November 28, 2014, 06:30:36 AM

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 - bdunbar79

Pages: 1 ... 115 116 [117] 118 119 ... 174
1741
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Bryan Carnathan's 1D X Review Is Finished
« on: August 10, 2012, 11:57:30 PM »
I am happy with it too, but you know how it is, when you get something new you maybe hope it may do the 1/3 stops of 1/640 and 1/800  8)

1742
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: How good is the 7D autofocus system?
« on: August 10, 2012, 11:56:24 PM »
The 7D's AF system is really good.  I don't know if it's any worse than the 5D Mark III's in low light, but it is really good.  I don't think it is desirous though, using any camera, to need rapid AF in low light.  The lowest light I go in is in a gym or night football and usually I wouldn't consider that as "low light" regarding AF, considering the 7D and 5D3 will do well in both situations.

1743
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Bryan Carnathan's 1D X Review Is Finished
« on: August 10, 2012, 11:38:59 PM »
Looks like the 1D X's faux manual mode is exactly the same as the 1D Mark IV.  There is a minimum shutter speed you can set in the main menu, however, the fastest in that menu is 1/250s.

If ISO Safety Shift, Min shutter speed to 1/500 or 1/1000, with auto ISO and EC set to whatever you wish.  I would have liked if you can set Min shutter to 1/640 or 1/800.  I can't remember if you can on the 1D4 but I don't think you could; I think it jumped from 1/500 to 1/1000 if I remember correctly.

1744
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Some Pictures with the 1D X
« on: August 10, 2012, 10:41:59 PM »
Was that giant fire perhaps a giant 7D on fire?   ;D

1745
Thankfully the D800 is here.  None of the photos I ever took the last 10 years made me smile until the D800.  Now photography can begin.

1746
Lenses / Re: EF 20mm f1.8L VS. EF 14-24 f4L
« on: August 09, 2012, 09:18:49 PM »
14-24 f/4 makes no sense whatsoever. 17-40 is perfectly fine for all intents and purposes. A 14-24 would have to be f/2.8 to pique my interest, but only if it had Godlike corner to corner sharpness. Even then, the featherweight 17-40 would probably be my choice, since any subject I'd be shooting wider than 24mm would be static and I'd have a tripod with me. UWA's distort people waaay too much for my taste, and in such an unflattering way. I'm seriously contemplating picking up an 8-15 fishy for UWA purposes instead of a 17-40 or 16-35.

It makes perfect sense for those who want a zoom lens from 14 to 24mm.  If you don't like the 14-24 because of distortion of people, how is an 8-15 going to be better?  Or do you mean you want one or the other?

1747
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D and 5D II that different?
« on: August 09, 2012, 08:49:26 PM »
Or you could just get a 5D Mark III or a used 1D Mark IV and have everything in ONE camera, considering you can only take ONE picture at a time.  What good does having two cameras with seperate qualities do you when you need both qualities at the same time?  I purposefully sold my 5D Mark II and 7D for a 5D Mark III so I could have both in one camera (and then some). 

RLPhoto has the right idea regarding cost, however.  A 5D and 7D will be much cheaper than either camera I mentioned.  Price is certainly a factor and I won't pretend that it doesn't matter.  So I am also caught between a rock and a hard place when people ask me this question.  Do you spend a lot of money for ONE camera with everything, or for much cheaper, get two cameras; one with quality A and one with quality B?  Unfortunately my photography does not allow me to do so.  If yours does, then yes, by all means have an A and B body (not to be confused with main and backup).

Yes, the 7D and 5D2 are different and are a great A and B body duo.

1748
Lenses / Re: EF 20mm f1.8L VS. EF 14-24 f4L
« on: August 09, 2012, 07:49:20 PM »
It'd be hard for me to buy the 14-24L right now, because I have the 16-35L II which works brilliantly (although not as well as the 24L at 24mm).  I do like the idea of the 20 f/1.8L though.  I like primes.

1749
I get the way the auto HDR works. It sounds like a perfectly good feature, but not useful to me. I don't need the jpeg preview or any in-camera processing. I wouldn't use it. And I can do auto bracketing in the d800, or most high end dslrs.

And I'm less inclined to shoot at high speed than to use a remote with the mirror locked up so I can keep vibration to a minimum.

But my real point is that as great as HDR is, there are situations where it doesn't work, it always requires more work, and it's great to be less dependent on it.

I think that saying there's no advantage to increased DR because you can combine exposures is like saying there's no advantage to more resolution because you can stitch. There's a bit of truth to it, but ... seriously. Show me someone who would choose multiple exposures and extended processing time over a single exposure.

I actually use ME more than HDR on my 5D3.  It's more fun anyways.

1750
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX or 85mm 1.2?
« on: August 09, 2012, 06:59:15 PM »
Total luck.  I am a graduate of the school in north central Ohio and the sports and media director was looking for a photographer for the media website and knew I was one.  Ironically it turns out I knew the guy, Al, in the past.  Funny how things work out.  Money won't be that much.  I could make more money doing weddings, easily.  And yes, buying expensive zoom lenses isn't fun.  I paid $9500 for a 300 f/2.8L IS I and 400 f/2.8L IS I awhile back and that was NOT fun.  But how can you not have those lenses for those events, especially football and track?  I would like to shoot weddings as a backup photographer instead now, when I can, because I have another full time job.  But it's hard around here because, believe it not, I'm seeing a lot of wedding photographers with no backup so I am not needed in this capacity.  The ideal situation would be sports fall, winter, spring, with intermittent backup wedding jobs, and in the summer doing some lead and backup wedding work.  I like weddings for the pure enjoyment of the challenge, but being backup takes at least some pressure off of me.  So I wouldn't mind one darn bit being backup on every wedding I went to.  I just like it because I think it's fun and challenging, and I like to learn.

1751
Oh crap!!  I looked at RLPhoto's profile and thought you had a 5D3.  You have a 5D.


1752
:) 1) So basically I should use this flash only mounted to the camera via hot shoe or a TTL cable, am I righ? (And they will make a "great couple"). 2) (If yes) Are there any other restrictions of the photographic nature (camera set to manual exposure doesn't work with the flash, I can't use the flash as a fill light, I can't freeze movement) and not pure technology (like number of slave units or... dunno...)? Thanks!

If you mount the 600EX-RT flash directly to the camera, you can set the unit to high-speed sync and shoot at any shutter speed.  Manual exposure certainly works with the flash.  I set my flash with the same parameters as what my camera has set, and do a "pre-flash" with the MFn button, reframe, and shoot.  It'll also give you a distance from object either in ETTL or Manual.  I often times will use expsosure braketing or compensation.  My best advice is to, like I did, get out the manual and start doing the instructions like exercises out of a textbook.  I learned the flash in about a day doing it this way.  It'll take some time but well worth it.

1753
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX or 85mm 1.2?
« on: August 09, 2012, 06:34:43 PM »
Tcapp,

I understand.  You probably make the faces/people sort of "pop" out from the background?  In retrospect I wish I had done more of that style in the past.  This is one reason I joined this site so that I could improve and learn in all of my weak areas.  Sports is quite a bit different from weddings and I'd say if I had to choose, weddings are more difficult in all areas of photography.

1754
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX or 85mm 1.2?
« on: August 09, 2012, 06:24:17 PM »
I have more than what I need to take amazing pictures in almost any situation but I after I buy something I find myself looking to the next thing to buy.  I don't know what is wrong with me it is like a disease.  I know I am crazy and should just be content with what I have.  So if you were in my situation and you were going to buy something new would you sell one of the 5D3s and get a 1DX or would you buy the 85mm 1.2?  I am a little afraid the 85mm 1.2 will be a little slow focusing at receptions similar to the 50mm 1.2.

Well, I think most of us here feel exactly the same way.  I know I do! 

I'm not a Wedding Photographer, but I was a Wedding Videographer for a few years, so I can relate to the importance of capturing those once in a lifetime photos.  There's no do-over.  I have the 85mm f/1.2L II and I shot my friends Wedding as a second shooter, but unaffiliated with the wedding photographer, so I was able to play around and let me tell you I would not trust the 85mm 1.2 for critical moments during the ceremony or reception, but it definitely can find a place in your kit, for portraits, candids, rings, non-critical reception shots, flowers and things like that.

Of course you can nail great shots with or without pre-focusing and I have, but I wouldn't trust it down the Aisle. It's heavy, the DOF is thin, and it's slow, but when you do nail it, it's spectacular.

The 1DX is obviously an Awesome Camera and I can certainly see you selling one of your 5DIII's for it, but it's also a bit heavy to shoot with all day, and you should also consider that if you shoot with two cameras at the same time, then switching from the 1DX to the 5DIII quickly may present some confusion, and the 1DX will definitely feel heavier on your shoulder, especially with the 85mm f/1.2L attached.

However, I really do love the 1DX and 85mm f/1.2L II.  I'm not trying to talk you out of either.  I'm just adding some of my thoughts for you to consider.

If I did have to pick one then I would recommend the 85mm 1.2L II.

Rich

Please elaborate on how the DOF is thin on a lens?  If my basic photography understanding is somewhat accurate, wouldn't that depend on aperture??  Bride down the aisle is no problem with f/8.  You just have to know where to meter.

Wow. As a wedding photographer myself, the only time I ever shoot anything near f8 is when I'm doing a macro with the rings and i need some extra DoF. I shoot 90% of my photos on f2 (or 2.8 with my 70-200). The rest are at f1.4. (Yes, big group shots are stopped down a tad bit more, but certainly not to f8).

My advice for the OP is to get the sigma 85 1.4. The difference between that and the canon are small, the sigma focuses faster, and it way cheaper. I love it and so will you. Shoot it wide open and be amazed. It has a significantly higher keeper rate than my canon 50.

Really?  Why?  I'm not doubting your success one bit.  I just prefer on most of my shots to have a deeper DOF.  Close ups and portrait shots sure, I'll shoot very wide.  But some shots, like bride up the aisle, I like background in focus too.  It's just my personal preference.  Again, many have different styles that work for them.  I use a lot of flash and I can shoot at pretty high ISO values.  I won't be doing many weddings as my task has now been devoted to sports.  I prefer sports because it's more fun to me personally and there's a lot less pressure than a wedding :)

1755
Unfortunately, automatically implemented HDR features aren't of interest to me in their current state. I need the raw files.

That's exactly what the 5DIII does. It saves all the original RAW files plus a JPEG preview rendering in your choice of a few styles (including a not-hideous "Natural" mode that avoids excessive tone-mapping).

And, as I mentioned, it does this at six frames per second.

It's also got a pretty extensive auto-bracket mode that does the same thing but without the JPEG rendering.

b&

Exactly.  There's a slight confusion on how this is done.  Yes, you can shoot your 3 shots and have the camera produce a 4th shot that is the HDR JPEG.  But you can also do HDR in post with your 3 original RAW files.  This is the exact same thing with Multi-Exposure mode.  So to say the JPEG feature is a downside is actually wrong.  It'll give you a free JPEG of all 3 shots and if you don't like it, you can do your own HDR image in post.

Pages: 1 ... 115 116 [117] 118 119 ... 174