bob jr.

Bob,

 

Is there a simple formula in terms of DOF like the "Sunny 16 Rule" in terms of exposure? For example, for a 50mm lens at 10 feet=1 foot DOF....50-10-1 -- that is just an example -- but is there something like that?

Thanks Tom!

(I hope that this is an OK section to post this item)

 

Hi!

 

I will be photographing lots of portraits at an up-coming luau in Hawaii for an

Army unit that is going to Iraq.

 

I will have 4 Hensel 500w mono lights to use. The typical portrait will be of

two people - husband and wife or boyfriend and girlfriend. The time that most

of the pics will be taken: from 6:00 pm to 6:45 pm. There will be a tree behind

the subjects, a row of small palm trees on the left and two tiki lights in the

foreground on the upper right. What lighting do you Photo.net'ers recommend?

How would you arrange the lights? For the main and the fill, would you use

umbrellas or softboxes or a combination of both? How can I get a good hairlight

effect? Should I umbrella the hairlight as well?

 

The sun will be low in the background for the 6 to 6:45 pm time frame; for pics

tken from 8:00 to 9:00 (the stragglers), the sun will not even factor in...do

you think that the light from the two tiki torches could even act as fill?

Should I gel the main light, especially considering that there will be fire

light in the pic?

 

hhhhmmmmm.............

Hi!

 

I will be photographing lots of portraits at an up-coming luau in Hawaii for an

Army unit that is going to Iraq.

 

I will have 4 Hensel 500w mono lights to use. The typical portrait will be of

two people - husband and wife or boyfriend and girlfriend. The time that most

of the pics will be taken: from 6:00 pm to 6:45 pm. There will be a tree

behind the subjects, a row of small palm trees on the left and two tiki lights

in the foreground on the upper right. What lighting do you Photo.net'ers

recommend? How would you arrange the lights? For the main and the fill, would

you use umbrellas or softboxes or a combination of both? How can I get a good

hairlight effect? Should I umbrella the hairlight as well?

 

The sun will be low in the background for the 6 to 6:45 pm time frame; for pics

tken from 8:00 to 9:00 (the stragglers), the sun will not even factor in...do

you think that the light from the two tiki torches could even act as fill?

Should I gel the main light, especially considering that there will be fire

light in the pic?

 

hhhhmmmmm.............

Zack:

 

Thanks for asking. I didn't see a pattern. I did notice that for the ones that were out of focus, if I did shoot a series, about 75% percent of the time the image was still out of focus for the next in the series...

Here is the program that I used:

This pic was taken in horizontal orientation; but still out of focus...

(By the was, the first sample pic that I attached was shot in AI Servo)

Please see attached pic. This was taken in vertical orientation; can the vertical orientation mess things up a bit sometimes?

A couple of days ago I shot a high school cross country running meet. I

noticed that a LOT of the pics that I shot with the 20D with 24-70 were back-

focused on the background. Is it possible that, in the process of holding the

lens barrrel with my left hand, I was inadvertently turning the focus ring?

Part of the reason that I am bringing this up is that I recall having a little

bit of "placement confusion" at one point while I was shooting, where I couldnt

find the zoom ring right away; I wonder if my fingers werent on the focus ring.

 

Input would be greatly appreciated. Has any one of you noticed a back-focus

issue with this lens/camera combination that could possibly be attributed to

user error like this?

I am doing a going-away-to-Iraq luau on the 26th of October here on Oahu for an

Army unit. My biggest job there will be to get portraits of the couples

(approx. 500 people will be there, so I will be one busy hombre...). There is

a small tree in the immediate background with accent lighting provided by the

hotel already there. The light is at ground level and pointing up into the

tree. I would like to put a few strings of lights on the main branches leading

up into the canopy of the tree to enhance the background for the portraits.

 

Questions:

 

1) Has anybody out there tried to do this? If so, did you like the effect? If

so, do you have a brand to recommend - especially one that comes in a very long

string or at least can be extended by stringing the strands together so that I

only have to use one in-coming plug to power the unit.

 

Mahalo!

Bob

Thank you, thank you. So this is light meter reading talk...aaahhh....that is a segment of phtography that I have not delved into. I guess it is because my camera has a built in meter and I use that for every shot. Maybe if I had been active in the great days of film I would be more familiar with light meters outside of the camera. Am I right in saying that light meters are almost obsolete for the digital shooter of today? All of the lighting equipment that I have used with my Canon system refers to ratios, such as +1/3 or +2 rather than "F11" or something like that. I do remmeber that Bambi said that the "F" numbers are right on the dial that she uses on her lighting equippment...

There is a concept in flash lighting that I don't understand. Someone please

give me some input.

 

I was at a Bambi Cantrell seminar a few days ago when she mentioned

putting "F8" intesity light here and "F11" intensity thlight there on the

subject. What does this mean? Is it a measure of light such that, at a given

F Stop, there will be a proper exposure? For example, "F11 light" might be

light of a certain inrensity such that, at ISO 100 with the F Stop set at F11

and the shutter speed set at 1/250th of a second, there will be a proper

exposure. Am I in the right park of the "ballpark" with this guess, or am

I "way out in left field"?

 

- bob

The EXACT same thing happened to me (I also have the 20D). I had to send it to Canon for repair - about $180 - hope you still have it under warranty

But I still want to stick with the Canon L's...am I crazy or what?

Your are correct, Geoff - thanks.

I already have the 70-200 2.8 IS, so I could get a 1.4 extender for that for reach indoors or for low light events... That would give me a 4.0 with 200 times 1.6 (320) reach on my 20D. My friend gets 300 times 1.5 (450) with his Sigma 120-300.

 

Thanks to you all for your input. I guess I'll be getting the 1.4 extender. The rest of the money will be put into a savings for the 1D Mark III

But I could use it (the 100-400) for outdoor sports -- and it takes the Canon exteders, correct?

The problem with the primes vs. the zoom is that the subject comes closer to the photographer some times. For example, football: my friend says that he can cover from 10% to 75% of the field with his 120-300 Sigma 2.8, whereas he could only cover about 25% to 75% with a 300 prime. At least that is his claim. I haven't shot football before. But I have shot water polo. When one is standing at the one end of the pool (where good shots are to be had), one has to be able to shoot the players near the near goal. And the lens has to be able to reach across the pool as well. With a 300 prime, for example, the focal length would be too narrow for the near players.

OK - I get the picture. Is there a Canon L 2.8 zoom somewhere in the range vicinity of the Sigma 120-300?

Hi! I am now getting into sports photography. My mentor uses the 120-300

Sigma 2.8 with his Nikon D200 will good results. He suggests that I should get

one for my Canon 20D and 5D so that I can be more effective in helping him

shoot events. The thing is I greatly hesitate going Sigma; I only like to buy

the Canon L's now.

 

Could I get the 100-400 push-pull L instead? I know that I would suffer some

on the aperture, but with Canon's high ISO capabilities, that would tend to

equalize things out, would it not? For example, my mentor could shoot

volleyball in a gym at 120mm at ISO 1600 at 2.8 at 1/250 with his Sigma. Could

I not up my ISO to 3200 (especially with the 5D and shoot at 4.5 to get almost

the same results? (albeit the background blur wont quite be as good as his)

 

And when I get a 1D Mark III with ISO 6400 the lens becomes even MORE useable,

correct?

You are all so kind and so knowledgeable! I did shoot yesterday all day and all went VERY well. What I found is that AI Servo with center point selected works better with the stabilizer running; before I had it off, thinking that that would speed up the whole acquiring focus, etc. But it wasn't that way; the stabilizer, I think, makes it easier to focus on the person in action because the image in the viewfinder is more "stable". I will post my shots from yesterday in a little bit. Man, did my 70-200 IS 2.8 get a work-out yesterday or what! Whew!

Thanks Zack.

OOhh...and focus and recompose isn't practical when they are going up to spike the ball...

Thanks for all of your input. Rob, you said, "And to approach it without an understanding of what your camera is doing is a recipe for disaster." That is why I am writing to all of you. Does any photographer have a complete understanding of why the camera does what it does? There may be a few, but I bet you could count them on the fingers of two hands. I think that we just know what works. And the system I am using is working in the sense that I am making my clients happy; I just want to get better.

 

So far you guys said not to use AI Servo...what then? Single shot? AI Focus? All the zones? In my experience and in these conditions, the best so far seems to be AI Servo with center point selected. Does anybody actually have actual experience shooting volleyball with a good keeper percentage - and - what settings did you use?

I wish that I had my 5D, but it is in the shop. I think that that six additional invisible focus points around the center point would help me quite a bit here...