or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Post your photography skills! (self-gloss)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Post your photography skills! (self-gloss) - Page 161

post #2401 of 4198
The 24-105 is f/4, the 24-70 is f/2.8. That's 1 stop difference. The IS brings 3 to 4 stops but only relevant if the subject isn't really moving.

You also have apr. 1 to 2 stop difference in noise between 7D and 5D Mk II at the higher ISOs.
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon_EOS_7D/noise_JPEG.shtml

The 70-200 f/2.8 would also be nice for portraiture. You should also try the 70-200 f/4 if that's enough separation through depth of field for you, it's really cheap for the quality at 500€. Not every portrait needs hair thin depth of field, sometimes it's nice to have a bit of background. I had quite some keepers with the 24-105L at 105mm @ f/4. That would also be an option with 1000 $ to go Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM and Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM, would fit in together (appr. 850 EUR).

I guess in the end it really doesn't matter if you shoot EOS 1000D or EOS 5D Mk II, if it's f/1.2 or f/5.6 . The nice composition will make the picture, not the blurriness of the background. I'm a bit of a gear aficionado myself, always want the best I can afford, but actually you really only want it but don't need it. People will barely be able to tell the difference between 50mm f/1.2, f/1.4, f/1.8 and f/2.8 when not comparing side by side. That's like when my colleague verbally orgasms about his new skis with bindings and boots. To him it's absolutely high-end, newest technology with huge advantages, to me it still is a pair of clunky plastic shoes with wood-planks beneath it that seems to be the same like most other.

The same with the shutter speed. I can see what Jacob relates to, the 5D Mk II is considered a slow camera. But why would you shoot 10 pictures a second for anything but the fastest sports (even there a lot of "pro"s believe that the first shot usually is the best and you don't need the huge buffer filled with the machine gun shutter mode)? Do you want to sort through 1000 pictures after a 1 hour shooting so the customer can buy 5 pictures? I'd rather shoot only 20 pictures of which 10 are really nice due to composition and planning than 200 pictures out of which 10 are good because of random luck.

If you look back some decades, people had a very limited amount of shots due to film consumption and price. Plus the sharpness of the lenses is quite a bit better today often, back then people didn't expect the ridiculously 3D sharp pictures that we love today.

If I'd start from scratch I'd most likely buy a EOS 40D or 7D with 24L/35L as a walk-around & environmental portrait lens and the EF-S 15-85mm IS lens for landscapes. For a longer portrait lens I'd like a 85mm (with the crop it's kinda like 136mm) but not the current 85L, it's just too big and heavy for my taste. Perhaps I'd stick to the 135L or one of the 70-200mm zooms. It's also the reason I wouldn't consider a 1 series as a "only" camera. It's top quality but it's big, heavy and clunky. 1 Ds II + 35L + 85L would be 2,9 KG. Then you can add a second battery, possible filters (ND, Grad ND, polarizer, ...) and add in the bag. No, too much weight to carry around the whole day imho. Plus they all have worse image quality than the 5D Mk II currently, only the 1Ds III compares but that is ridiculously priced.

All my personal opinion, no offense.

Something completely different. Jacob, I really enjoy your post processing. You're doing it as a template/preset in Lightroom or are you manually editing every picture in Lightroom or Photoshop?
post #2402 of 4198
hmm...so many options. I really would like an all in one lens, but I've shot mostly primes and love the sharpness they produce. I've also seen reviews that the Tamron 28-75 is very close in terms of IQ to the 24-75 Canon makes. I own this lens and can contest that it's really pretty sharp. I would love the 70-200 but that would be a hog to lug around everywhere...the 50 1.4 with the 70-200 f4 sounds nice though as I don't ever do portraits out of the sunlight, and the 50 would be nice for everything else.
post #2403 of 4198
I like those shots KG! even the B&W w/ flowers.... nod[1].gif
post #2404 of 4198
different than the usual, but this is all i shoot confused.gif hopefully theres somebody out there who can offer some input. most are from the opening day of the skatepark in my city. shot with a pentax kx some with a pentax 10-17 fisheye


6522265431_ddf7ed245c_z.jpg
6522264865_333ef07233_z.jpg
6522266625_62ea0d6567_z.jpg
6522264605_50b31622a7_z.jpg
6522266185_51d40bca25_z.jpg
6522268803_0c0169f6b5_z.jpg
5614676330_32102e3c35_z.jpg
5614097229_624b2fccbc_z.jpg
6116902885_da2b469cdd_z.jpg
post #2405 of 4198
love those shots clark! I grew up reading thrasher and transworld so I'm quite partial. biggrin.gif
post #2406 of 4198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Szeph el raton View Post

If I'd start from scratch I'd most likely buy a EOS 40D or 7D with 24L/35L as a walk-around & environmental portrait lens and the EF-S 15-85mm IS lens for landscapes. For a longer portrait lens I'd like a 85mm (with the crop it's kinda like 136mm) but not the current 85L, it's just too big and heavy for my taste. Perhaps I'd stick to the 135L or one of the 70-200mm zooms. It's also the reason I wouldn't consider a 1 series as a "only" camera. It's top quality but it's big, heavy and clunky. 1 Ds II + 35L + 85L would be 2,9 KG. Then you can add a second battery, possible filters (ND, Grad ND, polarizer, ...) and add in the bag. No, too much weight to carry around the whole day imho. Plus they all have worse image quality than the 5D Mk II currently, only the 1Ds III compares but that is ridiculously priced.
All my personal opinion, no offense.
Something completely different. Jacob, I really enjoy your post processing. You're doing it as a template/preset in Lightroom or are you manually editing every picture in Lightroom or Photoshop?

No offense taken smile.gif We all have our opinions and to be honest each of us have our limits. I know for me going into the city with a 1D3 (or 5D MK II) and 85L will be like lugging around a brick (I love 85 focal length so I find it to be suitable for me).

I personally think the 5D MK II or any FF camera actually will be best with a 35 while a crop will be best with a 24 as a walk around. Everyone is different though 50 on FF is also great, 50 on a crop is a bit long but I loved it. I agree 85 on a crop is pretty long though and definitely not a walk around lens. I believe a TRUE 85 is an exception though - if I had more money and it were up to me my ideal set-up would be a 35L, 85L and 70-200L on a 5D MK II or a 1D3. I'm trying to get a 1D3 if someone doesn't buy it before me otherwise I'll be getting a 5D MK II.

By IQ do you mean MP? Because I've noticed unless you plan on blowing up images you don't really notice the images difference. Now if you are talking about noise and what not 5D MK II is far greater than most cameras. I'm stuck though I really want the 10 fps of the 1D3 but the FF of the 5D MK II turns me on.... not really, but still. Plus the price of the 5D MK II is a bit expensive for me...
Quote:
Originally Posted by il ciclista View Post

hmm...so many options. I really would like an all in one lens, but I've shot mostly primes and love the sharpness they produce. I've also seen reviews that the Tamron 28-75 is very close in terms of IQ to the 24-75 Canon makes. I own this lens and can contest that it's really pretty sharp. I would love the 70-200 but that would be a hog to lug around everywhere...the 50 1.4 with the 70-200 f4 sounds nice though as I don't ever do portraits out of the sunlight, and the 50 would be nice for everything else.

I think it's truly what you want to be honest. The 50 definitely is great for almost everything (just buy the Sigma! - If you get the Canon 50 1.4 you'll probably be sending it back for repairs unlike the sigma for AF). The 50 and 70-200 would be a great combo! Especially the 70-200 (@ 200mm the bokeh regardless of what aperture will be truly outstanding esp at min focusing distance). If you aren't doing a lot of indoor high ISO stuff def go for the 70-200 f/4 instead of the f/2.8 version.
post #2407 of 4198
And some shots from an Islanders game I attended.

6571571075_702fa228b1_z.jpg

6572011873_c62ae70ea0_z.jpg

6572016003_f580d202e3_z.jpg
post #2408 of 4198
tlbuizen.jpg
post #2409 of 4198
nice action shots Krp, NOBD...macro?

here's a few from holiday at my Mom's house. My grandma brought the whiskey and we had quite a fun night Xmas eve lol

6585944511_83085dbf2c_o.jpg

6585919971_6a1a067aa4_o.jpg

way too much food to add to it all made for a very unhappy stomach


6585944719_48b54f86d3_o.jpg

6585945357_b0a4743712_o.jpg

6585945265_503d6279a5_o.jpg

(we're from the south we like our fatty foods down here lol)
post #2410 of 4198
Quote:
Originally Posted by il ciclista View Post

nice action shots Krp, NOBD...macro?

Just a close-up. Looks like you've been having fun!
post #2411 of 4198
oh yeah, we did...but I gained so much weight snacking from sunup to sundown!biggrin.gif
post #2412 of 4198
post #2413 of 4198
The first two are great Kaplan, where/what is that?
post #2414 of 4198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Szeph el raton View Post

The first two are great Kaplan, where/what is that?
Thanks. It's from Louisiana Museum Of Modern Art north of Copenhagen.

Just for the hell of it, here are the untouched originals of the first two shots:
* (Click to show)
U7Zve.jpg

9g4fL.jpg
I wasn't entirely happy with those and think the crops + PP make them work better. C&C welcome smile.gif

I'll try and post a few more from the visit soon...
Edited by Kaplan - 12/28/11 at 5:16pm
post #2415 of 4198
Thanks il!

couple from a little while ago and one from today.. I really haven't been shooting much over this winter break.
6591803939_868a89961b_b.jpg


6584967443_51d4a79b9b_b.jpg
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Chat
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Post your photography skills! (self-gloss)