Messages

1861

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D2 & Strobe Light Question

« on: July 13, 2012, 01:22:09 PM »

Use the Flash WB preset. I still use some novatron flashes from 2003 and they've been quite reliable.

Does it hit the WB everytime?  My Novatron is 10 years old and still kicken.  If you're interested, I found a guy in TX that will repair any Novatron equipment, he was actually an engineer for them and knows what to do.  He'll actually replace your flash heads for a decent price.  The only issue I ran across is the power pack I have is a 5 prong plug and the new lights reuire a 6 prong plug.  I found an adapter to go from 5 pin to 6.
[/quote]

I use the m500 Monolights. Its just a normal plug.

1862

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D2 & Strobe Light Question

« on: July 13, 2012, 12:47:28 PM »

Hey guys,
I'm hoping someone can give me some direction on what mode to set the white balance to when shooting with a 3 light strobe set-up?  I typically leave it on auto WB and tweak it in post production; however, this time I'll have the editor, stylist, and publisher of the magazine at the shoot wanting to see every image sent to my iPad for review.  I would like to hit the WB on the spot and not have to explain that we can fix in post.. 

I’m using a 5D MK2, 90mm TS lens, 50mm f1.4, and 24-70 f2.8.  Firing with PW to a 3 light strobe set-up by Novatron with 1 large softbox and 2 umbrellas.

Thanks

Use the Flash WB preset. I still use some novatron flashes from 2003 and they've been quite reliable.

1863

Lighting / Re: 430ex ii with 5d mark iii

« on: July 13, 2012, 12:42:03 PM »

i have 175$ credit at crutch field burning a hole in my pocket. figured why not get a flash? would the 430ex ii be a suitable flash for a somewhat beginner photographer in the flash game? I will be using it basically for recreational purposes. all around photo stuff. also can the flash stay lit up as an external light for video? is this recommended?

Its a good flash to start on and later it can be a slave from a 580 EX. Its IR beam may not be enough to cover all the 61 AF points on the 5D3 though.

1864

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mk III vs D800/E, is the 5D3 better at anything?

« on: July 13, 2012, 12:36:07 PM »

This thread is going on 30 pages. Seriously? :|

1865

EOS Bodies / Re: Mirrorless Update - APS-C? [CR2]

« on: July 13, 2012, 12:33:07 PM »

Not everybody wants a smaller body, many are using battery grips with their Rebels, 60Ds/7Ds/5Ds and they like the size of it.

I cannot work with the small bodies - 1 series is ideal for me

Likewise I dont like the 5Dx size without grips as I shoot a lot in portrait mode which is a killer for the hands

Mirrorless = Compact with good IQ and a basic lens selection.

That might be how it starts ....

Not sure how good IQ and basic lens selection works unless you mean a limited range?

Well, I wont want/need a 200mm F/2 to go with it but an adapter so you could if you'd like.

24mm prime eqiv.

50mm prime eqiv.

100mm prime eqiv.

and a 18-55mm & 55-300mm zooms for the consumers. Done.

1866

Lenses / Re: lenses for my 7D - please help!

« on: July 13, 2012, 12:25:27 PM »

If you are shooting mostly outdoors with the telephoto, you can save about half the cost with the f4 L instead of the f 2.8.

Although the 15-85mm is somewhat slow, I prefer its range to that of the 17-55 2.8. It just depends on which is more important: speed or range. I find the extra 2mm at the wide end very important (essentially the difference between a 24mm and a 28mm wide angle).

I have no opinion on the 50mm, but my gut tells me that it is a lot of money for not a big advantage on your budget.

Variable Aperture is a no-no for video.

1867

EOS Bodies / Re: Mirrorless Update - APS-C? [CR2]

« on: July 13, 2012, 11:55:01 AM »

Not everybody wants a smaller body, many are using battery grips with their Rebels, 60Ds/7Ds/5Ds and they like the size of it.

I cannot work with the small bodies - 1 series is ideal for me

Likewise I dont like the 5Dx size without grips as I shoot a lot in portrait mode which is a killer for the hands

Mirrorless = Compact with good IQ and a basic lens selection.

1868

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Have you considered joining the dark side?...

« on: July 13, 2012, 11:37:24 AM »

I do not think though that Nikon would surpass my:
17TS-E L, 24TS-E L II, 35 1.4 L(this is just ordered actually!), 135 f/2L, 300 f/4L (non-IS) 70-200 f/4L IS and 70-200 f/2.8L II

having used both, I'll comment on it:
17TS nikon version is coming per the leaks and patents, but for now canon has the edge, although I prefer the 14-24 anyday over the 17TS personaly but that's because I really don't find 17mm anywhere near wide enough for anything I shoot.

24TS-E nikon has one, only it is older and doesn't do independant Tilt/shift axis configurations, but optically it is just as good. After my switch, I don't miss the canon. what can I say.

351.4L nikon wins hands down. the canon is way old and way worse. I actually wouldn't use the canon because it was so bad compared to the 24L.

135 f/2. Both suck. no really. Nikon has one with defocus control which produces superb bokeh. Much nicer than the L canon, but the canon has faster AF and less CA, but both lack VR. In terms of which one I'd get, it would be the sony Zeiss 135 f/1.8 which wipes the floor with both both optically and spec wise. I wish I had that instead.

300 f/4 non IS (the nikon version is superb) Unless you neede IS, it's a tie.

70-200 f/4. Nikon lacks it for now so definitively a win for canon. Although I'd never use that lens on any system as I prefer shallow DOF.

70-200 f/2.8II. The nikon version nearly identical performance wise with the canon have a slight edge and better MFD. But unlike something like the 17TS, or the fisheye zoom, there just isn't all that much practical difference.

The only canon glass I would consider worth sticking for it is the 65mm macro, the DO line, and the 800mm prime...but Nikon just announced theirs so it is down to very very little. Compare that to a decade ago when it wasn't even close. And all the better for having two systems to choose from means cheaper and better gear for everybody. I'm glad canon has been in a slide for the last decade losing share to nikon/sony because otherwise we'd be shooting 5DmkI's with ancient canon gear.

Lenses I prefer on nikon:

14-24 f/2.8 (since canon lacks it, I compare it to the 14mm prime which gets spanked)
24 f/1.4
35 f/1.4
85 f/1.4 (better optically at 1.4 and beyond, cheaper lighter).
16-35 f/4 (it's no that but the canon 17-35 is way worse and lacks IS)

Lenses I found to not matter which one you have:
24-70 f/2.8
70-200 f/2.8
50 f/1.4 vs f/1.2
24 PCE vs TS
45 PCE vs TS

Lenses I used to prefer on canon, or would consider as being unique enough to the system to have no equivalent in nikon land.

fisheye zoom. It is a useless feature to have zoom on it but the nikon fisheye is very old.
65 macro (although with tubes that may be a different story but the canon is more convenient with its 5X magnification)
I'm not listing the 17TS because I honestly wouldn't care unless it was a 14mm TS.

The nikon 85mm 1.8G DOES NOT surpass the 100mm F/2 canon.

I don't know but thats a silly comparison. who cares really. Neither lens is really interesting. I could believe some would pick systems because of the 14-24, or 17TS. But for the 100 f/2. that's a joke.

Well, you'll always have better luck sticking old Nikkor glass on a Canon Body than on the newest Digital Nikon bodies.

When I switched I tried that. But I found modern nikon glass destroys the old nikkor glass without exception. So I don't know how what you say makes any sense. I guess if you didn't care about image quality that would be the case....I'll keep my newly aquired nano coated nikkors thanks.

You say it's for simpletons. Partially true. But it's more for people without s*** tons of money to waste switching brands every generations. 

switching brands is relatively painless these days if your gear is in good shape. 10 years ago it wasn't. this isn't wife swapping. Take it from somebody who did it.

for what i do.. Nikon D800 doesnt have ISO 25600 for video, or sRAW, mRAW... So, NO WAY

that's right. the nikon isn't for low resolution shooters or people that want to shoot in very dark conditions. there are better cameras suited for that such as the D4 or 1DX.

Digital quality wise maybe Canon is lagging a little behind if we are to believe the tests. I do not own Nikon to compare but I believe the tests. However I wonder. A few years ago professionals used Canon and Nikon gear to produce excellent results. The fact that newer and better models are made does not negate the work that has been done up to now. It is still good and professional.

I switched because the nikon glass is just as good for all my needs, and Nikon's high resolution offerings suite my goals better. I couldn't care less if it was nikon or canon or sony that I had to purchase. If I'm going to spend so much money, it will be the system that fits me the best. I'd encourage everybody to do the same instead of suffering from stockholm syndrome...canon or nikon version. These are just tools.

I lost all respect for this post when you mentioned "135mm F/2L Sucks".

1869

Lenses / Re: lenses for my 7D - please help!

« on: July 13, 2012, 11:34:44 AM »

I've just taken delivery of a new Canon 7D (body only) for work. I've been recommended three lenses by the supplier who know what I'm going to be using the camera for:

70-200mm F/2.8L
50mm F/1.2L prime lens
15-85mm F/3.5-5.56

I'm going to be using it mostly for shooting videos in the mountains (in all weather types) in the UK, indoor/outdoor and under studio lights.  I know that the lenses are just as important as the camera (or more important depending on what you have) but there seems to be a huge range in pricing for the range I've been recommended. 

Unfortunately, the company I work for has a tight budget, but I don't want to get something cheaper and then find it's not going to get the best results.

I shoot a wide range of stuff, from a static shot of presenters in a podcast, to tracking someone skiing past me or with me skiing with them.

Could I ditch the prime lens and make do with the 70-200 and the 15-85?

Someone else recommended the Canon 50mm f1.8 which they said although a bit plasticy produced great results.  Plus the Sigma 10-20mm F3.5 EX DC HSM as another option.

I haven't shot video with a DSLR before so please excuse my ignorance!

My budget is around £1500 (US$2300)

Thanks!

The 50L is a superb lens but its overkill for video. Its meant for high speed stills but you wont notice the difference in video. Get the 50mm 1.4 canon

The 17-55 2.8 has IS which will help with handheld shooting and is fast.

Get a good tripod with a fluid head and you'll be all right. Thecinecity.com has good quality equpiment for less $$$ btw.

1870

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Mirrorless Body Style - which style do you prefer?

« on: July 12, 2012, 05:27:46 PM »

The reason I created this poll:

Then no one would buy it. The "classic" looks way better.

you would not buy it.. but i really doubt you can speak for other customers.

you have not done a survey, right?
so you can not even say how many people would prefer a classic look.

the SX1 is no beauty.. but then i find angelina jolie not that sexy either. 

Then no one would buy it. The "classic" looks way better.

Who cares how they look?  You aren't taking pictures of them, you're taking pictures with them.

I hated using my AE-1 - rotten ergonomics.  Much better with an actual grip.

This looks awesome! now only IF canon can remake the 50mm 0.95 dream machine from the 60's.

1871

Site Information / Re: Are you guys crazy?

« on: July 12, 2012, 02:53:45 PM »

I shoot with a D30 to put things into perspective sometimes. A decade ago iso 400 is the new iso 6400. 

1872

EOS Bodies / Re: Mirrorless Update - APS-C? [CR2]

« on: July 12, 2012, 02:47:09 PM »

Or they could play off of this style of camera with a modern take.

THIS WOULD BE AWESOME IN APS-C!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

+100000000000000000000000000000000000000

1873

EOS Bodies / Re: Mirrorless Update - APS-C? [CR2]

« on: July 12, 2012, 01:39:04 PM »

Then no one would buy it. The "classic" looks way better.

you would not buy it.. but i really doubt you can speak for other customers.

you have not done a survey, right?
so you can not even say how many people would prefer a classic look.

the SX1 is no beauty.. but then i find angelina jolie not that sexy either. 

We can make quick survey to see how CRs members respond to body design  Classic Vs XS1 style

Classic Styling anyday.

1874

EOS Bodies / Re: Mirrorless Update - APS-C? [CR2]

« on: July 12, 2012, 01:17:23 PM »

Yes. Atleast APS-C!!! Now just package a good 50mm 1.8 Equivalent and im good to go.

1875

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: One way to win customers

« on: July 12, 2012, 11:58:45 AM »

I Finally Bit the bullet and found a mk3 on craigslist barely used for 3150$. I couldn't resist and going to buy it tomarrow.

Way to go, we knew you couldn't resist.   

A good deal also considering I turned my 5Dc around for 700$. Not to shabby.

Nice.  You'll have to give us your first impressions.

Disappontment. The man sold the 5d3 to his brother before even got to see it. Looks like I'll have to cancel my 5Dc's auction.

Buy a NEW one...then you're done for next four years. It's really worth it to wait for used body and save $300???

I'd also have to upgrade everything else to support my camera. All in all, an extra 800$ on top of the MK3.