The Professional Photography and Photoshop Thread

[eugimon]

why? because they're lighter and smaller and you can get a tighter crop without losing depth of field.

I don't know why you guys think a full frame just automatically means better. It matters what you're using the camera and lens for.

As far as DX and EF-S lenses sucking, well, that's your opinion, completely unfounded and without merit, but hey, isn't that what opinions are for?

[anime52k8]

why? because they're lighter and smaller and you can get a tighter crop without losing depth of field.

because most of the "lighter smaller and cheaper" comes from low-end construction and glass. And they show more barrel distortion, vignetting and corner/edge softening than comparable normal lenses on a crop body.

[eugimon]

because most of the "lighter smaller and cheaper" comes from low-end construction and glass. And they show more barrel distortion, vignetting and corner/edge softening than comparable normal lenses on a crop body.

That's just not entirely true. If you're going to compare the cheap starter lenses versus full frame glass, then of course but the higher end cropped lenses work just as well or better than their full frame counter parts.

[Vegas]

full frame FTW!

[anime52k8]

That's just not entirely true. If you're going to compare the cheap starter lenses versus full frame glass, then of course but the higher end cropped lenses work just as well or better than their full frame counter parts.

Ok, some do have very good glass, but once you start to see good optical quality the weight/size/cost advantage starts to get really marginal. a perfect example is canons EF-S 17-55mm. That lens is optically as good as an L lens in the same focal range, but it also cost about the same as those L lenses and isn't any smaller. It is lighter, but that's because it's mostly plastic (and not weather sealed).

and like I said, even the nicest lenses will have some distortion/vignetting/edge softness, around the periphery of there image circle. with a normal lens on a crop body, the outer edge gets cropped out, with a cropped lens it doesn't.

then there's the obvious lack of comparability if you do want to go full frame latter (or if you want to have both)

basically, except for getting super wide angle lenses, I don't see them being worth it.

[MacrossMan]

My reason for wanting to go full frame is fairly simple...I think. My next purchase is the Nikon 70-200 VRII. Although reviews are saying it's good on DX bodies it is a full frame lens. I plan to eventually buy a full frame body and do not want to be stuck with selection of DX lenses since glass is where it's at and not bodies. This is an expensive hobby and I'd rather be buying full frame lenses now instead of investing in DX. Rather than learn conversions for DX I'd rather go old school and learn on the 35mm curve. The easier the better as far as I'm concerned.

Eugimon, why the Cannon body over Nikon for full-frame? I'm somewhat paticular about Nikon lenses and for what I plan to shoot will it make all that much of a difference?

I've had an offer to do some nightclub photography on a regular basis and I'm looking for a good portable photo printer. Any suggestions?

[Vegas]

ive just checked the D700 prices and im shocked cuz that camera is still expensive.

[Skull-1]

Here you go.

Thanks to fellow MWorlders for helping.

[eugimon]

Ok, some do have very good glass, but once you start to see good optical quality the weight/size/cost advantage starts to get really marginal. a perfect example is canons EF-S 17-55mm. That lens is optically as good as an L lens in the same focal range, but it also cost about the same as those L lenses and isn't any smaller. It is lighter, but that's because it's mostly plastic (and not weather sealed).

and like I said, even the nicest lenses will have some distortion/vignetting/edge softness, around the periphery of there image circle. with a normal lens on a crop body, the outer edge gets cropped out, with a cropped lens it doesn't.

then there's the obvious lack of comparability if you do want to go full frame latter (or if you want to have both)

basically, except for getting super wide angle lenses, I don't see them being worth it.

I don't know about canon but with Nikon they put a lot of emphasis into their DX lineup and there's lots of DX badged lenses that at least equal if not superior to their full frame counterparts.

Plastic bodies and weather sealing don't bother me as I don't shoot in conditions where those would matter and there are metal bodied Nikon DX lenses and some even have weather stripping. Besides, with nikon from the D300 on the bodies have weather stripping.

Full frame lenses have their own structural problems as well. Mainly lens drift due to the weight of the glass.

Macrossman:

It depends on what you need the full frame for. If you you're doing it for the resolution (20+ megapixel) the 5DmkII is the superior camera. The Nikon equivalent is MUCH more expensive and doesn't perform nearly as well. If you want the full frame for the wide angle or low light performance and don't care about the resolution, then stick with Nikon because their 12 megapixel full frame bodies will out perform their canon counterparts and you'll still have Nikon's improved AF system.

Nikon got the sensor for the D3x from Sony and like while they managed to improve and smooth out the performance it still doesn't have the ISO performance the 5dmkII. Most people agree that it's a fantastic studio camera but it's field performance is hampered by it's poor ISO handling.

Vegas:

Yeah, nikon is weird like that. When the economy took a nose dive they jacked up all their prices and they have kept them up. go figure.

Edited February 20, 2010 by eugimon

[Dante74]

My reason for wanting to go full frame is fairly simple...I think. My next purchase is the Nikon 70-200 VRII. Although reviews are saying it's good on DX bodies it is a full frame lens. I plan to eventually buy a full frame body and do not want to be stuck with selection of DX lenses since glass is where it's at and not bodies. This is an expensive hobby and I'd rather be buying full frame lenses now instead of investing in DX. Rather than learn conversions for DX I'd rather go old school and learn on the 35mm curve. The easier the better as far as I'm concerned.

Eugimon, why the Cannon body over Nikon for full-frame? I'm somewhat paticular about Nikon lenses and for what I plan to shoot will it make all that much of a difference?

I've had an offer to do some nightclub photography on a regular basis and I'm looking for a good portable photo printer. Any suggestions?

If you're going to do nightclub photography (ie. low light and lots of movement) you'll need to use fast lenses and high ISO. Choose the camera that performs best at those high ISO's. Canon also just released the follow up to the 70-200 mm f2.8 IS. From what I've read online, it's supposed to be even better then its predecessor but it's still expensive as hell (up to $3000!). Prices should go down to about half the current amount in about six months though.

If you're going to make a living from photography, get the Nikon D3x. It's currently the best camera on the market.

Edited February 20, 2010 by Dante74

[Kicker773]

OMG i'm lost.. oh well i haven't taken any pics in a while, but as soon as I'm done with my paperwork imma hit the camera

[Kicker773]

Not professional, but took it while I was hurrying to pick some stuff up from rents house..One of my favorite figs surprisingly

[Skull-1]

"Werewolf Two-One-Zero, feet dry."

Thanks to Grapetang for the Photoshop work.

http://robotech-aod.com/images/ValkToys/Al...02-Flying2B.jpg

Edited March 7, 2010 by Skull-1

[MacrossMan]

Who's that peeking in my window?

[Dante74]

My boss just gave me the go-ahead to purchase a Canon 5D mkII, a 24-70 mm f2.8 lens, a Speedlite 580 EX II flash, two 16GB CF cards, B+W 77 mm Slim UV filter, circular polarizer filter, etc etc.

...

wait for it...

...

WOOOHOOOOOOOO!!!!!11

[eugimon]

wow, nice!

[Vegas]

wow! Dante got lots of $$$$$. congrats man

[MacrossMan]

30 days...

[Vegas]

@macrossman, i will be waiting to see some fullframe goodness from you

and i need to start shooting again

Edited March 11, 2010 by Vegas

[Dante74]

Yeah, me too.

Expect some Full Frame Valkyrie Goodness™ when I get my new toy.

[MacrossMan]

@macrossman, i will be waiting to see some fullframe goodness from you

and i need to start shooting again

Man I wish! I'm still a few months out with the FX body. I get my next piece of glass in about 30 days give or take. I'm registered to take a six week DSLR class that starts on April 20th. I still haven't harnessed the usefulness of the D90 so I am hoping this class will give me a foundation to start capturing some great shots. Who knows, I may stay with the DX body or wait to see what Nikon's move is with their next prosumer FX body before making the jump. I think for now I will continue to cop nice lenses until then. Just ready to get all this stuff figured out so I can start taking some great shots. Spring is just around the corner and we had an amazing lightning storm last night after the tornado passed through.

Is it possible to set the camera up and leave the shutter open to capture stuff like that? I mean can you "set it and forget it" and walk away while having the shutter set to close like every 10 seconds or so? Otherwise, how do photographers capture pictures of lightning?

[Dante74]

Canon camera's have a 'bulb' function where the shutter stays open for as long as you keep the button pressed down. I'm sure Nion camera's have the same functionallity, just don't know what it's called.

[Vegas]

Otherwise, how do photographers capture pictures of lightning?

by luck!

[MacrossMan]

Canon camera's have a 'bulb' function where the shutter stays open for as long as you keep the button pressed down. I'm sure Nion camera's have the same functionallity, just don't know what it's called.

Not sure what it's called either, but I do know the D90 will do this.

by luck!

Well damn! I tell ya, there was blinding lightning coming from the sky last night and it probably wouldn't have taken much luck to capture some nice shots.

I tell ya though Vegas, I remember when you first mentioned selling some Valks in order to pay for some camera stuff and I thought you were crazy man! Can't believe I've done the same thing. Fortunately I haven't had to part with a lot, but I have had to decide to focus on one scale for the time being...1/48!!! My fixation with customs don't help much either, but once they're out of the way I'll focus on completing my 1/60 collection and continue to enjoy this whole photography thing. Can't wait for my class to start!

[Vegas]

I tell ya though Vegas, I remember when you first mentioned selling some Valks in order to pay for some camera stuff and I thought you were crazy man! Can't believe I've done the same thing.

LOL and good luck on the class man.

btw im selling my 50mm 1.8 to get the 50 1.4 and probably a ST-E2 Transmitter

[Dante74]

LOL and good luck on the class man.

btw im selling my 50mm 1.8 to get the 50 1.4 and probably a ST-E2 Transmitter

Why not sell a kidney and get the 50 1.2?

[Vegas]

Why not sell a kidney and get the 50 1.2?

maybe for a 200 F2

sold the lens and just purchased the 50mm F1.4

im so excited now

[Dante74]

We demand pics!

maybe for a 200 F2

sold the lens and just purchased the 50mm F1.4

im so excited now

[eugimon]

We demand pics!

seriously, tease.

[MacrossMan]

sold the lens and just purchased the 50mm F1.4

Thinking about selling my 35mm 1.8 DX to get the Nikon version of this lens. It's on the radar...

[eugimon]

Thinking about selling my 35mm 1.8 DX to get the Nikon version of this lens. It's on the radar...

if you're gonna get a 50mm for your nikon get the sigma 50mm HSM.

[Vegas]

i purchased one at B&H so the lens wont be here til next week

ill definitely take some pics when i get it.

[Lynx7725]

Is it possible to set the camera up and leave the shutter open to capture stuff like that? I mean can you "set it and forget it" and walk away while having the shutter set to close like every 10 seconds or so? Otherwise, how do photographers capture pictures of lightning?

Generally speaking, all DSLRs are capable of doing part of this -- the aforementioned "bulb" mode. I know Nikon DSLRs can do this out of box. But they don't control sequence of shots; that's just not a common requirement. But there bound to be control software out there to do it. Astronomers use that kind of thing on a regular basis.

To answer the lightning question, it depends whether it's daylight or night shoot. Daylight is easier to answer: pure dumb luck. You can increase the luck factor by doing hundreds if not thousands of shots at high shutter speeds (to compensate for ambient light), but it's just hard.

Night shoot is simplier. Most night photos are pure trickery, from a perspective. Most night shot has no near focus (out to infinity), at the widest possible (no real DoF issues or possibility), has ISO cranked up as far as reasonable... so the only thing to play with is the shutter speed. This is necessary due to one overriding (and stupidly obvious) fact: there is insufficient light.

So what really happens in night shoots is that you capture a time slice in a photo -- in essence, you converted a 4D situation (3D plus time) into 2D. Say you set the camera to take a 10 sec exposure. That's a 10 sec record of everything that happens in that scene. So for example, if the first 5 seconds is pitch black, the next had a lightning strike, and then pitch black again for another 5 seconds, then what you (hopefully) will get is a nice photo of a lightning strike.

It's the same theory with fireworks shots. For example:

ISO 200, f/5.6, 5s exposure.

You can bet your donkeys that none of the live watchers remembered the fireworks like that.... because our eyes don't retain images the same way as a camera sensor. The photos you see of full bursts of fireworks can be instead wimpy flares, but captured in a camera it becomes a sensational trail of light.

It's the same idea for those artsy-fartsy pictures with headlamp trails or tail-light trails in them. The camera's merely being used to compress a 4D construct into 2D, using the lack of ambient light to achieve this. It's not simple, and it's not easy, but it's doable; I'd shot the Orion constellation in a light polluted environment using a D70 with a 70-200mm... but damn tricky.

[Major Focker]

need some quick advise. have an impromptu holiday and since i've been meaning to move up to a DSLR, i thought i might as well buy one now.

there is no budget per se, but i wouldn't want to buy something that will be overwhelming for a novice, or over-spec'd for my purposes (travel pics mostly, but should be good in low light since i like night scenes and inside churches/temples/bars).

sometime ago i heard about the nikon D3000, but then someone pointed out it doesn't have liveview, which i don't know if it should be a deal breaker or not. also heard about the D90, but i haven't been keeping updated on cameras so don't know if it's still good in the context of more recent models. i see the EOS7D on TV which piqued my interest, but that's about all i know of new cameras. i also just picked up a camera mag and it seems there's this new fangled micro-4/3 system, and so i am now even more overwhelmed with choices.

unfortunately i only have 3 days before i fly out to italy, so can't do proper research. appreciate any quick advise on camera choice, and for those who live in singapore, where the best place/s to buy are. thanks

[Lynx7725]

need some quick advise. have an impromptu holiday and since i've been meaning to move up to a DSLR, i thought i might as well buy one now.

there is no budget per se, but i wouldn't want to buy something that will be overwhelming for a novice, or over-spec'd for my purposes (travel pics mostly, but should be good in low light since i like night scenes and inside churches/temples/bars).

Assuming you want to retain the DSLR longer than your holiday, which particular area do you want to shoot? That's the key item, and would impact on your lens choices.

If it's travel pics, then tbh, a DSLR is overkill -- a Point-and-shoot might be better, lighter, and less logistically of a headache. Do pick one with a hotshoe and if possible, the ability to command flashes, since some of the subject matter (inside buildings) benefit greatly from a better, angled and off-body flash.

So ask yourself, if you really do want to buy a DSLR, do you want to shoot long and narrow (birds, planes, pretty girls on the next street... ), long and wide (landscape, possibly architecture), short and narrow (macrophotography), or short and wide (er, I dunno, normal stuff? Includes arty arty fisheyes, I supposed)? Since we are short on time, a rough idea would do.

My basic advice in the event that you really want a DSLR is this: get a decent body (which can support older lens), get a lens that is to your speciality (and try not to go with restrictive lens type like digital only), and get a decent flash unit. The body and flash, for Nikon, is reasonable. The lens, a lot less.

In general, Nikon and Canon are about on par, it's just which PR you prefer. Try it out on a store to see which UI you prefer, and generally your first choice of UI is the right choice (UI is an intutive subject, you either love it or hate it. You can get used to a particular UI, but a UI you like is a better UI).

unfortunately i only have 3 days before i fly out to italy, so can't do proper research. appreciate any quick advise on camera choice, and for those who live in singapore, where the best place/s to buy are. thanks

Alanphoto at Sim Lim and Funan is generally viewed as reliable (if not inexpensive, especially the Funan shop..). The other camera speciality store that is reputable is Cathy Photo at Peninsular Plaza, but that's IMO a bit on the expensive side.