from the photography-on-the-net forum, where there is the end all to be all thread or two about nightclub photography. He takes AMAZING nightlife photos.

I also do some club shooting-not only because its fun, but it is hard, and teaches you how to shoot in the worst conditions, and always in low(no)light.

I find it hard to believe people still think that people like Rukes, Al Powers, or or even people like Ron Galella do not have a place in modern art. Obviously there are formal ways of shooting, and all rules are made to be broken.

People like Drew and Al Powers have literally made people pick up cameras and love to take photos. They have also been selfless in sharing what they know to help others get better.

And, as was already pointed out, judging by Ruke's success, he is doing something right. 

While I am on my soapbox, Please check out:

Nightlife threads on Photography on the Net
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=415099
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=895331

My Friend Srika's Page-His work is Stunning.
http://night-club-photography.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?5-Gallery&s=769633bb40cb692802f328e92cf30b5e
http://night-club-photography.com/forums/showthread.php?10-srika-s-photos-*NWS*

Al Powers-Las Vegas-A former club shooter "gone good". He rarely shoots clubs now. He has also switched to the dark side. :-)
http://powersimagery.com/blog/

Pages: [1]