« 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
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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.