michael_hogan

<p>Back when I was involved with broadcast television video and graphics we used a system called The Quantel Paintbox. It is still the industry standard among professionals in the field of TV production. Fully optioned they were ~$750K - $1Million each! So we decided to try some other alternatives to augment those systems for smaller jobs.<br>

<br>

We needed systems that were powerful and stable -- that we could rely on not to crash halfway through a long rendering job etc. We extensively tested many different systems including Apple / Mac, Compaq (NT4 SP6a).. The Mac's crashed two to three times as much as any of the Compaq/NT solutions. They just could not take heavy duty 3D graphics rendering like a Compaq Workstation loaded with NT4 and dual processors could. </p>

<p>There were a few staff members that tried to convince management of the merits of the Apple Mac -- but the proof was plain for everyone to see -- the Windows NT machines were several times more reliable than anything Apple had on the market. Needless to say the Compaq / NT4 solution was used and the all of the Mac's were packed up and sent back to Apple; Compaq got the order. Anyone who says that PC's are unreliable is speaking out of total ignorance.. -Mike </p>

The PC represents the best value -- hands down -- over Mac / Apple. *Across the board* If you want an overpriced fashion accessory that has compatibility issues with just about everything (not made by Apple) then get a Mac.. If you want a solid, reliable, affordable machine that works with everything, and are not concerned about 'pose factor' get a PC. I would recommend HP, Lenovo or Dell.. Consider adding the following to your PC:

 

2GB to 4GB of RAM

Wacom Digitising Tablet

Dual Headed Video + Second LCD Monitor (eg, setup dual displays)

 

These things make life so much easier in PS & LR; they are 'must have' items for any serious photographer.

 

Take the money you saved and invest in decent lighting equipment (Profoto / Bowens etc) -- and focus on your pictures and vision.

 

-Mike

<p>Dmitry -- This is a very common problem when working with external (non Nikon / CLS) third party light sources. It's caused by flash latency relative to the shutter opening time. In my experience Nikon flash units (SB800 / SB900 etc) will only give even exposure at 1/250th using CLS or direct hot shoe. Triggering with a Pocket Wizard (radio) things get uneven at anything above 1/200th. The situation is the same with my studio lights (Profoto) and focal plane shutters -- leaf shutters will sync much faster without these issues. This is not a problem with the camera (Nikon's claim of 1/250th is with an all Nikon lighting system) -- just need to be aware of it and use 1/125th or 1/60th. Provided you can control the ambient light in your studio it should not be a problem at all. I generally use a slowish shutter speed even when using leaf shutters since it's the flash duration NOT the cameras shutter that counts in the studio. I know guys that actually use the focal plane shadow like an ND grad filter to mask part of the frame when mixing ambient and flash on location -- it's a interesting technique.. --Mike</p>

<p>Profoto make a grid for thier dish -- and it's worth every penny.. If you have invested in Profoto lights and dish why not get the right grid too? I have the dish and grid and they are superb -- well worth the invetment..</p>

<p>Hi -- Your problem is your sync speed is too high with a focal plane shutter / studio lighting setup. Try 1/200th or even slower and re-test. In a studio setting there is no benefit to high sych speed for table top work anyway -- the flash duration trumps the shutter.. Ask me how I know!</p>

I shoot LF (8X10 and 4X5) extensively, I can tell you that you are going need/want waaay more light than the Nikon SB's put out. Don't get me wrong, I have three SB-800's in my location bag (next to my Profoto Compact 600) - and they are great for wider apertures.. But for 4X5 at f22 or 8X10 at f45 even my Profoto 600 (by itself) is not really going to cut it. Of course you can shoot wide open (f5.6-f9) – but you will get sick of that fast! I generally use my Profoto Acute 2 - 2400 for LF work.. The light modifiers (especially softboxs, umbrellas and scrims) eat up your available power - fast.. You'll see..

 

There is nothing that compares to LF - Have fun..

The D700 has the same image quality and auto-focus as the D3 in a smaller, less expensive package. Same image sensor chip -- there are plenty of comparisons online.. Bottom line: unless you are a pro sports photographer or camera abusive photo journalist the D700 is more than enough camera for you.

I cringed when I read your post.. Sorry to hear that you are stuck with those horrible Bowens Pulsars (AKA Calumet Light Links).. I know how bad they are! But Calumet did the right thing and took them back for me - no problem.. They even paid freight each way via FedEx; and I am based in Australia!

 

Calumet first sent me four replacement Bowens Pulsars (Light Links) that unfortunately had the exact same problem as the original. As you can imagine I was pretty unhappy after going through eight (8) units all with the same problem(s)! I still can't believe they are selling these things - they are obviously inherently defective! They took all eight back in the end and sent me four Pocket Wizard Plus II's - and a transmitter module for my Sekonic flash meter..

 

I can't say enough good things about Calumet customer service. In spite of all the problems they were a pleasure to deal with.. It's a shame you can’t take your Bowens Pulsar units back -- I would at least contact Bowens and/or the dealer you purchased the units from and complain! SHAME ON BOWENS for marketing such a HORRIBLE product!

 

You need two (or more) Pocket Wizard Plus II's (I have four and rarely use more than three) - They are 'dual mode' -- they can be set as transmitter or receiver (or both).. Four channels -- they come with several adapter cables for different flash units.. Very simple to use -- one on the camera one on your light.. Two Pocket Wizard Plus II's will get you going if you are tight on funds; and these days who isn’t?

 

I have not had a single problem since I switched to Pocket Wizard.

I had four of Bowens Pulsars AKA Calumet Lite Links... They are complete rubbish! Take them back and get some

Pocket Wizards ASAP! - Calumet took all four back from me after I had the following problems:

 

1) Random flash triggering - this really sucked! My strobes would fire for no reason al all - In the middle of a shoot!

This annoyed my clients and made me look like a kook! At first I thought it was something I was doing wrong -

nope.. Synch cable worked fine. I plugged just one into my pack and it fired the pack a random - all by itself...

 

2) Double flash at low power setting... I called Calumet and they "had heard about this problem" as well as the

random triggering.

 

-- Get your money back and get some Pocket Wizards --

 

I have pocket Wizard Plus II units now and have not had a single problem since..

 

BTW: I use Profoto Acute2 and Compacts in my studio.. Same problems with both types of unit. I can't believe that

Bowens / Calumet are still selling these pieces of junk.. Get a refund!

D40 + 55-200mm VR - perfect..

I have to strongly disagree with another poster with regard to the D90's image quality. Here is what Ken Rockwell has to say: "The D90 has identical, or slightly better technical image quality than the D300, the exact same rear LCD, and adds several very useful ergonomic features for faster handling compared to the D300." If I were you I would get a D90 -- if I needed more camera I'd pony up some more bucks and get a D700.. If cost is a factor, the D90 trumps the D300, same IQ for $500+ less cash. It's also lighter, less obtrusive and easier to carry in the field..

A metal body is not synonymous with quality.. It depends on your intended use. In the world of large format you pay

through the nose for a light weight 8X10.. Why? Because a lighter camera is so much easier to use in the field! Most

light weight LF cameras are much less rigid, have fewer movements and are less precise - but for landscape and

some architectural applications they are fine - and you can skip your visit to the chiropractor! Still you pay a premium

for light weight construction!

 

Why do some members of the small format crowd think that a heavy camera is better? One of the great things about

small cameras is that they are small and light! Unless you are going to really abuse the camera I don't see metal as

inherently any better than composite, carbon fibre or plastic. Don't forget in two years you will need to upgrade -

these DSLR cameras are disposable!

 

The D90 has the same image quality as the D300.. My main DSLR camera is a D700 - not for the metal body or

build quality. I bought a D700 for the FX sensor and low noise/high ISO. If I could get those in a plastic body and

save 40% - I would buy two of them..

 

For me it's all about image quality - a DSLR is not an investment like quality lighting equipment, Pocket Wizards and

large format camera systems. A DSLR is a 24 month (max) consumable that ends up on eBay sooner than later..

Ragunath - I have the 1.4 version and if cost is an issue the 1.8 IQ is 95% (wide open) - stop down and they are

almost identical. So if you are on a budget get the 1.8..

 

I have to strongly disagree with another poster with regard to the D90's image quality. Here is what Ken Rockwell has

to say: "The D90 has identical, or slightly better technical image quality than the D300, the exact same rear LCD,

and adds several very useful ergonomic features for faster handling compared to the D300." If I were you I would get a

D90 -- if I needed more camera I'd pony up some more bucks and get a D700.. If cost is a factor, the D90 trumps the

D300, same IQ for $500+ less cash. It's also lighter, less obtrusive and easier to carry in the field..

Dino -- What are you going to use the camera for? Begin with the end in mind.. Sealing and heft don't matter for most

studio situations - but for sports, PJ etc it's another story etc..

 

Personally I would say get the D90 and a decent lens - Image quality is the same as the D300 or better (with the

same lens) for $500 less.. Are you going to bang it around? Use it as a hammer? No = D90. Yes; well then I would

say get the D700 and give the D300 a miss..

 

But please tell us what you intend to do with the camera. A camera is just a tool after all, without knowing the job at

hand it's difficult to give advise..

Ray - I use Pocket Wizards with all my studio lighting gear.. The PC port is for a cable that you (and your clients) get to trip over, reef your camera and/or pack..

 

The bad: Well PW's are not exactly cheap like a a simple synch cord - and they stick up on the top of your camera like a walkie-talkie.. They use batteries that can go flat during a shoot and otherwise malfunction. They can put kids off a little as the camera looks a bit menacing with a PW mounted.. Still way better than a synch cord..

 

I don't like any of the other solutions on the market (I have tried most of them at some point).. Stay away from Bowens Lite-Links – (Calumet have a re-badged version too) they are terrible (don’t ask me how I know).. If you are just starting out and are short on cash just a good sync cord and an AS-15 could be the answer too.. Just watch your step!

 

I can't say enough good about Pocket Wizards – value for money..

Carlos -- People who have had problems tend to be very vocal, and in many cases what you see and hear is not representative of the actual failure rates.

 

The only way to know the real failure rates would be if Nikon (transparently) disclosed their service and production records..

Carlos -- 25+ years, I have lost track of the number of Nikon Bodies and lens's I have owned. One body (F90X) had an issue that required return to Nikon. Also I had a lens with a bad diaphram ~10 years ago. I have also owned (own) several LF camera systems - I have striped the cable release cleats on the copal shutters a few times (self repair / SK Grimes).. Similar story with my MF gear -- very few problems..

Sp... -- Good point! Renting gear has an advantage of being an operating expense - it's a straight write-off. Buying

any asset, like a camera, gets depreciated over time (3 years in here in Australia) - it's on your books and, as you

surmised, the value of a DSLR just plummets... I am thinking low end DSLR (D40 / D80) for an everyday backup

(expensive paper-weight) and rent high a end DSLR (D700) for VIP jobs. That also has the advantage of giving me two

backup DSLR bodies for VIP work. That seems like an ideal balance..

David – Yep, I have a big UPS on my CS3 workstation; don’t want to loose my work if I forget to save and a power failure occurs.. But not for my studio – but I have thought about it..

 

You make a good point about *sufficient* backup – I guess it depends on what is at stake. A D40 / D80 / D70 is probably fine for some weddings even.. I just had a potential client call this morning to book a wedding in Feb – the bride just wants a disk of .jpeg’s at the end and the budget is $1.5K MAX! That rules out a decent assistant and renting a backup D700 too.. So for a job like this (if I take it) the only logical backup would be a D40 / D80 / D70 since the budget is so tight. If it was a client that was budgeting $3-5K it would be a different story.. So maybe it’s worth keeping a low end backup DSLR for the cheap-skate jobs.. hmm – there’s a thought! You have some good ideas..

 

Shun (& John R) – I have NEVER shot a wedding without backup *everything* – including an assistant; I have said that a few times, that is NOT what this thread is about. I shoot a few weddings every year and ALWAYS have backup gear and an assistant.

 

I make my living as a photographer and retouching artist – so another $3K is not going to break the bank; but neither is renting high-end gear and passing on the costs.. The question comes down what makes more sense from a business standpoint. I am leaning toward keeping a low-end DSLR for a backup on low margin jobs and renting another D700 for VIP clients (see David Hass’s comments) – this seems like the best compromise..

 

The way this equipment depreciates is just phenomenal - it would be foolish not to have a well thought out plan for dealing with the planned obsolescence of the DSLR market..

 

Andrew – Another excellent point –THEFT—what happens when your studio gets burgled the night before a Wedding? My studio has extensive back to base security and I have everything insured - but theft is always possible..

 

More to think about - excellent thread..

Carlos - Mr Murphy at his best I guess!

 

Stuart - The same way I choose which jobs need no assistant, one assistant, two assistants, extra pack(s) etc.. For instance I won't shoot a wedding without at least one assistant and backup everything! I know quite a few FT wedding guys that work alone to cut costs -- to me that is very foolish.. You twist your ankle and the client (and your rep) is stuffed..

 

The question here is weather or not I should buy another D700 –or- continue use an existing D80 body I have that was a backup for my old D2x –or- just rent backup equipment when needed. For me when needed translates to:

 

Weddings – (Rent backup D700 and assistant and cost into job)

VIP portrait sittings - (Rent backup D700, assistant, makeup artist / hair stylist and cost into job)

 

For simple ‘lifestyle’ portrait work – it’s hard to justify more than one camera and photographer..

Ditto for most comercial / table-top work..

 

Don't forget that I have two modern LF (8X10 and 4X5) studio camera systems and a stockpile of film (remember film?) - so that is always an option too. But shooting young kids with the 8X10 is not a good idea LOL..

 

The more comments I read and think about, the more inclined I am to keep a backup DSLR body -- even if it's a D40. But then again would a D40 or D80 be up to the job of backing up a D700? I think Eric Arnold summed up my feelings when he said “best backup for a d700 is another d700” – I think for my two scenarios above I would still be renting a spare D700 - anyway you look at it.. More to contemplate.. -Mike

Shun – Yes some pros do abuse their gear, but armatures scare me allot more! Maybe I miss-read your post – I thought you were inferring harsh treatment of SLR as a reason for always having a backup.. Sorry if I miss-read..

 

There are some jobs that require a backup – the question is do I rent ‘as needed’ or buy and cop the depreciation, cap ex hit etc. I would NEVER shoot a wedding without a backup camera, flash and at least one good assistant – what if I get ill or injured on the day or during. These things happen. I have to hire an assistant; I just cost that into the job – why not take the same approach to the DSLR body?

 

I don’t agree with a previous poster stating that “Having a backup for any commercial or paying gig isn't an option - it's a requirement” – This is just not true. One could argue the same for always having a good assistant. It depends on the job and what the client is willing to pay for.. I’m not going to pay for an assistant for a simple portrait shoot – I’d have to pass on the cost and ultimately loose clients.. There is a point of diminishing return here..

 

Some good points have been made both ways; I’m on the fence… -Mike

Ronald / David – It’s funny you mention the D40 – I have one too; it’s mainly for my wife / family use.. I bought it with the standard 18-55 kit lens for a song.. Great little camera! I would not use it as a pro backup, though I’m not sure why not! hmm It makes great images, it’s light fast & compact.. My wife might not like the idea though.. ; )

 

I have used the D80 in the studio with similar results to the D2x – it’s a nice camera – no doubt.

 

Shun – I appreciate your feedback.. But just because I am a pro doesn’t mean I subject my camera’s to hash treatment. This is a big myth that pro’s abuse their gear.. We take better care of our gear than anyone – it’s out bred and butter! It’s amateurs that thrash their gear and do silly things with lenses etc. There are exceptions – pro sports photographers come to mind..

 

DSLR’s are announced and hyped ad-nauseum months before they are widely available. In reality they are obsolete on the day of purchase – 18 months is even a stretch. I think the D2x is still just fine ditto for the D200 and D80 but they are now old hat in DSLR terms. Even the D300 is on it’s way out with the D90 below and the D700 above it, how much longer will it last in the market? I’d buy a D90 before a D300 without hesitation.

 

The D700 pretty much obsoletes the D3 – for $2K less – I don’t know anyone planning to buy a D3 since the introduction of the D700. I know several guys trying to sell their D3’s while they can still get decent money for them. The D3 was announced 14 months ago – now the D700 has trumped it! Like I said 18 months is stretching it…

 

A D700 rents for $150.00 (AUD) a day here in Australia – pretty cheap in the scheme of things..

 

David H – Your first example is more the type of work I do. I can’t help but think of other scenarios like power failure would put the kybosh on a shoot as well. This has happened to me a few times in the studio – prolonged power outage = no lighting = shoot cancelled.. Now should I invest in a generator just in case? Don’t laugh I have colleges that have don’t just that..

 

Example two – I don’t do high volume “cattle call” work – but if I did I would not even ask the question about a backup body. Agree that everything eventually fails – the question is how to best manage the risk. There is no way to eliminate it. If there was a cheap (<$1,500.00) FX format camera it would simplify things..

 

Eric – Exactly my thoughts..

 

Dan – $100 a day might add up quick; might not – but it’s an operating expense not Cap Ex. So it’s a direct write off, easy – unless the costs are drastically higher than buying – you also pay as you go.. You make some good points – maybe I should keep my D80..

 

Rich – You are forgetting that the D700 is FX – so throw that into the equation too. Different handling + different format + different ISO capabilities = confusion.. I think my D80 has like 600 actuations on it – that’s how much I have used it..

 

I have NOT made up my mind on this issue – otherwise I would not be posting here. The feedback on this subject has been great! -Mike

Jose / Roeland -- The last time I had a camera totally tank on me was back in 1992 (I think).. You are right -- It's not something that happens very often. But back in the film SLR days camera bodies had a much longer life cycle. DSLR -- I think the 'D' is for disposable.. After 18 months or so and they are obsolete.

 

I agree with you about having an -identical- extra body with a different lens setup etc.. But I find it awkward to use two different camera models - the controls are always different enough to be off-putting; especially when you are in the middle of a portrait sitting. So the way I see it I am up for two identical bodies (in my case D700 X2).. So why not just rent a spare for jobs that require it -- and of course cost that in?

 

I have two (different) LF systems in my studio (8X10 and a 4X5) lenses etc -- and I have never considered a backup LF system LOL! Of course clients that want to pay for 8X10 are getting rare these days -- but the jobs do come up..

 

Shun, Joe, David, -- I know I'm not going to get much for a used D80 but as a backup for the D700 it's just not going to cut it.. FX -vs- DX for a start -- controls are different etc.. Weddings are not work that I chase but I do shoot a few each year. I don't have a problem just renting a backup D700 for the weekend and factoring that into the job.

 

If I was shooting weddings every weekend (I'd rather be horse-whipped!) I would not question the expense. But I mainly shoot portraits and other commercial stuff -- also I do quite a bit restoration and retouching work. Portrait and retouching comprise ~70% of my income. If my camera keels during a portrait shoot it's not (generally) the end of the world. I sure wish I had $1.00 for every client that called with some lame excuse to cancel a shoot at the last moment! I guess depends on who the sitter is etc.. If I get a commission for the Governor General I'm going to have a plan B of course.

 

I just don't see using a DX format camera that has different handling characteristics as a smart move. Tying up $3-5K in a camera that I don't use regularly seems silly too; in 18 months it's going to be time to upgrade.. I can rent a D700 (or buy) on short notice..

 

It’s great to hear different opinions on this subject – I have not seen much discussion on it. It’s a big issue for me now that I have gone DSLR/FX – The D80 was OK to backup the D2x as both were DX format… -Mike

After my latest round of upgrades to my Nikon Digital System -- I migrated from a D2x to D700 as my primary

camera ~two weeks ago. I used a D80 as a backup which was always awkward and almost never used -- I am now

selling the backup off in the endless upgrade cycle of the DSLR.

 

This has got me thinking; I mainly shoot portraits and do retouching / restoration jobs to pay the rent. I still do a

few weddings and commercial assignments etc.. But I am questioning the wisdom of tying up funds in backup

DSLR bodies - I am considering just renting a backup DSLR when needed only..

 

This is how I deal with lighting for instance -- I have one pack / 3 heads / modifiers etc (all Profoto) and I just rent

extra packs when and if I need them for a job.. These DSLRs keep getting better and cheaper so I am considering

a different approach to manage this situation..

 

Note that I still have two LF systems in my studio (table top work) with no plans to upgrade in that area.. I love

what digital has done for my workflow commercially -- I am just questioning the wisdom of *always* having an

additional $3-5K tied up in something that deprecates so fast; and since it’s a backup – it gets almost no use..

 

I'd like to hear what others are doing to manage the DSLR ‘planned obsolescence' issue...

 

-Mike

I just sold my CS V (LS-50) after I compared the results to the new Epson V700. The Nikon makes terrible B&W scans - my tri-x looked just awful. Then I decided to try my Epson V700 for 35mm - outstanding scans. Did I mention that I sold my Coolscan V ED last week?...

 

-Mike