jake_v

Not that this hasn't been beaten to death already... but here goes:

I suppose the main concern would be how steadily you are able to handhold your camera.

I personally find that on a 1.6x sensor, I manage to shoot at 1/2 the FL of the lens, without showing camera shake. On our 5D, I can even fudge a little more.

So, for my particular application... 24-70L means I need to keep my shutter speed at 1/30 or faster at the long end, and 1/10 or faster when wide (on the 5D).

Unless I'm shooting a statue, 1/30 of a second is already on the edge of being too slow to capture most people shots, because of subject motion blur.

Sooooo... in a situation where 2.8 would give me 1/30 second at ISO 1600 (or worse, 3200), the F4 IS would ultimately just give me a 1/15 with more subject motion blur. Hooray!

However, on the 70-200L I find IS to be invaluable for low light. I can shoot the same 1/30 at 200mm with the IS, which is a far cry better than I would do handheld w/o IS.

I guess my thought process is that the 24-70 range doesn't (for my needs) justify IS, with the exception of strange circumstances where I can't physically hold still myself. The 70-135 range is where IS becomes "nice", but not quite necessary. And above 135 I find IS invaluable in low light situations.

Take that how you want. Of course each person's mileage may vary.

I'd highly recommend switching your focus to the "*" button on the back (where your thumb rests), so that you can focus & recompose without this issue...

And much more importantly, you don't have to refocus every time you want to take a picture. If you and your subjects don't change positions, you simply snap away... then when one of you changes, refocus and repeat.

Another thing mentioned was the "red light indicating focus achieved". While focus MAY be achieved when you see the red light, that is NOT an indicator of focus. The red light(s) indicate WHERE the camera is attempting to focus... there is actually a green circle in the bottom corner of your display to indicate when focus has been achieved (according to the camera). Until that green light is lit up, AF will continue to attempt to focus... and if you move, that means it will be hunting.

So, if you want to focus with your shutter half-pressed... you HAVE to wait till the green indicator lights up before recomposing. Technically, you'd have to do this with the * as well, but you'd at least be able to meter off a different area than what you focus on.

James Duncan:

Unraid is linux based. All the data is on ReiserFS... which means everything is readable in a linux (or windows if you have the tool to recognize the FS) machine.

The only thing proprietary is the software that adds a parity disk, which backs up any other disks you have on the system.

Raid 5 is by a long shot closer to "proprietary". I've dealt with systems doing this, and they are great. But try and move your multiple disks from a raid5 system to somewhere else once your raid card fails... good luck, especially if you want to do this in a timely manner.

OTOH, it's way overkill for most picture takers... but then, so is raid5.

Ahhh... managing the netowrk & servers on a medium sized business, plus our photography business, I may be overkill but here goes:

First off, we never delete a CF card until is has been copied to two separate locations.

One copy goes to our workstation, which has two mirrored hard drives for the data portion.

The second copy goes to an "unraid" server, which contains a current backup of whatever is on the workstation's data drive. We do this by running a program called "vice versa pro", which lets us update & copy files between locations easily. Most importantly, it checks the timestamp and filesize before copying and also verifies the files afterwards.

Copy and paste thru windows leaves you no verification that the files copied bit for bit... plus it's a huge hassle if somehow things get stopped in the middle of a "backup".

As far as the equipment on the "unraid" server goes... It consists of 12 hard drives, with one being a parity drive and the remaining 11 being data drives. The one parity drive makes it possible to replace ANY of the 11 drives, should they fail... but only if ONE drive fails. If two drives fail... well, it's better than a true RAID system, in that only the drives that failed lose data, instead of a RAID5's complete loss of data on all drives.

The "unraid" server has 1 parity drive, 2 drives dedicated to current copies of whatever is on the workstation, and the remaining drives being older versions of backups, and other types of data.

Couple all that with our rotating external hard drives that get put in fireproof safes offsite... and smugmug having jpg copies of all our files... I think we have everything covered pretty well, even without DVD/CD backups (which I find to be worthless a few years down the road).

For info on unraid, check out http://www.lime-technology.com/

Well, it's been called...

Shooting RAW (at least with our 5D/20D's) gives us over 1 stop (1.3-1.7 stops, it appears to me) of extra room for the brights.

We actually intentionally overexpose, to an extent, in order to give more detail/less noise in the shadows/darks.

I tend to spot meter at +2/3 on the brightest thing I want to still have detail... such as the white wedding dress. The histogram (and the jpg) LOOK blown out many times, but once you open the RAW and bring it down, it actually looks cleaner.

You may not want to intentionally overexpose, but shooting RAW will certainly help if you do, so long as you don't WAY overexpose.

Also, another thing to consider with your outdoor/fill flash... Make sure that your shutter speed isn't being brought down in order to sync with the flash. I'm not sure what the sync speed on the D70 is, but on our canons we have to kick in the high speed sync above 1/200 (or 1/250 for 20D)... otherwise the flash will kick the shutter back down to 1/200, which could very well make your scene too bright.

"...I like my digital file better. Why?"

Because they are smiling better in the digital photo.

But seriously... I remember a year or two ago having a discussion where (almost) everyone claimed that a 100+ person group shot would be impossible (printed at 11x14 or 12x18, mind you) on a 20D. Many people claimed each person's face would only be a handfull of pixels, and that there would be no detail. Almost everyone suggested a MF camera or a better digicam.

I reviewed a picture of a crappily lit, slightly out of focus (the subject wasn't in the crowd), high ISO image of our church sanctuary, which seats about 2000... and I certainly could distinguish faces and see detail there. Oh this was off a 6MP 10D, BTW.

Point being... sometimes people don't know what they're talking about and just speculate. The problem is, lots of the time, speculation is presented as fact.

For a 20x24" print... it's going to look approximately how 1/4 of the picture looks filling up a 17" monitor, as far as detail goes. (ex, the top left quadrant filling a 17" monitor screen). It's personal preference from there whether any particular camera will do a good enough job or not.

Between the two crops you show, I think they both did an adequate job.

Are you uploading a full picture and having the template/software split your slideshows?

I notice several of your slideshow 3-in-1 pictures don't line up correctly at the seams.

Using firefox... altho I doubt it's a problem with my computer/browser, as I'm building off the same template and don't see that happening to my images.

Sooo... are you implying that your pictures turned out properly exposed, but that the shutter speed was too slow (1/60th) and you were getting motion blur?

That's what it sounds like you're saying to me. And if that's the case, you're in luck! Because I can tell you exactly why the camera did that setting... In AV it adjusts your shutter to compensate for your choice of aperture.

Perhaps you spot metered on their black shirt, or on a shadowy area, or something...

If you know how to use AV mode properly, and your camera isn't faulty, the shutter speed the camera picks should be reasonably good to nail the exposure.

Then again, if you are implying something other than what I got out of your post... you may have to disregard all this.

I'm not sure you'd like the price... but if you search for "5D" on B&H's website you should come up with a few underwater rigs designed specifically for the 5d. (sort highest price first, haha)

The potential problem I see is $$$$, and lots of it. Cheapest being over $1200, going up to nearly $5000... none of which includes the lens portion.

If you were a tourgide/photographer who led kayaking expeditions frequently, I could see it being worth the money, but for a one time adventure... I would suggest seeing if anywhere that rents lenses will rent these cases as well.

It would appear: Your first picture (in this thread) is better exposed for the background, which would mean you let in less light (smaller ap or faster shutter), and used more flash to fill in your subjects. Your second picture has the background overexposed, which means you're letting in a lot more light.

Couple that with the fact that you have the sun basically directly shining into your lens, and you're going to have problems.

You mentioned that your 28-300 didn't have as bad of a time, but were you shooting them both at the same focul length?

Shooting a head-to-toe picture at 70mm is going to show a LOT more of the background (and sky/sun area) than shooting the same picture at 300mm.

All these pictures to me look like exactly what I would expect from any lens shooting with the sun directly in view (or very closely out of view). It would perhaps be a better idea to shoot with the sun slightly higher, or off to the side. Or wait for an overcast day (if you can find one) where the sun isn't so harsh.

To help narrow your view of your background, you can also use longer lenses, which will probably help a good bit.

I'm a big fan of flashes for most situations. Outdoors it will help fill in shadows...

But I almost always use my flash (580 and 430) with a sto-fen omnibounce on them and point them up 45+ degrees. Those little plastic caps help diffuse the light, and remove the harshness you can sometimes get from direct flashes.

I'm sure there are plenty of other types of diffusers you can use... it would probably be worth your while to check into a flash. And then do a lot of experimenting/reading about flash photography... years later you'll probably still be learning new tricks.

Another suggestion I might make is to get your focus OFF your shutter button.

I don't have the manual/camera in front of me right now, but one of the custom functions will allow you to change what the "*" button and shutter buttons do. Have the * button be your focus and the shutter (half pressed) be your exposure/metering.

This will make it possible to not have to focus every single picture you take, hepful if you & your subject aren't moving closer/farther away.

Also, practice proper techniques holding your camera and learn how fast your shutter needs to be in order to get rid of camera shake & motion blur.

The shutter speed comared to focal length is different for everyone. My wife usually needs to be around 2x focul length on a DSLR to get consistantly good results, while I rarely have problems shooting half the focal length on a DSLR.

YMMV

Delwyn,

Since when did shutter speed have anything to do with DOF (and thus "blur"/out of focus)?

A fast shutter speed won't have any bearing on Depth of Field, but you are correct that the apeture will.

Fast shutter speeds would be for freezing motion of your subject, or letting in less light to compensate for the large apeture... Perhaps you were trying to say you NEED faster shutter speeds to bring the exposure down when using wide apetures?

I'm always amused by the pro-theft crowd. It's even more stupifying hearing it coming from (supposed) photographers, who are working with & creating the same "it's ok to steal!" type of property.

Amazingly, 99% of the intelectual property that is stolen nowadays is for entertainment/convenience, NOT out of necessity.

You MIGHT have an argument if there was no way to get a picture out of your DSLR without this program, or that there was no way to get on the internet without that OS, or that there was no way to stay sane without stealing the other music to calm the voices in your head.

NOBODY (not one person) NEEDS photoshop for free. Please don't try to justify theft (whether it costs Adobe money or not). Just admit it's wrong, and that you are a burden on society and at least be honest with yourself.

Parents have to be millionaires for college kid to get photoshop? You do standup all week, or just on weekends? The educational version of photoshop was (last I checked) around $175. Millionaires... (that lack of sound you hear is my eyes rolling)

B&H photovideo

Type in "PSMAR" in the search blank, filter it down to "canon" products, and you should see a $999 20D (body only).

Perhaps it would help if you gave us a step-by-step rundown of what you're doing, and what the camera is showing. Example:

(1) set ISO to 400, Spot meter, AV mode, A at 5.6

(2) Set EV (push shutter halfway down and turn tumb wheel) to +1

(3) Meter & focus off subjects face in cener of screen

(4) Press shutter button completely

(5) Observe histogram showing slightly bright (+1) subject's face (since I spot metered off their face at +1)

That is how AV/TV should work, nowhere in this have I ever noticed a meter showing you the overall exposure reading.

Anyhow, if you could step thru this with us and tell us when/where you see the meter reading, and what you're actually doing, it might be a bit easier to answer your question.

Thanks

I still don't follow...

If you are in AV or TV mode, you set the compensation anywhere from -2 to +2 exposure.

There is no meter reading visible in these modes. All it shows you is what you have set the exposure compensation to.

You would have to switch out of AV/TV and plug the settings into M mode to get an actual meter reading, or use an external meter.

Are you sure you're not setting the FEC to +1 and have the overall exposure set at -1/3? Because in AV/TV there isn't a meter to look at.

Hey Felix,

I'm not quite sure I comprehend your problem.

Are you meaning a separate meter is telling you -1/3?

The way it should work in AV is... you pick your apeture, and the camera makes its shutter speed selection based on your desired apeture. So if you wanted to shoot at F4, the camera would change the shutter speed to be (for example) 1/100 of a second (based on apeture and ISO). THEN, if you change the apeture in this example to F5.6, the shutter speed would go down to 1/50... both exposures would be the same brightness.

What you MIGHT be having issues with is your metering mode. You can chose spot, partial, center, etc. metering modes, which evaluate the scene differently. So if your external meter is taking a reading based off the brightest thing it sees, you will get a different result in the camera if you are either using a different metering mode, or if you aren't properly metering with the mode you are using.

Hope that explains a little bit for you.

Not having the 17-55IS, or the 30D...

When comparing our 20D's and our 5D's, If I want MORE DOF, the 1.6x sensors help out... essentially giving you "free" light when you need a larger DOF.

However, the way I shoot... it is almost always the reverse that is true, I am looking for LESS DOF. In that case, the 5D hits the spot for me in almost all situations.

Occasionally, when I can't fill the screen with the subject, the 20D is a better choice... But that's not common with my style of shooting.

I assume many know this... but just in case you or someone reading this doesn't understand:

To fill the frame with a cropped sensor, you will either be zoomed out more, or farther away from your subject, in comparison to a FF camera. Being zoomed in more, and being closer are two important things in minimizing DOF, and adding nicer background blur.

IMHO, that would be the BIGGEST thing I would consider in comparing the two, if money isn't an option. Do you want MORE or LESS DOF?

In trying to explain (briefly) to my wife the technical side of photography, I think it can be easily summed up as:

Your camera (and its settings) manipulate light to form a picture. You have an aperture (F 2.8 for example) which increases (lower number) or decreases (higher f number) in size to let in more or less light. You have a shutter, which opens and closes faster (higher number, lets in less light) or slower (smaller number, lets in more light). You have ISO speeds (how sensitive your "film" is to light), which can be more sensitive (higher number) or less (lower number).

Each one of those 3 things, when changed, will need to be compensated by one or both of the other two things, if you want to keep your picture exposed properly. So if you let in more light by raising your ISO (making your film/sensor more sensitive to light), you could for example have a faster shutter speed (lets in less light to compensate) or use a smaller apeture (less light), or a combination.

So, when people are suggesting you get a "fast" (2.8 or lower) lens, this is especially true/important for sports over "snapshots" because in sports your subjects are oftentimes moving very fast. If you leave your shutter open for 1/30 of a second, you will see motion blur. Being able to let more light in with your lens will allow you to speed up your shutter speed... which can make a HUGE improvement with fast moving subjects.

There are many things to consider which are effected by the size of the apeture, speed of the shutter, and sensitivity of the ISO... they each will change things differently, which is important to learn. But as a brief overview, just know they all interact with each other directly. Now you just need to learn WHY to use one over the other to get the results you want/need.

As far as lenses, while I agree as many have said... that you should consider the 70-200 2.8L (the "L" on Canon lenses just indicates it is a "pro" lens... higher quality), I think you MIGHT want to consider something a bit cheaper to practice and learn on to begin with. You also said you're into macro photography, and the 100 2.8 macro is a very good macro lens. This could also be someting to practice with, before investing thousands of dollars into a zoom lens.

The 100 macro does not zoom (change focul lengths), which would require you to move around and plan out a bit more... but should certainly be doable, and save you a bunch of money up front while you decide whether or not you really need/want a more expensive lens.

JMHO

That's a pretty good price for a rebel w/ kit lens.

If you really want a 20D... I'd personally suggest starting with the 350D (rebelXT) unless you need something on the 20D, or just have extra money to spend. Anyhow, if you really want the 20D, you can type this code into B&H's website: PSMAR and in the search results, select "canon"... you should see a 20D (body only) for $999.

I would think that since you're new to photography, a 350D would be a great tool to start learning with... at which point you could upgrade in a couple of years (or whenever you feel confident you NEED more) and have a nicer camera at that point. That's just my opinion, of course.

Good luck... you'll have fun no matter which way you decide to go.

Now see Puppyface, you should be saving a LOT of money.

You said you print 1 out of 100... that means you have to pay for 24 prints every 2400 pictures.

So, $7 for 2400 pictures, as opposed to $650 for 2400 develop & print by film.

But don't forget the $5 (or so) a roll of film, adding another $500 to give you a grand total of $1150ish dollars, instead of the $7 dollars for the 24 (out of 2400) digital shots you had printed.

Oh, and however much your lab costs for scanning...

So see, you DO save a lot of money, and admittedly don't shoot much. Those who shoot more can easily save faster. And I'm sure there are plenty of people who want everything printed who digital isn't really much/any savings at all... Just depends on your style and needs.

Now... we just need to keep working off the $10-12,000 we spent on our cameras.

We owned a 350D for a brief period, and found that it was pretty good as a backup, and for my wife's personal camera when not being used for work.

However, I was disappointed in the fact that the dimensions of the pictures (between 20D and 350D) were ever so close, but off... this confused me for a while, as I would wonder why some of my batch processing 4x6's were off by a handfull of pixels. Eventually I figured out that both cameras had different sensor sizes (or at least output sizes), which created too much of a hassle over just getting a second 20D.

The only major advantages over the 350d that I saw were the ability to use 3200 (H), the wheel, better construction and larger size, and the ability to swap batteries. We didn't have any problems with focusing, or really anything else bad to say about it other than the size difference.

So, if you say you're having focusing problems, and a lack of confidence... I'd suggest either getting it sent in for repair, or sell it and get a 20D/30D. I personally didn't think the 33% extra $ is worth the 30D (20D for $999 at B&H using code "PSMAR" vs $1300+ for 30D), so I opted to get a second 20D, and then later added a 5D.

Don't get me wrong... I think the 20D is a good improvement over the 350D, and if the costs were the same/closer I'd say the 30D is a good improvement over the 20D as well... You'll need to be the one to decide what's worth it to you. Personally, as I said before, I'd consider trying to have the 350D fixed for a low cost, and use it as a second camera. Of course, that is assuming you don't need 3200 ISO, or some other feature a "better" camera would give you. And if you decide to go that route, keep in mind that you will have two sets of actions you will need to run in photoshop, which means two batch jobs (after separating the two cameras files). For me it wasn't worth the hassle, for others it might not be a big deal at all...

As to deciding to go Nikon or not... that's up to you. I personally think it would be a major hassle to have TWO different brand cameras with TWO different sets of controls and TWO different sets of lenses, etc. I would suggest that if you were to jump ship on canon, that you go all out and get rid of the Canon gear you currently have, as well.

One thing to consider, you stated you will be "trusting to do a wedding", you should seriously have at least one backup for everything. If you have a nikon set and a canon set, and the body goes on your nikon... you've lost not only your nikon body, but all the lenses. So you now have no backup for your canon lenses, should one of them fail.

Similarly... if one of your nikon lenses fails, you have to use the canon body and lens for some stuff, and the nikon body and lenses for other stuff. Could be quite tricky when trying to remember controls, settings, etc on two different pieces of equipment, unless you're used to it.

Puppyface:

Around here, even the "non-pro" shops cost about $.50 a shutter click for film and developing. Doesn't seem too far fetched to think that you could recoup a lot of money fast, depending on how you shoot.

Saturday's 11 hour wedding consisted of 1300 pictures, of which the client will get around 600. All the proofs are via the website.

IF they want printed proofs, WHCC will proof print 4x6's for $.24 each... half the cost of less than half the pictures taken. That means a total savings of ($.26 x 700) plus ($.50 x 600) being $482. Not to mention the fact that we bill more than $.26 per printed proof to the client... It's quite easy to recoup $5000 worth of equipment, if it fits your needs.

And don't get me started on scanning costs of film...

But let's just say that for many of us it is very easy to pay for digital bodies over film for our applications. It may not work for you... sorry if it doesn't. Sounds like you need to find a better/cheaper printer, or stop printing every single picture you take.

Well, now you can say you've met ONE person who didn't have issues. It took them long enough, but I got my $645 in rebates about 3 months after mailing them in... no questions asked.

Gonna be getting another $315 coming up soon, too.