| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
jinju
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
|
 Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 6:27 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Crip factor? Thats why you buy a FF body. 5d will plummet in price once the 5D MkII comes out.
Which wide angle? I was set on the 24mm f/1.4 for a long time to go on the 5D Im planning to buy this year but the thing is just so damn expensive, I think Ill go for the 24-70 f/2.8 and that will be enough especially with the 5D being a real good performer at high ISO. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
indytrucks
Joined: 09 Apr 2003
Location: The Shelf
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 6:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jinju wrote: |
| I was set on the 24mm f/1.4 |
That's the one. I already have the 17-40mm f/4L, which performs superbly for landscapes and such, but obviously it isn't fast enough for low light or indoor stuff at 100 or 125 ISO. I was pricing the 24mm last weekend. Come the spring, she will be mine!
That one ain't cheap either. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jinju
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 7:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| indytrucks wrote: |
| jinju wrote: |
| I was set on the 24mm f/1.4 |
That's the one. I already have the 17-40mm f/4L, which performs superbly for landscapes and such, but obviously it isn't fast enough for low light or indoor stuff at 100 or 125 ISO. I was pricing the 24mm last weekend. Come the spring, she will be mine!
That one ain't cheap either. |
Its like 1.2 vs 2 million. For the extra 800,000 I can get myslf a nice telezoom which I have been wishing for on a few occassions where I just couldnt get close enough due to restrictions on my access. Ill have 2 bodies. I hate changing lenses, its just faster to have 2 bodies and 2 good zooms that cover from wide to very long. Primes are good but also restrictive and sometimes you cant just walk up to your subject. Photojournalists use zooms for that very reason. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
indytrucks
Joined: 09 Apr 2003
Location: The Shelf
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 7:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jinju wrote: |
| I hate changing lenses, its just faster to have 2 bodies and 2 good zooms that cover from wide to very long. Primes are good but also restrictive and sometimes you cant just walk up to your subject. Photojournalists use zooms for that very reason. |
I like to have a mix in my bag of zooms and primes. Both have their advantages and drawbacks. I have the 28-70mm f.2.8L myself, which stays on my camera a lot of the time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
twg
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Location: Getting some fresh air...
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 7:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| This is a hobby that seriously needs to be cheaper. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jinju
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 7:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| twg wrote: |
| This is a hobby that seriously needs to be cheaper. |
Who said its a hobby? If its a hobby it can be. You dont need L lenses when you can get 3rd party lenses in similar focal lengths for much cheaper. Hobbyists dont buy 2000 dollar lenses or of they do they arent complaining because they can afford it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
twg
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Location: Getting some fresh air...
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 7:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Who said its a hobby? |
Me.
I figure pros have better things to do than debate lenses on a Korean ESL teacher board |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jinju
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 7:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| twg wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Who said its a hobby? |
Me.
I figure pros have better things to do than debate lenses on a Korean ESL teacher board |
Who is debating? You think pros dont talk about equipment? I think you are wrong there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
indytrucks
Joined: 09 Apr 2003
Location: The Shelf
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 8:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| twg wrote: |
| This is a hobby that seriously needs to be cheaper. |
Stuff in Korea is overpriced, though, don't forget. And I figure I would rather sink my money into quality glass first, then buy a pricey body than the other way around.
Like Jinju said, it doesn't have to be expensive if you don't want it to be. You can by second tier EF or third party lenses for a fraction of the cost of the Canon 'L' series. I guess it all depends on what your intentions are for your photographs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
twg
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Location: Getting some fresh air...
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 8:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jinju wrote: |
| Who is debating? |
Since you're asking: You, previous page. But Indytrucks was too mature for you so you had to tone it down. Don't take it personally. Just consider this part of your ongoing Dave's peer review...
Regardless, the materials are still expensive. It can be justified if someone is a professional getting paid serious wages. But as a hobby, it's far too steep. Which is a shame for an art that is perfect for the masses to participate in.
Then again, there is usually the distinct scent of snobbery when it comes to photography discussions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
indytrucks
Joined: 09 Apr 2003
Location: The Shelf
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 8:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| twg wrote: |
| Which is a shame for an art that is perfect for the masses to participate in. |
Hey, that's what relatively inexpensive point and shoot dig cameras have afforded many. Certainly moreso than the film days. That's the one good thing about dig photography I can think of off the top of my head. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jinju
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 8:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| twg wrote: |
| jinju wrote: |
| Who is debating? |
Since you're asking: You, previous page. But Indytrucks was too mature for you so you had to tone it down. Don't take it personally. Just consider this part of your ongoing Dave's peer review...
Regardless, the materials are still expensive. It can be justified if someone is a professional getting paid serious wages. But as a hobby, it's far too steep. Which is a shame for an art that is perfect for the masses to participate in.
Then again, there is usually the distinct scent of snobbery when it comes to photography discussions. |
Only expensive equipment is expensive. I mean nobody has to buy a Canon 1D MkII with a 2000 dollar L lens. There are plenty of alternatives, from SLR film bodies to lomo type cameras to cheaper range finders to point and shoots or cheaper DSLR options. Hell, you could even try pinhole photography. This is a non issue. If you want to spend money on equipment, you can splurge to your heart's content. if not, you dont need to.
Damn, and I was going to stay out of this thread. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lotuseater
Joined: 22 Jan 2007
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2007 7:15 pm Post subject: Re: Software and a 2 buck "tripod" |
|
|
| jinju wrote: |
| lotuseater wrote: |
I never used to be happy with photos taken above 200 "iso" (hate that word for digital cameras) and I never used to push my camera above that but I have been using a program called noise ninja and more recently a Nik photoshop plug in called Define that do a wonderful job of removing some of the noise at higher "ISO" settings. I have had really good luck with these and though they don't work with all images, for the good majority of noisy images they both do a wonderful job. I don't see much of a difference between them so which ever you have better luck getting a hold of, it is worth the investment.
And for while you are out on the shoot and a tripod is not allowed/desired/practical, tie a 2 metre or so piece of string to the neck strap holes on the camera so that you can hold the camera and step on the loop of string. it will help to stabilize the camera. Sounds silly but it really does work. |
A good camera should not be giving you any trouble at 200 iso.
As far as Noise Ninja, never has a bigger cancer been unleashed on photography. I just dont get this obsession with sterile photos. Some noise/grain is NOT a bad thing. |
I don't have any "trouble" above iso 200. Its just that shooting mostly travel and landscape, and having a good complement of fast lenses, I rarely need to get things above 200 and if I have a scene that does not have enough light to shoot below 200 iso I would rather tripod mount the photo than bump the iso. Shooting digital, its easy to add noise (and looks way better than in camera noise) its not so easy to get rid of it.
Ive also run into some problems with publishers about noise, they want crisp, clean images, I find that anything above 200 iso gets negative comments about noise. I'm shooting with a 350d not the best camera but certainly not the bottom of the heap either.
For those moments when the iso has to be bumped just to get the photo, ie poorly lit concert and you want to get a bit cleaner image, noise ninja does do a fairly good job as long as it is used sparingly. Its certainly not a "cancer" upon photography. Its a tool to be used when needed and as long as it is used well it can be very beneficial. Especially selectively removing noise from areas of high bokeh in the photo which are especially prone to noise. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
moosehead
Joined: 05 May 2007
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2007 1:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| twg wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Who said its a hobby? |
Me.
I figure pros have better things to do than debate lenses on a Korean ESL teacher board |
you're right - a simple discussion maybe but photo debates can quickly become a 'mine is longer/bigger/fatter/ than yours' too quickly
i am a pro - docu photo - and just bought my second digital last year - it's an olympus sp510uz
i've been really pleased w/it - traveled quite a few countries and made very pro exhibit quality photos - it has a very user-friendly menu selection that includes night shooting, low light, etc.
i bought it at in hong kong at the airport, no kidding and after a few extras, maybe it was around 350 us dollars. i've seen them here but don't know the price. i checked out a lot of cameras before i settled on this one.
the canon eos is the next step up - but it's a bit bigger and of course more expensive - this one is nice and compact and has a 10x zoom on it - really it's an awesome camera.
i've always been a big fan of olympus and now i'm totally a believer. no canons or nikons - tho i do use a nikon for my film shots; it's ok but i'll never buy another nikon, never.
the thing is, low light shooting presents its own problems so you might want to do a lot more practice at night and inside before going ahead and trying to shoot something serious; and you definitely need to shoot a lot of it to start and understand what you are doing. rolls and rolls, or gigs and gigs, whatever
just don't give up - learn from your mistakes - everyone makes them - but keep on trying and asking questions it's the only way to learn.
pm me if you want |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
