« on: February 08, 2012, 02:07:52 AM »
while i agree with you completely, i am interested to know why you chose to shoot that shoot at iso 4000 and f3.5 rather than iso 3200 and f2.8? considering the 70-200 has very little benefit to sharpness in stopping down relative to wide open.
It was a deathly quiet lecture, and I was directed not to shoot excessively to avoid distracting the audience with "clicks". That said, I knew going in that my image count would be low. And, as expected, my first sort yielded only 87 high quality "keepers", which will probably be cut down to 40 or less final images that are passed on to the client. For a client that typically sees 200+ images for my event work, this may come as a surprise (but they understand the shooting limitations).
So... since I knew my shots would be a "one and done" type approach, I dropped the aperture down to improve focus and maximize keepers. f/2.8 owns when I can shoot as much as I want, but when I can only shoot a couple times a minute - I need to know my focus is on 100% of the time - and f/3.5 gives me that extra security of knowing my DOF won't miss in those types of strict shooting environments.
Just my $0.02.