Messages

1651

Lenses / Re: new lens and camerabody

« on: June 27, 2011, 01:23:46 PM »

I've still got the 450D, but hardly use the 70-300mm, so my advice would be to get a decent walkaround lens with a body, don't buy a body with a kit lens, it's gonna end up in your camera bag forever once you get a decent walkabout.  Then after several months, check your images, are you going long or wide, landscape, sports, portrait, etc - once you figure out what you take photos of, use the remaining money you have to service your lens and filter needs.

I agree with most everything you said... a couple things to think about is lenses, on average, especially really good ones, will stay in your bag for many many years (and camera bodies for that matter)... You can get a kit lens and "learn" but they tend not to keep their value once your ready to upgrade and it (especailly once you move on and can compare better), aren't as good of lenses. 

Personally I like the xxD series over the rebels because of the LCD's, ergonomics, size, etc etc however it is a personal matter and perhaps thats where you should go to a camera store and hold the different bodies, do your research and find out the differences and weight the price differences to see if for an extra $100-200 a top LCD, stronger body, ergonomics, etc...is worth it for you or not.  To some it will, to some it will be seen as a simple "splurge"... Only you can answer that.  Lastly bodies get replaced every 12-18 months (for consumer grade bodies) and lenses on average can go much much longer before upgrades, sometimes decades, see the 17-40mm L.  If you had the option in your budget, spend more money on lenses than bodies. 

1652

Lenses / Re: new lens and camerabody

« on: June 27, 2011, 12:44:04 PM »

True, while "there's no bad lens, there's bad photographers", he also stated he had 3000 euros saved up and if he had that money to invest in photography gear/training, he might as well get the best bang for your buck and the 24-105 is going to suit him longer and be more consistent than the 18-55 from shot to shot to shot.  I will give my advise that I gave in other threads that you should invest money in training whether it be dvd's, books, online tutorials, kelby training, etc... You can get a lot of camera/lens for 3000 euros but if you dont know what to do with them, they might as well be a paperweight.  If you are going to be a casual photographer and looking for a camera to shoot in auto and plan on using the camera once or so a month, then a cheapie rebel xt and 18-55 would suit your needs completely... If you want to be serious and plan on putting in the time and effort to become an advanced hobbyist or semi pro to pro... Once you go L lenses, you will never go back... It's like a disease and all your gear will eventually become L lenses (thousands of dollars/euros later)  =)

1653

Animal Kingdom / Re: First trials with the amazing 7D

« on: June 27, 2011, 10:58:16 AM »

I wouldn't look down too much on the kit lens you have... the MTF charts on this lens appears to be nearly as good if not better than L lenses at this range, however, other factors such as construction/sealing/durability tip the scales in the L lenses favor.  You've got a nice piece of equipment and heads and shoulders better than its original 28-135 lens.  Learn your gear.  I heard one seasoned pro say that when he gets new lenses, he would play non stop with that lens/camera for 6 months to a year (minus other photoshoots that may need other equipment) so that when he was done with that period he was confident he knew everything about that gear so when situations popped up in which he needed to use that gear, he would know not only what f-stops worked best for what he wanted to produce, but where was the sweet spot in the lens, in what conditions the gear worked best so he can get the best shots when he wanted it.  This is a lost art now-a-days where people dont get as intimate with their equipment and dont learn it good enough, and when they get missed shots, they blame the gear, not themselves. 

1654

Lenses / Re: new lens and camerabody

« on: June 27, 2011, 10:21:14 AM »

A cheaper body and a superb lens will do you better in the long run than an expensive body and a bad lens.  Like what bycostello said, learning how to use it and get the most out of the camera/lens is crucial, especially if this is your first camera gear.  I would recommend the 60D or maybe even the rebel t2I or t3i and a 24-70L or 24-105L.  If you wanted to get even more zooming range you could consider the 35-350L but IMHO the sharpness isn't as good as the first 2 lenses mentioned.  The 17-55mm IS is no slouch and is really good on cameras such as the rebels and the 60D, however construction is iffy and if you ever upgrade to a full frame camera such as the 5D or the 1D series, then it isnt compatible whereas the other L lenses are.  I would think you could pick up a 60D and a 17-55 for under 2000 euros and use the rest on training dvd's or classes?

1655

EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon Withdraw from the Megapixel War?

« on: June 23, 2011, 10:12:57 AM »

V8,  I was thinking more about your issues and I remember one time about 7-8 years ago I attended a short class taught but a guy called Harry Liles... (or something like that)... anyways he was a photographer who shot for companies such as lexus and porsche for their yearly display catalogs...You may know about these tricks allready but for those who dont, he said that on moving shots, they are going very slow... at times less than 5 MPH... that allows for smooth stable ride in the 2nd car and allows for shots up to 5 seconds or longer to allow for the wheel blur.  He also said to always shoot dusk or dawn (magic hours)... There's enough light in the sky to build up exposure on long exposures and not enough light where you can afford longer exposures even with low Fstope 2.8-5.6.  He also mentioned that on time sensitive shots they get a car rig that attached to the car to be photographed and extends the camera to the angle you want it to be... Focus the camera, then use a remote from another car to fire the shutter when you want to... Remove the rig in post production.  I dont know how practical those are to when you want a specific road/bridge and you got traffic and your metro area... but for giggles, there they are... Also for driving scenes, most companies want the driver burned out/darked out or hidden... the idea is they want the viewer to feel like they are/can be driving the car and when they see someone else in the car, it causes a disconnect thinking its "someone elses" car instead of "it can be my car"... I wasn't his favorite student because others had high budgets and would rent cars for each shoot to have new and exciting cars... I didn't have that in my budget so I had to shoot my car or my friends car for shoots... not as exciting, haha. 

1656

EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon Withdraw from the Megapixel War?

« on: June 23, 2011, 08:43:45 AM »

V8beast, don't feel like a douche. Sharing portfolios and critiques help everyone get better. My website is attached to my profile. It's a work in progress trying to make it html5 compliant however I need to replace my flash portfolios... Yuck. Architecture, commercial and retouching are my strong suits. I keep a minimal portrait portfolio should a client ever ask if I can do portraits as well. But that isn't my strong point.

Regarding your specific situation you mentioned, I don't suppose using your old 20d with 5fps or trying to use a 40d or 7d if you can't use the 1ds. 40d with 6 and 7d with 8fps could catch it. I undserstand the frustrations of 3fps at times. Regarding the bouncy car, reminds me of an article I read in the latest CPN network magazine produced by canon. They interviewed a photo who shoots in antartica and shoots from a helicopter. They asked how he gets sharp shots given the vibration of the copter. He said the only to combat such strong movement was shutter speed.

Regarding the dust, what lenses were you using?  Some have that gasket for the lens mount. I know on the 1ds and newer cameras like the 7d and 5d2 and maybe the 60d has that dust mapping in camera technology but don't think that's in the 5d classic. Dpp may have that to help you out. Don't think that shipped with the 5d classic but you should have that in the dpp from the 1ds.

1657

EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon Withdraw from the Megapixel War?

« on: June 22, 2011, 10:48:20 PM »

Have you had the opportunity to play with the new 5D or the 1d series? 

I never upgraded to the 5DII because I didn't feel it was enough of an upgrade over the 5D. I found a great deal on a used 1DsMKIII, and while the image quality is just incrementally better, the AF system and faster frame rate absolutely crushes the 5D. So does the 1Ds enable me to capture a higher caliber of image over the 5D? Not necessarily, but it sure makes things a hell of a lot easier and saves a ton in the field and in PP.

I never upgraded to the 5D II for a totally different set of situations, got the 50D to tide me over, the 7D came out, my father-in-law loved the 50D and I hated the 50D so I gladly let him buy it off me to get the 7D... Now i'm awaiting the next batch of cameras to see where I go from here in my evolution of digital photography.  I do agree using more "feature rich" cameras such as 1Ds makes life easy, however when people come off as "if you dont have x camera your stupid, a lesser photographer, and will never take as good of pictures"... That's when my feathers get ruffled and I got pipe in.  I'm glad we are able to reach some common ground.  While yes, I would love to be able to move to a 1Ds series camera, i would rather upgrade glass and incrementally upgrade bodys until I either land a steller account in which I can start splurging willy nilly on 1D cameras or get "that" photo that rakes me my millions... Until then I'm doing what I can to pay my underwater mortgage, bills, and feed my kids.  =)

1658

EOS Bodies / Re: My Prediction for the new EOS Lineup

« on: June 22, 2011, 10:37:59 PM »

possible but I still cant see them COMBINING the 1D series and separating the 5D series... Kinda counter intuitive... I could see them adding a 5D and 3D or something like that, but separating to 2 5d's... dunno...

1659

EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon Withdraw from the Megapixel War?

« on: June 22, 2011, 12:28:05 PM »

V8beast, I would like to thank nuero for pointing out your online portfolio should you wish to call it a portfolio or not.  You have talent and skill at what you do, however I did not see any 1d series camera photos anywhere in your photos... from what I saw, you had photos taken with a 5d classic, 20D, and powershot.  (most of your "work"/shop style photos seemed to be with the powershot with the most recent few with the 5d, did you recently acquire the 5d?  Point is I'm glad you're making due with what cameras you have to work with (all 12MP or less).  Have you had the opportunity to play with the new 5D or the 1d series?  Yes, we all look with admiration to the top of the line photos, but seriously, unless you work with them on an ongoing bases and have a solid comparison between the two, we can make any argument you wish however we are talking hypothetical rather than practical use.  We all wish you the best with your photography, however it is more constructive to bounce ideas off each other to make each other better photographers and utilize our gear better than pick fights over gear, especially when you're not as experienced with that gear yourself ...

1660

EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon Withdraw from the Megapixel War?

« on: June 22, 2011, 12:19:38 PM »

Lastly, while it used to be different 10 years ago, the rule of thumb WAS to spend twice amount on each lens than you spent on the camera body.  At the end of the day, it was the glass that was important, not the camera.  While prices of lenses has remained slightly constant and the prices of camera bodys have skyrocketed, even if you spent near 1:1 on glass, you should be in good condition...

Lens prices have gone up, too - not as much as bodies, but they've outpaced inflation by a fair margin.

I think the advice still holds - the lens is going to have a bigger impact on IQ than the body.  Personally, I've got a lens:body value ratio of slightly more than 3.5:1.

I want to say roughly my lens:body ratio is around 2:1 however it changes year to year as I upgrade bodies and lenses...  It gets kinda mind numbing when you crunch the numbers.  =)

1661

EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon Withdraw from the Megapixel War?

« on: June 22, 2011, 10:21:07 AM »

Dont worry about hurting my feelings, however if you cannot get a shot with a xxd camera with the quality that you could get with a 1ds... then that kinda reflects on your ability to fully utilize your gear and skill.  That's all I'm getting at.   

That's funny. I'm glad your xxD bodies and 7D are suitable for your needs. I, too, remember the days when I had yet to reach the limit of lesser, entry-level equipment. Keep practicing, and maybe you'll get there too someday

By your account, anyone who shoots with a 1D or 1Ds isn't capable of capturing the same caliber of images with an xxD body. Using your logic, nicer equipment is for less skilled photographers, and the truly skilled studs like you stick with inferior equipment. Think whatever helps you sleep better at night, bud.

Haha thanks for your comment neuro... All i'm getting at is you do not NEED as a prerequisite a 1Ds or equivalent to get awesome photos.  You remind me of a photographer i went to school with who like you, was an elitist... He said in order to get the BEST photos, you need a hassy, hassy glass, top of the line this, top of the line that...  between the two of us, I'm the one doing professional work and he has his hassy on his mantle collecting dust. 

Yes, I'm am anxiously awaiting for new and an improved 5d mark III however I do not in any way consider any xxd or 7d or 5d camera, a "lesser" camera nor do I consider myself a lesser photographer for using said cameras... At the end, they are just tools of the trade and you have to push cameras to the limit to get the shots you want.  Other than AF, there isn't much difference than a built in grip and weathersealing.  And if I'm not mistaken, many photogs worked for DECADES with no AF just fine, and that was at that day in age when film cost money, lots of money when you throw in developing and or prints... If you screwed up a roll, that came out of your pocketbook.  You learned how to nail focus with what you got every time or as you said, time is money and it cost you money.  With your reliance on AF and the 1d in order to get an image you couldn't get otherwise with any other camera, as I said before, kinda shows your level of raw skill in this regard. 

Lastly, while it used to be different 10 years ago, the rule of thumb WAS to spend twice amount on each lens than you spent on the camera body.  At the end of the day, it was the glass that was important, not the camera.  While prices of lenses has remained slightly constant and the prices of camera bodys have skyrocketed, even if you spent near 1:1 on glass, you should be in good condition... so if as you suggest is about the gear, what lenses are you pairing with your camera...

1662

EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon Withdraw from the Megapixel War?

« on: June 21, 2011, 07:15:51 PM »

Torger... regarding your post, it seems like you are trying to point out all the limitations and saying if you want to do this, this, and that, you cannot use x, y and z.  Handholding is bad on a 7d because of camera shake?  Ever hear of faster shutters and as a backup?  Tilt Shift to make up for DOF?  Are you kidding me?  Yes you can (if you have your angles right) get a horizontal focus however subjects on the floor and ceiling will be OOF at shallow F Stops... The fact is yes we are venturing into a new horizon, and yes, canon, nikon, sony, et al are all creating new lenses/cameras/gadgets to prepare for the new wave of cameras... Yes, diffraction is a reality, but it's just something to overcome... anyone remember reciprocity in the film days?  a 1 second exposure quickly turned into a 30 second exposure just depending on the type film you were using!  Diffraction has always been there but print sizes and resolution were so small with 35mm's that no one saw it.  Odds are with the 7D, at 8x10, you probably wouldn't see it with decent glass.  Stop worrying about what your camera CANT do and starting finding ways to overcome and be a better photographer.

Yes fast shutter speeds is a good backup, but then you usually have too little light to go for ISO100, and then electronic and shot noise takes down the effective resolution, so you pretty much end up at around that 12 megapixel effective resolution anyway. Thing is you need really short shutter speeds to avoid camera moves that makes 12+ megapixels tack sharp, shorter than "traditional" hand-hold times since those are based on what resolution you would expect from 35mm film.

The purpose of the whole discussion with hand-holdability does not need more than ~12 megapixels was to make clear that if you only do hand-held photography you shouldn't scream for more megapixels today. The megapixel hunt is for us that shoot from a tripod with mirror up and remote shutter and dream about affording a medium format system so we could do even larger prints. It is probably quite a small group, but we exist.

Tilt is to make up for DOF, shift is perspective control. Anyone that has worked with a view camera in landscape photography know that tilt is used *alot*, perhaps in the majority of photos. You often don't get 100% perfect sharpness in the whole image of course, but you can in many cases make a much better sharpness optimization than you can without tilt, and new compositions of near-far-type is possible. When you may have needed f/22 without tilt you could get away with f/8, and thus both get less diffraction and shorter shutter speed with less wind problems. The more resolution your system can produce, the more you want to avoid the smallest apertures, and the more valuable the tilt function becomes. Some compositions made possible by tilt have so much depth of field that even f/22 is not enough.

I'm not exactly worried about performance. However, I invest quite a lot of money in my hobby and thus make careful technical analysis of the performance of the system. If quality wasn't important to me, I'd just go for a Canon S95 compact camera and happily shoot my landscapes. Aside from quality, it can do all pictures I can do with my current system. But I kind of like the photographic craft and want to be able to produce the best technical quality within my budget, so that the 4 - 5 pictures I manage to do a year that do have sufficient artistic quality to be framed on the wall also have true professional technical quality and can be made very large. So I gather all this technical knowledge to be able to make wise investment decisions, and to know how to make the best possible out of a situation in the field. But it's not like I don't shoot pictures if I can't use ISO100 and optimal aperture... :-).

To be frank, you can easily get away with up to ISO 1000 in most situations on the 7D... I've shot with higher and noise isn't bad... I will say that the 50D has more noise than the 7D and has less MP... I shoot a lot of handholding with my cameras... sometimes you need to shoot 2-4x the MM of the lens you are using, but it's not hard getting tack sharp images with my gear unless you are shooting indoors... then yes, a tripod is required, but as you can expect with most cameras...

Heck the same can be said with large format cameras in regards to size and resolution, the 4x5 view camera had to be tripod bound cause of size and weight but they were able to come up with 4x5 feild cameras which were handheld and that has even higher resolution than modern digitals.  Dont forget Image stabilization within lenses... Unless you have the shakes, you shouldn't have problems handholding with fast shutters and getting tack sharp images.  What lenses are you using that cannot get sharp images?  There's a difference between theory photography and practical photography... I understand your theory about MP and tack sharp images but in practice, in what situation have you ever had problems... please provide examples and details...

i've shot with 4x5's, medium formats, 35mm... to be honest 3 years ago I sold my view camera cause of lack of use... There are other ways to get around DOF including for landscapes and such including but not limited to focus bracketing and hyperfocal distance focusing which can use lower f-stops.  To be honest, the latter of the two has never let me down on my landscapes.  Also as lens quality improves, so will diffraction and this a new era in lenses and cameras...

1663

EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon Withdraw from the Megapixel War?

« on: June 21, 2011, 06:23:33 PM »

Really, how many people are printing at sizes that require higher MP?  I understand that Canon has to compete with what others sell just to stay competitive, but that's because the consumer is buying their camera based on just MP.  How many of you ever shot with a 1V, 3, 7/7E, or even a Rebel?  Except for speed, AF, and weather sealing (OK the 1V offered a very primitive EXIF data), there was very little difference.  What I am trying to say is that the resultant picture was usually just as good regardless of the body (not the lens though).  I still have my 28-70, I have no plans on upgrading to the 24-70 much less anything that comes down the road.

Only when we do very large enlargements (bigger than 8x12, probably larger than 13x19) would we see a difference...and very few photo's get enlarged to that size.  Frankly, I don't have the money to afford the framing for all the enlargements that I would like.

I'm sure the lenses Ansel Adams used would be considered vastly inferior by today's standard...but I'll take his photo's over mine anyday.  Technique is worth far more than glass and sensors anyday.

And as a side note, on sharpness and landscapes.  Lens sharpness is a moot point for any longer exposusers on a tripod, all it takes is a breeze, much less a gust, and sharpness goes out the window.

I agree with your sentiments regarding skill... with my clients, most portraits, the sizes range from 8x10's to 11x14... Keep in mind, even with the 7D at 300dpi it's native size only pumps out a 17.5"x11.5".  While that's more than most people, and I know you can print at 240dpi and get slightly larger, it isn't as big as you would really think.  I also have clients that like 2 page spreads and their magazines are roughly letter paper sized and so you are looking at about 11x17 right there, plus needing enough for a bleed.  Lastly, on epsons you can get away with printing at lower DPI, however with commercial printers, they still require 300 DPI or they look crappy with the crappy CMYK color mode... As said before, I'd rather have the extra MP in my backpocket to shoot with as needed than need it and not have it.  PS.... this last spring a company going to a tradeshow wanted a mural shot for their tradeshow booth... It was at 10 feet wide by 8 feet tall... I only needed to shoot it at 72dpi because of the printer they were using for the booth... with the 7d vertically, I was able to shoot the mural in 7 photos overlapping a little each time and used photoshop to quickly stitch them together... I was able to produce an image at their resolution and size that required no interpolation and fractal enlargement you would need if shot with a lesser camera. 

1664

EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon Withdraw from the Megapixel War?

« on: June 21, 2011, 05:37:40 PM »

"Pro" sports photographers you see at races, games, etc I would bet you my paycheck came from a bigger company such as but not limited to magazines (espn, sports illustrated), newspapers, other media outlets that either has photographers on staff they send out to games/events whom they provide the gear for.. They usually also have press passes and access the typical photographer wouldn't have.  Pro photographers in those instances are the ones on the sidelines and wannabe's are in the stands with the camera security screened before letting them in the event. 

7D, in most events minus lets say indoor arena's or whatever with low low light, is more than adequate and has very nice IQ for most of my needs and my clients needs.  I do not claim to be a professional sports photographer, however when I get the request, I have had no problems using my 7D to shoot a 2 page spread magazine shot.  7D is not as poor IQ as you let on.

Personally I couldn't give a rip what you or any other person says about photography, but I just want to get out the truth, not the opinion of photography.  Crop sensors can hold their own if that's all you need and you dont need to sell your xxd or xxxd cameras for point and shoots if your willing to put in the time and energy to learn this craft.  Dont worry about hurting my feelings, however if you cannot get a shot with a xxd camera with the quality that you could get with a 1ds... then that kinda reflects on your ability to fully utilize your gear and skill.  That's all I'm getting at.   

1665

EOS Bodies / Re: Will Canon Withdraw from the Megapixel War?

« on: June 21, 2011, 04:26:36 PM »

V8beast, case in point about your gear comments, I knew 2 photographers... one works on Hollywood movie posters and the other taking photos at airports... The airport photographer had to take some pictures of airplanes taking off on runways... He sat on the runway and took pictures of airliners as they charged at him.  He didn't shoot 1ds's or medium formats or such, he had this little point and shoot camera so when he got the picture he needed he can run off the runway.  The other Hollywood guy took the original photo for the "i am legend" movie poster with Will Smith with a point and shoot as well.  Not all pro's shoot with $4000-8000 gear...

I think you're missing the point. Given enough time and patience, and commitment to spending long hours in post processing, I can get the same shot with a 60D as I can with a 1DMKIV. Is it satisfying to get similar results with lesser equipment and chalk it up to superior technique? Absolutely. Unfortunately, time is a commodity that's rarely on your side for a busy pro photographer. As the adage goes, time is money, and if your photography tools enable you to get a job done more quickly and efficiently, you'll be able turn around a greater quantity of work in a shorter duration of time, and pay off the extra premium you paid for nicer equipment. I can see how it might be unimaginable for a hobbyist to spend three times as much for a 1Ds than for a 5DMKII, when the 5D can match the 1Ds in image quality, but working pros are almost always under time constraints. As such, a camera that just works and "doesn't get in your way" is just as important as image quality, and the 1Ds higher FPS and far superior AF just flat out crushes the 5D.

Let's say I'm covering a race and there's a wreck or a pivotal pass that needs to be captured to adequately cover the event. If luck is on your side, you can get away with a slow, portrait/studio oriented camera like a 5D. If you're really lucky, maybe even a point and shoot will work. However, the truth of the matter is that wrecks or passes like that happen in a few brief seconds, and you can't risk missing the shot of something that's only going to happen once. Plus, you're standing next to a half dozen photographers from magazines that compete directly with the magazine you're working for. If you're the only loser that doesn't get the shot, and all the competing magazines have it, you can bet your sweet hiney that your editor will be pissed. He could very well hire another photographer the next time around, so there's just too much at risk by limping around with lesser equipment. 

I've been cheap before, whether it's with glass or bodies, but every time I make the plunge and invest in nicer gear, I always ask myself why I didn't do it sooner. That's not to say that novices should go out and spend $20K in gear, only to wonder why their images suck, but their comes a point where you've maximized the potential of your equipment and no amount of practice or improvement in technique will make up for it. Granted it take a LONG time to get to that point, but with enough practice, everyone will get there.

I understand where you are coming from, however, in my experience as a working professional (making 100% of my income due to my photography), there are 4 groups of people who own and use these 1d series cameras in which you call "pro"... 1st... agencies who deal with high price clients and photographers working with said agencies (including newspapers, magazines, etc).  These are the creme of the crop photographers... 2nd... people who work freelance for newspapers/magazines/etc who negotiate prices for photographs which easily pays for said camera.  These are the photogs not good enough to be hired full time.  3rd... Hobbyists who need to have the latest and greatest, and lastly, those who are incredibly stupid with their money and cant compensate otherwise.  There are a lot of "working professionals" that dont fit within those categories that make due with what they have. 

I've always been taught to do everything possible to get it "right" in camera so post processing is at a minimal.  I am comfortable with post where I dont have to spend long on each photo if I royally screw up, but thankfully those are few and far between.  I wont lie and say I want the 7D AF in the new 5D MIII... however I feel the 7D AF is more than capable for 99% of all situations.  If I run into that 1% situation, I also, as a pro, have canon CPS to borrow cameras/lenses for when needed.  Lastly, I've shot several low light football games, air races, air shows, etc when I had my 30D, 50D's and it was rare I got missed focus.  If anything it was too slow shutter than anything else.  I feel its commentators such as you that make people feel that it's all about the gear and not about skill.  If you got the skill, you should get good photos off of any camera as you would with the $8000 cameras... It's just the $8000 cameras make it that much easier which has taken away some of the skill factor from many good photographers.