mpalmquist

<p>Never shooting sports, and not going to be in the weather or beating the hell out of it then the 5D III will probably be a better choice. And like you say the weight can become an issue over the course of a day of shooting the 1dx is almost double the weight of the 5DIII. You can have extra money for lenses/computers which will likely be more value for your situation.<br>

Ed mentioned the 6D, from what i have read and seen in reviews I would stay far away. the AF system has only 9 points and only 1 cross type (center point) and even using the center point people have complained about inaccurate focus.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I own a 1Dx but I have not shot with the 5D III yet outside testing in store. Canon is lending me one on 3/13 via CPS so I can do a thourough use test. While I love the 1Dx sometimes I want a lighter body when I don't need to shoot high FPS or require absolute weather sealing so I am considering adding a 5D III. Right now I shoot 1Dx with a 1D IV as backup so a lightweight body would be good for me.<br>

The question of the price being worth it for the 1Dx vs 5DIII comes down to these points to me, weighted for price difference:<br>

1> FPS, if you shoot any action, sports or wildlife 1Dx> 5DIII<br>

2> Weather Sealing, the 5D is weather sealed ( I but not to the same level as the 1dx) 5DIII >= 1DX (if you are going to be out in torrential rain or at the foot of waterfalls I would go 1Dx, a light shower 5D should be fine)<br>

3> IQ, 5DIII > 1DX (cost to 5DIII, thought the IQ on the 1Dx is basically the same to my eye)<br>

4> build quality, 1DX >= 5DIII (but do you need a armored truck or will a f-150 do you okay)<br>

5> AF, 1Dx > 5dIII the AF speed/accuracy on the 1Dx is second to none in my opinon (this may change with more testing on the 5DIII, if it's close the cost difference may tip it to 5DIII)<br>

6> low light, 5DIII=1DX the 1dx has a slight edge in low light AF the 5D a slight edge in low light IQ (from what I read)</p>

 

<p>Santa Cruz california surfing.</p>

<p><img src="http://www.flickr.com/photos/mastersniper1967/8008603088/in/set-72157631251101902/" alt="" /></p>

<p>I now own the 100 2.8L and I rented the 180 for a few days a couple years ago when I needed a macro and couldn't afford it. <br /> The 100 is MUCH lighter, has very fast AF (great for general lens use) has hybrid IS if you ever have to use it hand held. the 180L while older has outstanding IQ I would say just slightly behind the 100L until you get to f8+ which you will be using for macro most of the time anyway. It AFs VERY slowly if you are going to use AF, if you are using a tripod MF is usually the best method so this may not be an issue.<br /> For strictly macro work close to the 1:1 range the difference is working distance from the subject where the 180 might be a benefit 'in the wild' getting that flower or whatever that is not easily accessed due to an obstruction in getting close enough with the 100.</p>

<p>I have the 17 TSE and it is an amazing lens; it's very sharp, no distortion/CA unless you are at full shift + some tilt, stitching to get really wide shots and of course selective/extended DOF. The bad things are cost, off axis flare and course no filers unless you juryrig some matte box due to that huge chunk of (amazing) glass sticking out front.</p>

<p>I use the DR-1 which is essentially two RS-2s since I sometimes shoot with 2 bodies. I have no hessitation using it with my 1Div + 300 2.8II if I am going to not use a monopod. be sure to moisten the rubber casket a bit before screwing in the stud (on the lens tripod socket for anything 70-200 or bigger) and periodically check it is not working loose which it never has for me. <br>

switching back and forth with a mono/tripod is easy. I can carry the camera ready for quick shots on the strap and when I am going to be in one spot for a while just unscrew and mount on pod in less than a minute then when I move to a new spot put it back on the strap.</p>

<p>depending on the telescope you will need the meade T-mount adapter and a EOS T-Mount ring. basically the T-Mount screws onto the treads that hold the eyepiece holder on the telescope then the T-Mount ring threads onto the T-Mount tube and finally the camera locks into the ring like a regular lens. <br>

As noted before the tripod/mount you use needs to be VERY steady, use live view or mirror lockup to reduce camera shake. Much more prone to shake than any canon lens simply because you will end up with probably a 1000-2000mm lens that is F10-F15. If you are thinking of taking exposures of on alt-az mount of the moon is quite doable as it is full sun exposure 'sunny F16 rule'. if you are wanting to take images on nebulea or star clusters etc... the scope needs to be polar aligned which means adding a photo wedge mount or using a equatorial 'german' mount.</p>

<p>assuming you will be hand holding and not using a monopod the 70-200 2.8 is a great lens it can be heavy after carrying it around the whole game. Being a student you may look at the Canon 200mm f2.8 L prime lens ~$800 and about 1/2 the weight. And if your xs provides good enough quality at ISO 800-1600 (not everyday is clear skys) 300mm F4 IS ~$1400 is also an option. With the primes you won't be able to zoom out for shots close on your side of the field but for most of the game you are shooting into the middle of the field or down the sideline 20+ yards not 10 feet away when the reciever is doing a route right next to you. both are less expensive and both will take the 1.4 TC and autofocus (center only on the 300+1.4 at 5.6) and the 200 with take 2x (but only center point focus) if you need the extra reach and have enough light. <br>

The focus speed/accuracy and FPS if the rebel will be lower than a higher end body but usable. Good glass > higher speed most of the time, I can blast out 10FPS with my 1dIV but if I had crappy glass thats just 10 crap shots per second. I would rather get 3 good shots per second.</p>

<p>I don't do a lot if portraits but Alan's point about undercorrected lenses is a good one. Very few people over the age of 10 have flawless skin, a macro lens is too sharp to make good portraits of most people. the exception is if you want to show the ruggedness of a weather beaten/ haggered face then a macro is great but most people want a pleasing smoothness to their portraits especially women. I have not done a lot of portraits focusing more on sports and nature but one trick I have in my bag is the Canon 135 soft focus lens it has a ring that can dial in differing amounts of spherical abberation to create a softer portrait. Not sure if Nikon has something similar. The other option is filters to add the soft focus but they create a different look. basically for full frame I look for 100-135 for crop look for around 85 for the look I like. Like he also said there is no right focal length, I have taken some portraits with a 17mm and a 300mm 2.8 which also work well but like macro lenses is very sharp and yelling across the 30-45 feet to the model gets annoying after a while.<br>

<img src="../photo/2458340&size=lg" alt="" /></p><div></div>

I break this down to 2 types of shopping.

 

If I know exactly what I want, generally B&H has stock where my local shops don't so I get stuff from them online.

 

If I want/need an experienced salesperson to assist me or for advice or if I want to handle some equipment I generally go to a local shop. I also generally buy accessories/bags at a local shop. If people do not support their local shops they won't last. Sure I pay a small price premium but I think it is worth it.

 

My sales tax is 8.25%, but like others have said many states including mine have a 'use tax' so the sales tax issue is moot for many.

back with my 10D I shot RAW very rarely, Large Fine JPG was good enough for my purposes reserving RAW for those shots I was trying to make as good as possible or which I had a good idea would need post-production.

 

With my 5D since it supports RAW + JPG I save RAW + small fine JPG the RAW for post-processing and printing and the jpg for small easy to handle files to emails, web, CDs for friends etc... sort of digital proofs.

I will wait for people with more experience shooting fashion to chime in about the angles. as for film I would stick with whatever you need to achive 1/250.

 

IR inside will not be feasible without special lighting even in bright sunlight and a modified D70 I think the shutter speed is down around 1/60 and slower. without strong IR lights no way to be usefull inside.

Karl,

My 2 cents, if I post a pic asking for a critique and someone made a suggestion and edited a copy of my pic to show what they recommended I would be happy they took the time to demonstrate what they ment.

 

Fair use is a grey area at the moment but as Mr Atkins pointed out in the Terms of use this type of behaviour is acceptable so I would just shrug it off and not hesitate to provide constructive critisisms and edited copies.

I think trademarks not used for marketing and are not the only focus of the image are fair game. otherwise pretty much every street scene would end up with many law suits.

here is a good page about center filter I googled real quick.

 

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/center-filters.htm

at 24 F4 there is noticible vignetting but with my copy it is better at 5.6 and still noticible not bothersome at F8. There is nothing you can do to make it better without filter/post processing it is physics - the image circle is not much bigger than the sensor so the corners show vignetting. This is why people using a wide angle large format lens often use a 'center filter' which is a gradient neutral density filter dark in the center clear at the edges to 'cancel' out the effect but also taking adding 1-1.5 stops exposure. I suppose you could try to find a 77mm center filter but I have never seen one. You can also emulate this in Photoshop with an action, search for digital center filter.

Steve,

I will echo previous posters, if you are going to stick with film the EOS1n, 1nRS or the 1V were are all top of the line (in their day). You can get an excellent+ 1n for around $200 and I would say that is a fantastic buy. I would also suggest thinking of going to a digital rebel if your not going to be staying in the film world for long.

I recently lemented selling my 1N years ago. I am going to be doing some really long exposures and all Digitals (except special cooled CCD cameras) have noise problems with hour long exposures. I am probably going to go and try to find an original F1 (fully mechanical) and a 35mm FD for these night shots since batteries are not needed.

I guess this is personal choice. I always shot raw or large/fine with all my digital cameras because:

1> I could always downsize for screen or smaller prints (I believe there is some loss of detail but I don't think it is necessarily worse than the amount of detail shooting low-rez natively).

2> I would have the resolution be able to print 8x10 or larger.

3> cropping possibilities are increased substantially.

4> Memory cards/drive space are relatively cheap.

 

If you truly never print then 3MP images would be more than adequate, however if you get that super shot and want to print it big, crop out part of the whole etc... the extra MP are required.

Thanks for the replies. I knew that commercial use permits were required, I guess that 2000 federal law is the root of the issue. I have not been to DC since the mid 90's.

 

I try to use common sense and not block traffic, be 'low impact' on the area and generally keep out of peoples way so I have never had a problem.

That curve is going to be tough, I found a couple links that might help out. Sorry I do not have that much experience with this kind of shot.

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00BjHh&tag=

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00FpgD

Rick,

The 30mm on the XT will give about a 48mm equiv FOV if you wanted wider than 28 on your film body, I would look at the 10-22.

Gregg the link does not work.

 

But from my own problems with chromed parts this may work out for your 'mirror ball' problem. Build up a box of white fabric a few feet larger in each dimension than the helmet to give some space and place this over the helmet and shoot through a small hole in one side or the top of the box. This yeilds a nearly perfectly boring white reflection, if you are looking to control reflections but still have some interest setup a larger 'box' say 6'-10' cube just to control the amount of area where reflections would come from and leave some items for texture in the reflections.

It seems that there are quite a few posts here and elsewhere with people saying

that tripods require permits in various cities (NY, Washington DC, LA etc..)

 

In 20 years of photographing with a tripod in various cities around the US and

europe I have never once been asked about a permit. I understand that at

airports, train stations, museums etc... permits/permission may be required by

the management. But my understanding has always been that on public spaces a

sidewalk, a park, the beach and you are not blocking traffic, either vehicular

or pedestrian, no permit was needed.

 

If a photog is setting up a shoot with scrims, reflectors, a bunch of light

stands 3-4 assistants and an assortment of gear I can see a permit requirement

*maybe*. But just some photog and a tripod? maybe if he is setup on Penn ave.

with a canon 1200 5.6 aimed at the white house but even then a simple

chat/inspection by the police/secret service to make sure all is well should be

all that is required.

 

If it is true that permits are being required in cities how long might it be

until tripods require permits in national parks, state parks, all public

venues? Not that I think that would happen but the slope looks like it is

getting slippery if these stories are true.

 

-Mark

I use the black 3021pro legs they are very good. the 3047 3 way head is solid if you go the 3 way road, though the head controls are right handed, you may want to try one out in-store to see if it would work for you.

 

As for weight raiting of the legs, I believe they are rated at 13 Lbs witch would include the head, in my case using a Bogen 3047 3 way (4 lbs) would leave you 9 Lbs of gear. So even a 500 F4 (8.5 Lbs)though pushing it a little should be okay

 

heads designed for quick release plates generally come with 1 plate, you will probably want 1 or 2 more for leaving on your lenses with tripod collars (my 105 macro and 300 have plates left on the collars for convenience).

 

yes the same plates are used on the camera for smaller lenses.

 

rail type clamps? a macro focus rail maybe? used to make fine front to back adjustments in macro work to composition and/or focusing.

Personally I have gone for mostly primes (20 f2.8, 35 f2, 50 f1.4, 85 f1.8, 135 f2.8 SF, 300 F4), the exception is the 24-105 F4L.

 

Comes down to the Convienience of the zoom or slightly better images and lighter weight of the primes and the decision on how to weigh those options is a personal one.

 

The other thing to consider is dust on the sensor, primes = more lens swapping = more chance for dust. Though I have not had any more dust than my friend who basically only uses the 24-70 2.8 and very occasionally his 70-200 2.8 so either I am very lucky or this is a minor concern.