July 23, 2014, 12:32:04 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 ... 152 153 [154] 155 156 ... 171
2296
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5d Mark iii noise at 1600
« on: June 23, 2012, 10:59:11 AM »
I can't take this anymore.  You are underexposing badly.  In digital photography, if you underexpose, you can't really fix it without adding noise.  You can't just add light with LR retroactively; if you didn't collect it, it's not there.  Now let me help you out.  I'd like you to see some success.  You want to slightly overexpose in digital if you are going to be off in your metering.  +1/3 is best, but +2/3 and +1 are salvageable, as long as you don't have blown highlights.  For instance, in landscape photography I meter off the sky, set the shutter speed accordingly, then expose +2/3 typically.  If I overexpose slightly, that's not a problem in LR, underexposing is. 

Your porch photo is difficult because it's a high contrast situation, much like shooting in the woods on a hot sunny day.  In that case, meter off the brightest face, then exposure bracket, 5D Mark III will do a bunch of bracketing, I'd do -1/3, 0, +1/3, +2/3, +1.  Pick the best photo.  When you get better than shoot only on shot with no bracketing.

I would go even further will the porch picture - large amounts of flash would sort the whole thing out, putting light on the important things (the people) and reducing the ambient highlights

... and reduce the iso to 100/200

Yes.  Good point.

2297
Lenses / Re: What would youdo?
« on: June 23, 2012, 10:43:08 AM »
I would either put towards full frame (maybe 5dc)

 or invest in some wider/faster glass, have you considered the 28/1.8?

If you do weddings, I assume you can afford a 5D Mark II.  There is no reason to buy a 12mp camera from 2005 if you are a professional wedding photographer.  Get a new 5D Mark II if you want to spend about $2k for superb IQ.

2298
Lenses / Re: Faster cheapish prime for a wedding?
« on: June 23, 2012, 10:23:37 AM »
I am disappointed that you are not prepared to listen or learn from other peoples experience

I am well prepared to learn & listen, that's why I'm reading plenty of posts - see me asking about what 24-70 to get. It's just that your attitude and enthusiasm for all Canon no matter what wouldn't encourage me to take advice from *you*. But of course I am prepared to change my mind anytime if I see other evidence of professional-like unbiased advice. But time will tell, so no need to discuss this further from my side.

the 70-300L on crop imho just isn't a wedding lens - and as I wrote, I have it, too
I'll disagree, with the caveat being that the ceremony has to be outdoors.

Ok, I should have added that of course - I had your standard wedding in mind, civil reg office & church inside, then group shots & portraits outside and later on, and the sun's not always shining... I just wanted to make sure the op knows the limitations of shooting and esp. af'ing with f4-5.6(!) inside, if he didn't happen to have tried it himself. And if it's a friend who's getting the shots, they shouldn't be too concerned if they're not getting 85L-style bokeh in portraits.

The 70-300L is a fine and not too heavy lens that is sharp wide open - that's why I bought it after all. But for me, it's always most interesting to hear people point out shortcomings of equipment they actually own rather than globally recommend it.

Bryan Carnathan recommends this lens as a portrait lens.  Is that heavy enough?  ;)

2299
EOS Bodies / Re: LightRoom...HELP!
« on: June 22, 2012, 11:58:01 PM »
I have Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4 Classroom in a Book and The Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4 Book:  The Complete Guide for Photographers by Martin Evening.  Both are fantastic.

2300
When the 1D X does come out, you're right.  Although maybe not enough people will have it due to the price.  I highly doubt serious photographers who purchase this camera will start a childish thread?  Oh boy I hope not.

2301
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D3 with AF assist
« on: June 22, 2012, 10:04:13 PM »
If it's off, it doesn't get confused  ;D

2302
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS-1D X - June 20, 2012 in Japan
« on: June 22, 2012, 09:33:06 PM »
June 28 from B&H?  Uh, no.

I really hope I'm wrong, but...

2303
Lenses / Re: Faster cheapish prime for a wedding?
« on: June 22, 2012, 09:32:29 PM »
I'd modify my setup:  5D Mark II and 60D backup, 24-70L II, 135L, 600EX-RT flash, tripod.  That would be my bare essentials if I had to start over with gear and go right into wedding photography.  This is for the criteria of two bodies, 2 lenses, a flash, and a tripod.  Kind of a scary thought, haha.

2304
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5d Mark iii noise at 1600
« on: June 22, 2012, 09:28:05 PM »
I can't take this anymore.  You are underexposing badly.  In digital photography, if you underexpose, you can't really fix it without adding noise.  You can't just add light with LR retroactively; if you didn't collect it, it's not there.  Now let me help you out.  I'd like you to see some success.  You want to slightly overexpose in digital if you are going to be off in your metering.  +1/3 is best, but +2/3 and +1 are salvageable, as long as you don't have blown highlights.  For instance, in landscape photography I meter off the sky, set the shutter speed accordingly, then expose +2/3 typically.  If I overexpose slightly, that's not a problem in LR, underexposing is. 

Your porch photo is difficult because it's a high contrast situation, much like shooting in the woods on a hot sunny day.  In that case, meter off the brightest face, then exposure bracket, 5D Mark III will do a bunch of bracketing, I'd do -1/3, 0, +1/3, +2/3, +1.  Pick the best photo.  When you get better than shoot only on shot with no bracketing.

2305
Lenses / Re: Faster cheapish prime for a wedding?
« on: June 22, 2012, 05:15:18 PM »
to the OP: honestly you are are going to be fine with your current set up.  If anything do as others have suggested and buy/rent a FF body. 

Obviously if you are doing this for friends you want to make sure their day is special, but since you aren't being paid don't go over board with a bunch of stuff you have to cart around with you all day.  After all I assume you want to enjoy the day celebrating your friends as much as you want to also capture it.  Set expecations low, then they will be pleasantly surprised when you deliver the goods! 

If it was me, I'd bring the 7D, 24-70, a flash, and be done with it.

+1

2306
Wow, bashing a camera that you don't even own. Have you even used one? This camera is built for professional photojournalists and wedding photographers in mind. The majority of us don't need or want 36 megapixels because that is not great for working out in the field. When you submit photos to most wire services you only need about 2000 x 2000 pixels at most. The samples I have seen at ISO 6400 are super clean and the ones I saw at ISO 40k had no banding (maybe if you push it a stop or two).

Go ahead and switch to Nikon if you want, then after you find out how hard it is to get Nikon bodies and lenses you'll want to come back to Canon.

For 10k? I'd buy a lot of 600EX-RTs with a 1DX.

No worries Mark.  It's a joke thread; or at least that's the way I took it.

2307
There's a light leak issue.  Only 18MP (must suck).  Shadow IQ is worse than 1Ds III.  Images are "soft."  Only takes 2 flash cards.  Isn't mirrorless.  D800's better.

2308
Lenses / Re: Faster cheapish prime for a wedding?
« on: June 22, 2012, 12:06:20 PM »
Again, lots of very useful stuff there - thank you all. Seriously looking at a 5D now, rather than a lens.

On the long lens argument (gosh, so sorry - I didn't mean to start a fight but really appreciate that you care  ;)), I take the point on the 70-200 and will consider renting though there aren't many options locally.

I think I'd probably only use the 70-300 for outdoor candids from an unobtrusive distance. And I'm very happy to let the wifesistant lug it around.

Interesting comments on the wireless flash for the reception. I do have wireless triggers but had originally discounted it as too much faffing around, potentially intrusive and at risk of kids booting the light stands over. But I'll take them with me when I go to check the venue, see how it looks.

I would recommend not buying an original 5D right now, especially if you need it for weddings.  2005 release date, no way, get a 5D Mark II.  Hands down it's worth the money for what you'll be doing and you need the reliability.  You'll have no idea on shutter count on a 5D.  You will notice the resolution difference, sorry.  Did you really mean an original 5D?

If you already have the 70-300L, use it.  Outside.

2309
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D3 or 200mm f/2?
« on: June 22, 2012, 11:00:51 AM »
I always recommend glass over bodies, but in this case I can't.  Upgrade to the 5D Mk III first, then start saving again and get the 200 f/2L.  Get that lens, because I can tell you, as good as the 135L is, the 200L is even better.  Whether you make money off these purchases or not, I think your photography means enough to you, that I can guarantee you that it will be worth it to you.  5D Mark III about $3500, 200 f/2L about $5999, total purchase value $9500.  That's not that big of a deal if you spread it out and your photography will go where it hasn't yet.  The 200L loses very little resale value anyways, for financial security.

2310
EOS Bodies / Re: F1 Silverstone - advice with the 5D MkIII AF
« on: June 22, 2012, 10:57:04 AM »
Read the 5D Mark III autofocus manual.  There are settings that allow you to do what you want, ignoring objects that move in front of your target, and they work because I've tried them.  I think it's setting 2 in the AI Servo menu, if that's what you want to do.  The manual explains it all.

Pages: 1 ... 152 153 [154] 155 156 ... 171