March 06, 2015, 07:21:47 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 - V8Beast

Pages: 1 ... 49 50 [51] 52 53 ... 74
751
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D3 and things that could be improved just a little.
« on: April 04, 2012, 10:00:49 PM »
I'd like a button that tracks my location via GPS, and sends over the nearest hooker, preferably a blonde. Oh wait, wrong forum....

752
The ONLy test you will ever need to see . . . . . EXCEPT the part @ 5:20 . . . if ytou are Canonista . . PLEASE look awayby 5:19 At the very least.

Even as a Canon shooter, I don't know why I found the part at 5:20 so funny.

753
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D MKIII vs 1Ds MKIII
« on: April 04, 2012, 04:38:06 PM »
I'm about to plagiarize myself from another post, but here goes.

The 5DIII vs. 1DsIII debate is a tough one. I think I'm committed to the 5DIII at this point, but the 1DsIII is awfully tempting for roughly the same money. I shoot cars, and the highest I pushed the ISO was 3,200 on my last shoot, and most of the time ISO was 400 or less, with the occasional tick up to 800-1,600. That's another way of saying that if the biggest advantage of the 5DIII over the 1DsIII is ISO performance, I didn't push it hard enough on this last shoot to benefit from it. That said, I do have some ideas on how to really push the ISO for creative effect in the future, so perhaps that will change my opinion once I fully utilize the 5DIII's potential.

IQ aside, the 5DIII does handle very well. I still prefer the handling of my 1DII, but the 5DIII's ergonomics and responsiveness are very good. Most the second-hand 1D bodies I've seen for sale are beat to hell, probably since many are used by sports photogs and journalists that are on the go. However, I've seen many 1DsIII's on ebay that are in outstanding condition. Perhaps they've lived a more coddled life inside a studio :)   

754
So they concluded that the D800 didn't blow the 5DIII clear out of the water. They obviously have a Canon bias, and their video is bogus ;D Seriously, though, to summarize their findings:

1) The D800 has a resolution/detail advantage, but not enough to really matter in most situations.
2) The D800 has a slight advantage in DR, but it's hardly noticeable.
3) The 5DIII has a snappier AF system.
4) The 5DIII has slightly cleaner high ISO images at the expense of smudging detail.
5) The 5DIII has "punchier" raw files
6) Both are amazing cameras and you can't go wrong either way.

To me, #5 is why I shoot Canon. The D800 is a brilliant machine, but I just don't like the look of it's files as much as the 5DIII. "Punchy" isn't exactly a scientific term, but the 5D line has always had a certain balance of color and contrast that give their files such a pleasing look. That's more important to me than some lab test results, but to each their own :)

755
EOS Bodies / Re: Art Morris in love with 5D III!
« on: April 03, 2012, 03:49:33 PM »
Good stuff, and great images. If someone told me six months ago that Canon would release a 5DIII that's capable of capturing BIF, I would have told them that they're out of their mind :)

756
EOS Bodies / Re: My first real shoot with the 5DIII
« on: April 03, 2012, 02:36:37 PM »
I enjoyed these photos... so after your first shoot, what would you rather own, the 5D Mark III or a 1Ds Mark III?  :)

That's a tough one. I think I'm committed to the 5DIII at this point, but the 1DsIII is awfully tempting for roughly the same money. I believe the highest I pushed the ISO was 3,200 on this last shoot, and most of the time ISO was 400 or less, with the occasional tick up to 800-1,600. That's another way of saying that if the biggest advantage of the 5DIII over the 1DsIII is ISO performance, I didn't push it hard enough on this last shoot to benefit from it. That said, I do have some ideas on how to really push the ISO for creative effect in the future, so perhaps that will change my opinion once I fully utilize the 5DIII's potential.

IQ aside, the 5DIII does handle very well. It's still not a 1-series, but its ergonomics and responsiveness are very good. 

Well, keep in mind, the shots themselves have some blocked shadows and some small areas of blown highlights. I don't think you captured the full dynamic range of the scene in those shots, which is why I think you might have had some issues metering and needed some extra light. (Note: The highlights themselves, although mostly very tiny and point-like, could very well represent one to two stops of additional DR that you are not able to capture.)

You're probably right. IMHO, it's better to have more DR than you need and not always use it, then it is to have less DR than you need and come up short when you really need to push a file. That said, this is purely a subjective assessment, but sometimes I think all the DR in the world can't possibly capture the scene as it's framed in the viewfinder. That's OK, though, because I don't always want the sensor to capture all that DR. Some blown highlights here and there can enhance the depth and dimension of an image. Take the first shot, for instance. Parts of the front spoiler are blown out, but I didn't bother trying to knock down the highlights on the spoiler or the grille, because to my eye, doing so would make the image look flat and two dimensional. Another common technique I see are people that dodge and burn an image in post that actually reduces the DR of the final product. This is in part why I find people's fixation on DR a little silly. Yes it's important, but it's just one of countless factors that affects your ability to create art with a camera.

Quote
At least with my 7D, yes, the camera is actually always running its focus check algorithm. If you manually focus and half-cock the shutter button, you should still get a focus confirmation beep. The camera is not actually trying to focus, but it knows what areas of the scene are in and out of focus.

Good to know!

757
EOS Bodies / Re: My first real shoot with the 5DIII
« on: April 03, 2012, 02:14:52 PM »
cool but how do you fix it without damaging the paint etc looking at my own car i can see too many places to fix it to, the rear is easy as i have a tow hitch, i guess i could take the number plate off the front and make a steel bracket that fits that, it would be pretty universal for all cars then but i'm not sure how i feel about hanging several thousand dollars worth of camera off those 2 little screw holes which arent real solid

i'm keen to have a play with this i have some really cool shoot ideas once i get a rig worked out and build it
any other info you are willing to offer up would be really appreciated ;)

There are two options: rig the boom to the body, or rig it to the bottom of the car. If you rig the bottom side of the car, it's much easier to remove in post, since you're only cloning it out from the road surface. The downside is that an under-mount rig takes longer to setup, you have to monkey around with jacks and jack stands in the field, and there might not be enough ground clearance with cars that sit low to the ground.

Rigging it to the body is much easier to set up. This is a huge factor when you want to get fire off multiple shots from different angles in a limited amount of time. The biggest drawback is that it's much harder to remove it in post. It often requires recreating body panels and parts of the background. Typical attachment  points are the hood/bonnet, trunk/book, the roof, the windshields, or a combination of all of them. The suction cups are surprisingly sturdy, and I've never had one come loose. They can leave swirl marks on darker paints, but they'll buff right out.

I case you're still awake, I sent you a PM with some helpful links on the subject matter :)

758
EOS Bodies / Re: My first real shoot with the 5DIII
« on: April 02, 2012, 10:15:22 PM »
awesome vid!,
that rig sure looks epic and expensive! what do they cost?
and what sort of rig do you use? something a little more in the realms of affordability for mortals?

Those rigs are sweet. Cream of the crop, for sure. I could have my figures mixed up, as I've never used one before, but I believe they cost $3,000 a day to rent. For that fee, they send out a henchmen that attaches it to the car for you, and moves it around should you want to shoot at different angles. The rig in the video has an optional plexiglass arm to make it easier to remove from the image in photoshop. Crazy stuff. Here's a link:

http://www.move-n-shoot.com/us_rig_inventory_motorig1.html

There are places that make turnkey rigs for less than $1,000, but even those are way overpriced. Outside of high-rollin' commerical photogs, almost everyone else builds their. There really isn't much to it. Mine is just a piece of steel pipe that attaches to the car with suction cups and some Manfrotto super clamps. I'm looking into getting a aluminum pole to cut down on the weight and try to get some more distance between the car and camera. 

759
EOS Bodies / Re: My first real shoot with the 5DIII
« on: April 02, 2012, 10:06:42 PM »
If you count dynamic range being from the darkest pixel to the brightest, there is a LOT of dynamic range in those photos. There are some very bright highlights, particularly off the chrome. I am not surprised that you couldn't capture it all in a single shot without pushing down the shadows. If I had to guess, I'd say...counting the very bright highlights...that there was more than 14 stops of DR in those shots.

You don't say. How can a $hitty Canon sensor manage that kind of DR ;D? I know preliminary reports show that the DR of the 5DII and III are similar, but the MKIII is a nice step up from the 5DC. The first shot was captured in a single exposure, while I usually need to merge at least two exposures together in similar shots with the 5DC. I actually had couple of separate exposures in which I hit the dark side of the car with flash, and planned on layering it in, but I was able to pull out enough shadow detail to eliminate the need to do so. 5DIII = less post processing for me, so I can't complain ;)

Quote
I've italicized parts that might be relevant to you. Most importantly is that the previous metering sensors may have assumed incorrectly about how much light was actually available in the scene, as they saw primarily in the red spectrum (monochromatically). The new iFCL metering should be MORE accurate, not less, given that it "sees" full color. It is not surprising that you might have to add more light, for two reasons. One because it meters blue and green now as well as red...silicon is less sensitive to both of those additional colors, and less space is given to red metering. Also for the fact that with a layered system, blue is less sensitive and in the top layer, so the red layer is going to have a certain amount of light filtered out by the layer above, making it less sensitive as well. The lower sensitivity seems like it is by design, though, to produce more accurate, highlight-friendly metering.

Very interesting info as always. At this point I've concluded that there's nothing wrong with the metering, just my expectations. I'm sure the new metering works very well for many shooting situations, and the stuff I threw at it was just outside the realm of it's optimal performance.

Quote
Second, the iFCL meter DOES take into account focus, and it will attempt to weight metering around AF points that seem to have focus above those that do not. The backgrounds in some of your wider full-car shots are out of focus, so the meter will probably give them less weight than the car (and all its sparkly highlights) in the foreground. Again, it is not surprising that you need to add more light, since the background is darker than it might have been with a 5DII.

Didn't know that, either! What happens when you manually focus? Does the camera still try to figure out which areas are in focus, and which aren't, for metering purposes?

760
EOS Bodies / Re: Visit to Bh Photo video, Held 5dIII it is awesome!
« on: April 02, 2012, 06:59:03 PM »
I was in Manhattan last summer but didn't have time to swing by B&H. I'd like to visit the place where I've spent so much of my money someday :) Did they have any 5DIII bodies in stock, or just the kits?

761
Lenses / Re: 24-105 f/4 & 5d3 vs 24-70 f/2.8 & 5d2
« on: April 02, 2012, 05:01:15 PM »
Optically, it's the worst lens I own, but it's versatility means it's what's on my camera most of the time.
So you haven't got any of the Canon wide angles then?  ;D

Hey, I like my 17-40! I used a 16-35 before that, and I liked it as well. I hardly use wide-angles, though, so maybe that's why I don't notice their optical shortcomings :)

762
Lenses / Re: 24-105 f/4 & 5d3 vs 24-70 f/2.8 & 5d2
« on: April 02, 2012, 04:40:26 PM »
So now the next lens on my list is the 70-200 f/4 IS L.  I was waiting to see how the 24-105 fared before I made my decision on 70-200 f/4 vs f/2.8, my mind is now made up.  F/4 it is...smaller, lighter, cheaper, and bright enough for the 5d III!

Glad to see that you actually tried the lens out before trying it. There are lots of "f/2.8 elitists" that love bashing the f/4L glass that have never even used it before. The 24-70L is an optically superior lens, hands down, but the the zoom range of the 24-105 combined with its IS make it one damn versatile lens. Optically, it's the worst lens I own, but it's versatility means it's what's on my camera most of the time.

With ISO performance improving with each generation of camera, and AF points become more sensitive to smaller apertures, f/4 lenses are a much more viable option.

763
EOS Bodies / Re: My first real shoot with the 5DIII
« on: April 02, 2012, 03:15:59 PM »
V8 Are those done in camera or post processing to get the feeling of motion?

The motion blur is real, but how it's captured isn't. Bascially, you rig a pole to the car, hang your camera off of it, and drive or push the car very slowly to minimize vibration. That enables using a very slow shutter speed, usually several seconds long, to dramatically increase the motion blur. The pole is then removed in post.

Here's a video clip of a super high-end, super high-budget commercial photog rigging up a car. (Edit: The vid won't embed, so just click the URL at the bottom.)



At the commercial level, they have the budget to rent far more elaborate rigs that allow mounting the camera much farther back from the car. This enables using longer focal lengths, and minimizing distortion, and capturing the proportions of the car in a far more pleasing manner. With homemade setups that editorial hacks like myself use, you can't get the camera as far back from the car as you'd like, so you have to rely on wide-angle lenses which don't always yield pleasing proportions. Some people like the distortion, but I despise it. 

764
EOS Bodies / Re: My first real shoot with the 5DIII
« on: April 02, 2012, 11:56:19 AM »
I love the 1st and 4th photos.

What was your setup/settings for the 4th one?

It's a mix of natural and accent lighting with a couple of off-camera 550EXs. It was taken with a 70-300L, and according to the exif data shot at 120mm, f/8, 1/3 shutter, ISO 100. One flash is to the left of the wheel, and the other is to the right of the grille. The image is more or less straight out of camera.

holy f*ck the first is gorgeus. the camera seems to be sliding over the grass
how did you do that

The camera is sliding over the grass :) There's a boom attached to the front of the car which was later removed in post. This allows using a very long shutter speed to enhance motion blur. While the results can be dramatic, the technique is very common and quite overdone in the walk of automotive photography. I don't like rigging cars all that much, as it's become kinda gimicky, but when you have a car that doesn't run very well and you need to get some action shots, it is very effective for that purpose :)

765
EOS Bodies / Re: My first real shoot with the 5DIII
« on: April 02, 2012, 11:47:45 AM »
Thanks for the compliments, fellas. Logistically, a lot of stuff went wrong on this shoot, so I was glad to be able to salvage some decent shots.

as for metering i stopped using evaluative on the 5D2 and the 5D3
I always use spot metering and get a quick meter from the center of the frame of the part of the scene i want to use as my exposure control point and set my shutter speed in manual accordingly, I've stopped shooting in AV or Tv as I find this method is quicker than bothering with changing exposure compensation on the fly
just remember that unless using a 1D its only metering from the center not from your selected af point so on the 5Dmk3 check you exposure first on the center frame, then compose and shoot.

Thanks for the tip. I have the luxury of manually focusing on most of my shots. Since there are no AF points in that situation, I'm presume the camera just meters the entire scene and not from the center point?

As you know the 5d3 has the same 63zone metering system as the 7D. I have two 7D's and both nearly always needed +1 exp comp in both ambient and ttl flash, especially for portraits. I got used to it so It's not much of a problem for me know I have a 5dmk3 also.
I must admit it would be nice if the metering was a bit more accurate, however I like the sound of the spot metering idea then recomposing I might give that a whirl and see how I get on.

Great info! I definitely need to refine my technique to adapt to the 5DIII. While in the field, I couldn't figure out if the metering wasn't what I was accustomed to, or if the screen display was set too dark. The screen on the 5DC is so bad, I rarely rely on it to judge exposure. The 5DIII, however, is another beast entirely :) In the worst case scenario, I'll just train my brain to treat a +1 reading on the light meter as "0."

First I must say that I love the shots and my comment is purely from a personal point of view. From the above samples it looks to ME like the photos are sligthly over exposed - but it works and it gives a great feel to the pics. Could the exposure compensation on your side maybe be because of your personal taste? This said... if I say the pics looks slightly overexposed, it is definately not by a full stop - more like 2/3rds.

The monitor on my desktop is calibrated, and on it the exposures look fine. The images do look slightly over exposed on my laptop, however, which has one of those stupid glossy screens and hasn't been calibrated for quite some time. That said, I have gotten into the habit of slightly overexposing. Many of my clients use very poor quality paper and ink, and the images tend to print darker than what I submit to them.

Pages: 1 ... 49 50 [51] 52 53 ... 74