December 21, 2014, 08:36:53 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 - PavelR

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6
61
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1d4 or 1d3 +lens
« on: November 05, 2012, 12:27:08 PM »
My ability to shoot sports with a 50D went up greatly when I got a 70-200 IS f/2.8. Put your saved money toward a better camera in a year or two and go for great glass. A 1D4 with your current glass will get you mediocre shots but at a great frame rate.
+1
Glass, AF or good MF, the reasonable ISO + correct exposure time make the image look great, not fps...
(Or 5d3 for better low light AF. I have 1d4 and FPS do not help much in 95% of sports, you need to catch the exact moment.)
Are we in agreement that better glass with a 50D will be better that a kit lens with a 1D4?  Or not?  My sports shots did get better when I paired my 50D with a 70-200 IS f/2.8 and improved a bit more when I went to a 7D.  Saving my $ for a 1Dx.  I'd like to get the shots in between the ones I get with the 7D as the frame rate goes from 8fps to 12fps.
We are in an agreement.
(Better glass improve the technical quality of an image the most. I listed some characteristics that influence an IQ the most.)
(I have set 9fps on my 1D4, because AF needs more time to follow the subject than it is available in the highest FPS, but generally fps do not help me in group indoor/outdoor sports or any athletics disciplines - only one moment is the best and it is needed to press the shutter release just before the moment. I've also used spray and pray :-) with new camera, but now one shot at the best time is better technique for me...)

62
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1d4 or 1d3 +lens
« on: November 04, 2012, 10:21:49 AM »
My ability to shoot sports with a 50D went up greatly when I got a 70-200 IS f/2.8. Put your saved money toward a better camera in a year or two and go for great glass. A 1D4 with your current glass will get you mediocre shots but at a great frame rate.
+1
Glass, AF or good MF, the reasonable ISO + correct exposure time make the image look great, not fps...
(Or 5d3 for better low light AF. I have 1d4 and FPS do not help much in 95% of sports, you need to catch the exact moment.)

63
Lenses / Re: Need comparisons between Canon 135L vs 100L
« on: October 23, 2012, 03:58:59 PM »
I own all 3 mentioned lenses.
100 - using it only for macro shots, sharp at F4
135 - sharp at F2.8 (a bit slower AF, prone to yellow cast if sun light is in / near the frame), the best bokeh (the most blurred [pleasing] background); I do not use 100 or 70-200 for IS (monopod does the same service).
70-200 II - sharp at F3.5 (fastest AF, zoom is sometimes necessary)
(I use 200, 135, 85 primes in any low light situations [including gym sports].)

64
I've shot Elinchrom's at 1/8000s with the Phottix Odin. ND is the way to go though...
Which Elinchrom line (models) are able to HSS with Odin?
(I'm looking for some mobile / outdoor solution and 1/8000 looks great...)

65
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Full Frame Sharper Than Crop?
« on: October 19, 2012, 03:23:12 PM »
I think that the main difference is in in/correct focus, DoF and overal chip technology used and of course the mpx density in 100% magnification, which reveal all details of used glass.
If I've changed, in the first link comparison of 50/1.4, the camera from 60d to 1dsII, center still looks much softer than real life photo...

67
Lenses / Re: Which Prime: 50L or 35L?
« on: October 12, 2012, 11:51:58 AM »
50L.  It's dreamy bokeh is legendary.

Same for the 135 f/2L. :)
The same on 200/2 + sharpest wide open ;-)

68
Lenses / Re: What lens should I use at my first Fashion Show?
« on: October 11, 2012, 12:20:21 PM »
I think the picture was taken from the second floor - where the technical people will be at, so I won't be there.
Yeah- all those white seats are for the vips, but where would you pick a good location.
I would try to get to that technical zone - sometimes it is possible and use 200/2 or 300/2.8 depending on distance.
In general the best place is several meters in the front of the end of the runway and enough high to minimize impact of the first line of vip heads. Sometimes it is possible to get chair or table to stand on it.
But I think that in the front of the runway will be some reserved space for photographers and videographers. It is hard to tell if there is another good place...

Sometimes it is interesting to shoot the return path with strong back light, but not the whole show for sure and there is no chance to get posing photo, which I like the most, thus I always try to get to the front of the runway...

69
Lenses / Re: What lens should I use at my first Fashion Show?
« on: October 11, 2012, 08:56:49 AM »
Video:
Good news: No shadows in the eyes, floor of light & single / unobtrusive color, single color lights
Bad news: At least 1EV difference on the runway end between top and bottom of the models.
I'm not able to figure out the absolute amount of the light, but looks like ISO 1250-1600, F 3.2, 1/320-1/500s [in my eyes] not good for prints, unless you use 1dx :-)

70
Lenses / Re: What lens should I use at my first Fashion Show?
« on: October 11, 2012, 06:22:30 AM »
It is pretty bad layout - audience close to the runway end, thus the best place to shoot is the same as the picture is taken from, but it looks like it is needed longer FL from this place (200-300mm) and it is too far to use flash...

71
Lenses / Re: What lens should I use at my first Fashion Show?
« on: October 11, 2012, 02:17:17 AM »
I recommend renting 70-200/2.8 IS II - usable for prints from F3.5-4.5 and exposure with flash - min sync time (1/160 - 1/200) [w/o flash 1/320 - 1/500]. I also recommend rent flash battery pack - recycle time from 4 AA are too slow.
Manual Camera settings is the best for changing background. (Spot metering does not usually help me...) I use only flash exposure compensation - direct flash: -1/3 (-2/3), bounced flash: +1/3 (0)
(Flash is not usually forbidden even on TV broadcasted shows.)
(I use monopod only with 200/2 to help handle the weight ;-) )
Examples (w flash):
First part 70-200, second 200/2
http://galerie.rezny.net/thumbnails.php?album=175
85/1.8:
http://galerie.rezny.net/thumbnails.php?album=164
70-200+200
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.1591854950701.2074840.1065693869&type=1&l=ac9e09898a
70-200
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.1676464905897.2082652.1065693869&type=1&l=790090f610

72
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Considering switching to Nikon
« on: October 09, 2012, 04:57:23 AM »
I did upgrade from D2x to 1DIV and found:
* 50/1.4, 85/1.8 - Nikkors are much better
* crop 17-55/2.8 - Canon have IS, sharper, cheaper
* flash exposure calculation is better on Nikon side in changing lightning on the stage
* flash recycle time is better on Nikon with 5 batteries (I need flash battery pack on Canon)
* full size body + 70-200/2.8 + flash - noticeably lighter on the Nikon side
* 70-200/4 IS nice option of the only Canon side
* Canon 300/4 with IS
* Canon 400/5.6
* Canon does not display several things in viewfinder and top display - selected AF point (on both places), selected mode, exposure compensation is not indicated by number, switched off camera do not show on the top display free space on the card - very handy - it is anytime known that battery and card are in the camera, card free space on Canon is always < 2000, ...
* custom button function "do not use flash" on Nikon

73
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Can someone help me with low light settings
« on: October 06, 2012, 06:07:53 AM »
Not trivial.
We all struggle in such situations...
I might go full manual. Set all parameters to your satisfaction for the background. Then fill in with flash. Control flash intensity with flash compensation.
Am I over simplifying it?
+1

74
Lenses / Re: Finally got my dream lens- 200mm F2 L
« on: October 06, 2012, 03:01:29 AM »
A sample of the bokeh would be appreciated...

75
Lenses / Re: Portrait Lens
« on: October 02, 2012, 05:49:45 PM »
The 100mm f/2.8L is the SHARPEST Canon lens I own.  Amazingly sharp...BUT ..
if I am going to take portraits:
1st Choice: Canon 85mm f/1.2L  II (any portrait!)
2nd Choice: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 (3/4 portrait)
End of conversation.
100L @ 2.8 is sharper than 135L @ 2.8 or than 85LII @ 2.8?

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6