March 04, 2015, 03:29:27 PM

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 - brought1

Pages: 1 [2]
Lenses / Re: Canon 14-24 2.8 - With our powers combined....
« on: September 01, 2012, 11:42:18 AM »
I really appreciate everyone's imput into this thread.  The situation with the 14-24 is very similar to the 5DMK II Vs. 5D MKIII.  For example, I purchased my 5d MKII last September...and I literally waited until the last moment in hopes that the 5dmk III was going to be released soon. 

But unfortunately, like most instances, you use what's available and make sure you do the darn best job you can with it. 

So, it may be another year until this lens is going to be released, so...I'll just make do with the 16-35, which is still a great lens. 

So...using a nikon lens on a canon body...I think I would really enjoy it.  I have several Canon FD lenses that I use (with a converter, no doubt) with my EOS systems...and they surprisingly do a magnificent job.  Actually, my favorite is my 70-210 barrel zoom (keep in mind...all manual focus - using AV)

Let's be realistic, I would never take one of these setups to a paying shoot, for fun maybe...but the offshoot chance of not capturing what i'm being paid to shoot...UGH...

The real reason for the thread - is because I'm not terribly thrilled with the 17-40 or 16-35.  Canon can do so much better, be we have to hold their feet to the fire.  Ex.  70-200 2.8L II .....I don't care who you are or what you shoot on...hands down, this is the best ( and I mean THE BEST) 70-200 lens out there in this focal range.  And if you think otherwise, then guess're on your own - Sorry.

Anyways, everyone have a great labor day weekend.  I'm going to start getting ready for a wedding i'm photographing today.


Lenses / Canon 14-24 2.8 - With our powers combined....
« on: August 31, 2012, 05:46:31 PM »
With our powers combined, "We" the loyal and (for the most part...satisfied) customers of Canon command you (with a pretty pretty please....and cherry on top) to release your secret weapon - The 14-24 2.8L upon us to smite thee Nikon. 

Let it be known, this day of 31st (it just so happens to be my birthday - the "Big" 30) of Augusta, of 2012, that "We" ( I'm really just speaking for myself) will gather groupies to petition everyday, if we must, for you to release it  ASAP.

Just trying to have a little fun here...

But seriously, why make us wait? Is it because you haven't quite released the 24-70 II and are afraid this will trump the profits of the 24-70?  Some of you may think i'm crazy, but i've really considered purchasing the Nikon 14-24 2.8 (and all of the other verbage (SP) along with an Nikon mount to EF adapter just to use their lens MANUALLY....

From reading some of the other forums, it looks like Canon will be releasing a slew of other lenses before they even touch this one.  And before the Die-Hard "Primers" respond, I have tons of primes that I love using, however, it would be nice not having to take a few of them...but rather having this bad girl. 

So everyone, don't take this posting too serious, it was meant to lighten the mood. 

I would appreciate any insightful commentary.

Have a GREAT Labor-day weekend.  I'm photographing at a blues festival...a wedding...and a bunch of other stuff this weekend. 


Site Information / Re: In Sympathy for CR Guy
« on: July 16, 2012, 10:09:56 PM »
Oh about taking my breath away and bringing me to and your family are in our prayers.   :'(



Metering and White balance shouldn't matter in a studio Environment.

And this is what is wrong with the world of photography today...
Congratulations on being the poster child for the "Lazy Digital Generation"

We are probably miscommunicating here.  They don't matter in a studio environment because

1) You meter yourself.  You are using Manual mode.

2) White balance is either 3200k for tungsten or around there or 5500 for flash.  If you are shooting off that, you are smart enough to know what it is.  Why fix it in raw when you can get it done right in camera.

So using your cameras auto metering and white balance is not required in studio.  It's a controlled environment that you as the photographer fully control.

What I said actually should be lauded by you rather than you saying it's lazy time :).  Make sense?

I completely agree!  I once met a photographer who spent 7 hours doing a fashion shoot with two amateur models and ended up taking over 8 gigs worth of raw images and spent a week editing the images to narrow them down to just 4 half decent images.  And when she asked me for my opinion, I asked her why she didn't spend more time prepping her subjects, makeup, posing, lighting...etc..etc...this way she would've had nearly a finished image right out of the camera. 

And her response to me was - it's digital, it's not like i'm wasting film. 

My next question set her off - would prefer not to learn your craft as a photographer?  In that case my grandma who knows next to nothing about photography could take poor pictures and take them to a digital artist to make them decent again...right? 

What's funny is that she started yelling at me and the other studio photographer about how she knows people that were never studio trained that take wonderful pictures. 

And I told her...that's great for them, however, this studio has a reputation for amazing photographs that are not left up to a hit and miss if you'd like to continue shooting here, you're going to need to learn a few basics.  She stormed off.

Sorry for the long story...

Wow...I'll be honest, I didn't know that about the 5d3.  That's sweeet! Thanks.


EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon 50D vs 7D
« on: July 15, 2012, 11:43:26 PM »
brought1, I think you're understating the differences from 50D to 7D. Considered individually they might not be massive enough on their own, but lots of small improvements do add up. The differences are not something "you can usually adjust in Post".

After spending time shooting with both cameras, I do agree that the 7D is a mighty fine speciman, however, from a practical standpoint, I'm sorry, you can equally get beautiful results from either camera. And yes, eventually small improvements will make a difference, but not in this scenario.  Unless you have an endless budget or absolutely must have high end gear, you'll learn that you purchase the gear you need/must in order to give you an edge or to stay current.  Comparing these two to someone who already has a 50D is a moot point, andthey've probably have in an order for a full frame camera already. And in that case, they should be looking to upgrade their lenses. 

And about the "post-editing," if you wouldn't mind sharing what cannot be achieved in post.  In all honesty, I try as best as I can to nail each and every exposure every time so I don't have to futz with post production, however, let's be practical, I have several weddings coming up and one just happens to be in a catholic church...poor lighting, no flash allowed, high ISO is expected. I would take a 7D over a 50D any day for that application, however, because I know the circumstances, I won't even bother with a 7d and jump straight to my 5D mk2 with my primes to offset noise and to get down to 1.2 or to extreme measures, my 50mm 1.0 to really avoid noise...but even with those components, you're still going to make small adjustments in post. 

For all that read this, please know I'm not trying to be argumentative towards anyone, just being practical. If you already have a 50d and want to upgrade, you might be better off going full frame, but this depends on your NEEDS as a photographer. If full frame is out of the question, then save your $$ and get better glass.  Quick much would you really get back if you sold your 50d? Not too much, believe me...or don't...go to eBay and check used will be taking quite a hit selling your 50d and end up shelling out more for the 7d with nothing left for better lenses. These little accommodations on the 7d do NOT justify a complete need to switch bodies unless your after the video feature, which then, the 7d will work just fine.

For the original owner of this post, think of your purchases as if you run a business and have to justify your expenses instead of reading which camera has the best specs and you won't go wrong.  One last point...GET WHAT YOU NEED TO BE CURRENT and WORK AT BEING A BETTER PHOTOGRAPHER...


EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon 50D vs 7D
« on: July 15, 2012, 04:10:31 AM »
I'll try to keep this short and sweet as many of you have posted excellent points!

Short of the overall quality of the image and possibly a touch better AF...and the Video capabilities, what can you do with the 7D that you HONESTLY cannot achieve with the 50D?

The bump in resolution from 10.1 to 15 MP from the 40D to 50D, was significant in giving photographers a little more cropping room.  However, the 50D and 7D images are nearly identical. 

IMO - you're better off saving your $ for better lenses or additional photography equipment instead of changing from one cropped sensor to another.  High ISO - Banding... is even apparent in the best cameras if completely pushed to their limit. 

So, the EXTRA stuff you get in the it worth paying the extra $ for what you can usually adjust in Post?  Plus...what and when are you going to print larger than a 16 x 20?  Now-a-days, people are forgoing the prints for placing the image on digital media outlets where their high resolution image is automatically scaled down to a  50-100 kb file....

Be realistic and practical!  If you were looking to start photography, then I would have a completely different point of view than if you already own something that is very good!  Learn to use your equipment to it's max...and just then, when you're needing more than what your current camera can offer...than make a decision to upgrade.   

Hey guys...Thanks for all of your great imput.  It was very nice getting a completely different point of view on the topic. 

I do have a couple of questions, especially for those who use Al Servo, for sports. 

When you're tracking someone or something during Al Servo, the camera is constantly focusing.  How do you re-compose your shot while keeping the center focus on the subject and not jumping to an object in front or behind them?  I would assume that with the new 5D3, with the crosshairs being more sensitive, using all cross types or even varients of combinations, it would be easier to accidently jump forward or backwards depending on the contrasted objects...or am I to assume that everything shot is taken in a horizontal orientation and cropped vertically, when needed.   ( I can't wait to get my paws on a 5D3 to test it out or 1Dx)  :)

Please don't be too outspoken when answering, this is the reason I actually find Al Servo mode annoying and not terribly helpful.  For sports, I use my 40D, which has always been much quicker at focusing than my 5D MK2.  And matched with my 70-200 II, it's lightning fast as you guys know.  And to be honest, I have never "NOT" fulfilled my clients needs.  And I do this with utilizing the AF button the back of the camera along with quickburst and oneshot mode - usually tossing the majority of the quickburst as almost always, the first image is usually sharpest. 

Not to take this thread off onto a tangent, I agree...that the 5D MK2 is a turtle, in it's focusing, compared to even my 40D, the 50D I used at a studio I used to work for.   

Thanks for everyone's imput!  Seriously...I appreciate it.


Hello everyone - To get right to the point....

Auto focus points - Is it me or does it seem that canon has jumped on the bandwagon with an overwhelming amount of auto focus points? 

Honestly, when i'm photographing anything from Seniors to Weddings...engagements...the whole sha-bang, I can't stand using just the center point as many photographers do, but rather I am constantly dialing between all points re-positioning my camera to get the shot. 

(a quick note before low-light photographers jump in on the conversation...When I photograph in low-light situations, the primes come out and I use the AF on the back of the camera (center focus) and hold my focal length in order to focus and re-position)

So, here's my beef...what good is it to have 61 auto focus points when you shoot like me...and use them all the time.  Would I have to dial all through them just to get the focus area and then miss the shot?  Is this a gimmick? Similarly to the Megapixel wars? Just to entice those on the fence?

Before landscapers join in, too... most successful landscape photographers are usually shooting in manual, so please don't bother commenting on how they use all their AF points...because that's BS. 

So, let me recap - landscape photogs shoot in manual or set a "Range" to focus on...low light can focus using the center focus and recompose their shot...weddings photogs either use a focus/Recompose or selective AF points...

Is the 61 AF points really just for those who were suckered into purchasing an expensive camera and can only set it to Automatic? 

One last thing....Please don't mistake my humorous demeanor for the need to respond with erroneous and illegitimate information...I am honestly curious how other photographers feel about useless AF Points.



Pages: 1 [2]