david_boily

Todd,

 

Once you go RAW you never go back! I used to shoot JPEG simply because I didn't have enough CF cards. But because of pretty wild exposures when using my flash, I shot the ceremony in RAW. The extra latitute for under/over exposure is amazing. The other reason is that I don't have to pay constant attention to Whitebalance, it can all be done afterwards. You might think that JEPS are ready to print, but I found I spent more time correcting bad JPEGs than starting clean from a perfect TIF file. I give my clients their proofs on a CD and although these files don't need to be perfect, they do need to be relatively well exposed and colorbalanced. Fixing all these pictures in PS takes for ever. Using actions and batch processing doesn't help much since the auto-levels sucks. In short, although the Canon software is slow, it is still much better than shootng JPEGs... Just have LOTS of Memory on hand.

 

Dave

I shoot weddings with a 10D in RAW mode. I'm finding that I spend

way too much time processing the RAW images using the Canon software.

 

does anyone use something better and why is it better?

 

Thanks,

 

Dave

Ilka, my post wasn�t made to enlighten you. In fact I recall mentioning that it wasn�t a fair comparison. �I know, I know it's not fair, a zoom vs. a prime blah, blah blah...� However, show me another head to head between these 2 lenses and I�ll stand corrected.

 

I also did this head to head in order to convince myself not to sell this lens. You see, I was thinking of selling this lens to finance a 300mm 2.8. My reasoning was that I already have a 200 2.8, so do I really need a 200 prime? These pictures show that the boost in quality is worth it and the extra stop is priceless. This lens with a 1.4x is a 280mm f2.5 or a 400mm f3.6 with a doubler. Unfortunately, I can�t stretch it any further. And by the way, 200mm 1.8 blurrs a background like no other lens.

 

Jon, It�s not a typo. This lens is not at all like the 200mm 2.8, it is a beast. The front element is huge and it weighs a ton. I wouldn�t think of using it on long assignments without a tripod. Like Steve said, they are rare and expensive ($2500-$3000) and I think they will appreciate in value. As soon as I hinted of selling this lens I had a flood of pro photogs banging at my door.

My captions may not be very clear I realize. So the leftmost is the sigma @2.8, center is the Canon @2.8 (one stop closed) and the right, the Canon Wide open at 1.8

OK so I was bored and wanted to demonstrate the sharpness of my

Canon 200mm f1.8, So I did a head to head with my Sigma 70-200mm

f2.8. I know, I know it's not fair, a zoom vs. a prime blah, blah

blah... but take it for what it's worth.

 

The test was done on my Canon 10D at ISO 200, 200mm, f2.8 @ 1/60s. I

had the camera on auto WB, JPEG Large, and all other settings

normal. The camera was on a tripod and I used MLU and a 2sec. timer.

 

I autofocused and made absolutely NO CHANGES to the files (no

levels, no USM...)

 

For the Sigma, I took several frames and they were all identical.

The crops are from the center.

 

I also took one shot with the Canon at 1.8. Because the DOF is

Sooooooo shallow, my focus was off, but a section of the paper to

the left (which was maybe 1/4 inch closer is bang on. This crop was

from the left center of the frame. Pretty damn good for wide open

off center!

 

I don't know how to attach the picture so go look at it in my

gallery. Sorry.

 

http://www.photo.net/photo/2358905

 

Now I'm not harping on the Sigma, I love this lens and use it alot.

I was just messing around. The Canon 200mm f1.8 is said to be one

of the sharpest lenses ever made. I tend to believe it.

Jordan,

 

Check out page 102 of your 10D instruction manual. Your answer is in the first line.

 

Cheers,

 

Dave

My item isn't so unususal, but is a life saver. I bring a little combo stool/toolbox. It has 4 legs and opens up into a toolbox. I use it for formals with the bride so she doesn't have to sit on the ground (cleaner and makes for nicer poses). Later, I use it at the reception to stand on to get a good view of the dance floor (don't stand on chairs if you want the hall to like you!). Then finally, you can put all the other useful things that people suggest inside it.

 

Cheers!

 

Dave

Harvey,

 

Thanks alot for your advice. I realy appreciate it.

 

Dave

To get straight to the point, I am thinking of doing a reportage

about a local palliative care facility. I would spend something like

24 to 48 hours at the house and document what goes on in order to

show the public the importance of such a facility. I would then show

these pictures at a local gallery and either charge for the entry

fee or sell prints, with all proceeds going to help fund the care

center. I�m sure I�d have no problem recruiting donors for printing

and framing to cover the costs.

 

My questions are the following:

 

1) Is the subject matter too somber for an exhibit? I would love to

show some of the good times but I�m sure there will be not so

pleasant moments galore.

2) Would anyone want to buy such prints? What size? Presentation?

3) Will I need model releases (I�m sure that I will), what should it

include?

4) B&W or color? I was thinking B&W.

5) Equipment? I am fully digital, but I could go back to film for

this. Problem is, my darkroom is no longer functional and with my

busy schedule, I can get it done faster and easier digitally.

6) Anyone ever have such an experience? Other advice would be

greatly appreciated.

 

I have wanted to do something to give back to the community for some

time now, and having lived through an uncle who lived with my mother

and me during his final days in a losing battle wit cancer, I feel

especially close to this project. It would be one of my toughest

challenges as a photographer, but really want to help. Your input

would be greatly appreciated.

 

Dave

Hi,

 

I've been shooting my weddings with a 10D. I like the results very

much, but I recently bought a used 1D for press work. I was wondering

if this would not be a better camera for weddings? I know the

resolution is lower, but I've heard that the enlargements are nicer.

I've obviously made some prints with both and even runa a side-by-

side, but I'm still unsure. Real world experience would be

appreciated.

 

Other factors are the serious weith of the thing, the better crop

factor, the smaller file size, the speed ...

 

Any comments? (From those who actually use a 1D please).

Thanks for your responses so far. I too use my 20-35mm (plus 1.6 crop factor) for photos from the balcony and other panoramic style pics. I also drag aroung a film body to have full frame in case I need it. But my inquiry is especially directed to those who use this almost as a standard lens. Although clients like a nice panorama every now and then, they rarely choose more than one for an album. So why shoot so much with this lens? Am I missing something here?

Hi all,

 

Over the last few months, I've read many postshere and on other

sites about the lenses that people use most often. Personally, I use

(on my 10D) a 28-70 f2.8 for 60% of the shots and my 70-200 f2.8 for

38% of shots and only occasionally my 20-35mm. However, I've read

from many people that their main lens is the 16-35 or 17-35 zooms.

How do you use this? I find that I have to get too close to the

couple, becoming a little too intrusive. So my question is to all

you guys and gals who use ultra-wide zoom for most their wedding

shots; Under what circumstances do you use them and why?

 

Thanks, I'm always trying to improve my technique. Examples would be

nice!

 

Cheers,

 

Dave

Do you like your 1D Chip? Don't mince words.

 

There's no doubt that it is the best digital camera Canon makes in terms of speed and reliability yada yada yada. But the last time I checked a landscape rarely moves all that fast. The question isn't should Peter get the best digital camera on the market? It's does the benefit to him warrant the cost and sacrifice? As I stated previously, for Peter's needs, the 10D is more than adequate and even better than the 1D in some respects. I have both the 1D and the 10D and when things move fast I take the 1D when things don't and I need large prints, I use the 10D.

Just had another thought! Rent one and use it for a weekend. You'll know after that. Oh yes you will fall in love with it on day one, but by day 2 you will be seeing clearly. It may cost a bit, but you can't unsell your 10D and 17-40.

Ok, so I need a 1.4x for my awesome 200mm 1.8L lens. I just can't

bring myself to spend the coin on a Canon, which will not fit my

other lenses. I couldn't find any head to head comparissons on the

net.

 

How big is the difference? I can get a Canon extender for $243+$25

shipping or a Sigma for $115+Shipping and used canons don't sell for

much less.

Hi Peter,

 

I have both, although I've only had the 1D for the last 10 days. Both cameras have their pros and cons and you seem to know them all very well. The only correction I would bring is the battery life issue. I think that the 10D with 2 batts will last about as long as the 1D (I could be wrong). You also didn't mention the ISO capabilities of the 10D are much better (IMHO).

 

I got a 1D because I like to shoot sports and the 3 fps of the 10D and autofocus really are not adequate for fast moving sports. The 1D is a beast and a real pleasure to use. That being said, I never would have bought one if I weren't really making a serious go at being a pro PJ. What I REALLY miss when I use the 1D is the zooming of the playback screen, the 1.6 crop (cheap zoom) and the extra megapixels.

 

I use my 10D for weddings with great results and will continue to do so. If I were you, I would stick to the 10D and be very happy, your needs simply do not warrant a water resisant, 8fps, pro camera. Save your money and DON'T sell your 17-40 (unless it's to me!).

 

Hope this helps.

 

Dave

I had my flash on a bracket and the flash end of the shoe cord

broke. It broke at the point where the bracket holds on to the cord

(the male end). At a glance, it looks like I could undo 3 small

screws and just replace the bottom half of the hotshoe, but where do

i get the part? Do I bother?

 

Thanks,

 

Dave

Here's my 2 cents. I've shot may weddings with a 10D, 550EX on a bracket, a 28-70 2.8 Sigma, a 70-200mm 2.8 Sigma and a 20-35mm 3.5-4.5 Canon.

 

Personally, I'd use the 300D as my main(although I'm not sure how it compares to the 10D). The D-Rebel also gives you extra reach with the 1.6 croping factor. That helps you stay a little further back in the church and thus more discreet. Or just leave the 70-200mm on the 300D and the 28-70 on the Elan.

 

The 70-200mm Sigma is awesome and if you buy it, you may never buy the Canon. I don't tnow about the quality of the Tamron. The 550EX is great and fast, but make sure you have fresh batteries for the ceremony to keep recycling as fast as possible.

 

I would just use the Elan for wide shots with the 28-70mm.

 

But you had better be VERY comfortable with your gear and have LOTS of batteries.

 

Good luck,

 

Dave

Thanks Scott, that is my point. But it looks that having it look factory stock will not be possible. On another note, maybe there's a market out there for shades that are little longer taking into account the cropping factor of some digital cameras?

If I use the 200mm 1.8 with a 1.4x extender (or even 2x), I would

reduce chances of flare with a longer shade, no? Do any of the

shades from the longer L lenses fit?

 

Thanks.

I forgot to ask if there were several versions of this lens and if one is better than the other. I've seen many description of the lens. i.e. ATX Pro, ATX Pro II ...

I'm looking to buy a Tokina 300mm 2.8 until I can afford a Canon

lens. I've read some reviews, but there are too few. The specs look

good on the lens, but I hear it's noisy. Unfortunately I would have

to buy by Internet and cannot try it first as there are no Tokina

dealers near by. Does anyone have any experience with this lens? I'm

particularly interested in focus speed, reliability and picture

quality.

 

Any comments or feedback would be greatly appreciated. Any

suggestions where to buy would also be appreciated.

If you are planning to do this often, I would start with a good quality zoom. I shoot weddings with a 10D, 550EX and most of my shots are using the 28-80 f2.8. I also have a 70-200mm 2.8 and highly recommend you have this at all times. More than once the minister has told me to keep my distance (not during the ceremony) while others told me no flash. The 70-200mm 2.8 saved my butt more than once. I recently added a 20-35mm for a little more range, but rarely use it. With the 1.6 crop factor, you will find that a 28-80 allows you to get the shots you want without being too intrusive. Primes will be razor sharp, but all the back and forth with be annoying. With a good zoom, you can take many pictures from the exact same spot and frame them completely differently. The Bride & Groom will appreciate the multiple pictures and you will be much more discreet.

 

A 50mm 1.8 prime might come in handy during the reception if you want to try to take pics with no flash but that'a about it. The extra shapness of primes is great and all, but at least with a zoom, you will be able to fill the frame more and eventually crop less, thus getting better enlargements.

 

Have a backup EVERYTHING, lots of batteries and memory.

 

Good luck.

I use the 10D with the grip with a flash bracket for weddings. No problem. I also bounce alot (the flash that is) and use a diffuser. The offset is less than an inch (I'm going by memory). Ideally, I'd rather not have an offset, but the extra battery life is worth the small difference for me. The camera looks awesome with the grip too.

I third the CP-E3. I use mine for my wedding work and the batteries last almost all day. I use to have Quantums and got rid of them and never looked back. The recycling time is 1.5 sec and it is clean, light and the connector goes cleanly into the flash. And if ever things go to hell, you can always find AA somewhere.

 

Go for it.