dan_south

<p>The polarizer absorbs about 75 percent of the light that passes through it. That slows down your shutter speed by about two stops. That might be okay in bright sunlight, but indoors or in shady or cloudy conditions, slower shutter speeds might cost you sharpness.</p> <p>I use polarizers rarely. I used to enjoy using them, but I grew tired of the look of the polarizing effect. I use them very infrequently now.</p>

<blockquote> <p>I thought You HAVE to have ALL the time a filter in front of your main glass<br> </p> </blockquote> <p>No, you do NOT need to keep a filter on your lenses at all times. I rarely use filters. Most of the time the front of my lens is exposed. I use lens hoods to add a level of impact protection.<br> <br> Henry Posner - thanks for making my day!</p>

<blockquote> <p>I was wondering if I can put my Polarizer filter on top of the UV filter?</p> </blockquote> <p> <br> There's no point. You gain nothing by stacking them. Use them one at a time or not at all.</p>

<blockquote> <p>Am I correct in saying; D610 - entry level FF, D750 - advanced amateur FF, D810- professional FF?</p> </blockquote> <p> <br> No. A professional can use a D610, and a novice can use a D810. The pro's photos are going to be much better than the novice's photos regardless of which camera you put in their hands. Such "classifications" are useless.</p>

<p>Yes, it's fair to say that.</p>

<p>Why bad for you? You bought a new camera, not a refurb. There's a reason why refurbished gear is cheaper - reliability.</p>

<p>Thank you, Steve Gubin, for saying what I was thinking. I hope that the 'prey' post was meant to come across as tongue in cheek. Not that that makes it any less disturbing.</p>

The best bet is to move them. No amount of fill flash is going to remove the shadow of a tree branch from a person's face without also washing out their skin. Either move them out of the shadows, rotate them so the light is coming from a different direction, move them to open shade, or filter the sunlight through a diffuser (requires support). Once you solve the branch shadow problem, you can consider adding fill light. Soft boxes are bulky, and the large ones are heavy. If your flash is on camera, rotate the head and bounce it off of a reflector (an inexpensive accessory that you'll use frequently). If you can use off camera flash, a shoot-through umbrella is a portable and effective modifier.

<blockquote> <p>2. PocketWizard technology is already integrated in products from Sekonic, Profoto, Dynalite and Bowens.</p> </blockquote> <p> <br> This is definitely not true for Profoto. I'm not sure about the other brands. Profoto's radio triggering system is proprietary.</p>

<p>Is the question how to think like a photographer? Or is it how to think like a professional photographer who needs to sell images and/or services in order to eat and pay the rent? Those are two very different perspectives.</p> <p><strong>Think like a photographer:</strong></p> <p>- Be open to everything that you see as a possible subject, but be selective and use your camera only when you believe that you have a strong chance of capturing the results that you want to produce.<br> - Know your style and make decisions that support it.<br> - Think about light and composition.<br> - Think about ways to develop, expand, and sharpen your technique.<br> - Think creatively.<br> Think about keeping up with current trends and practices.<br> - Think about how to overcome limitations and how to use obstructions to inspire greater creativity.<br> - Think about collaborators (models, subjects, subject owners/stewards, and other people who can help you make images).<br> - Think about how to get the best out of every visual opportunity.</p> <p><strong>Think like a pro whose livelihood depends on their photography:</strong></p> <p>- Think carefully about what your customers want and expect.<br> - Think of any possible thing that you can do to deliver what your customer wants in a way that exceeds their expectations.<br> - Think about expenses versus revenues.<br> - Think about the effectiveness and impact of your marketing and advertising.<br> - Think about your reputation.<br> - Think about permits and forms and insurance.<br> - Think about assistants.<br> - Think about taxes.<br> - Think about keeping up with current trends and practices.<br> - Think about backups and storage and organization.<br> - Think about the safety of everyone involved in your business and in your shooting.</p>

<p>Lens on</p>

<p>The D750 has the latest autofocus advances. If you're budget is tighter, the D610 is probably fine. I would avoid the D600 (oil of the sensor problem) and the D700 (heavy-handed anti-aliasing filter, single card slot, archaic live view implementation).</p>

<blockquote> <p>What about the Zeiss Otuses?</p> </blockquote> <p> <br> Costs a lot, manual focus only, but no macro or tilt-shift capability - I can't think of a single reason to own an Otus except for bragging rights. <br> <br> What are you going to use it for? Portraits? Why bother when you're going to soften the sharpness of the final image? Sports? Not long enough. PJ? Optical overkill for handheld shooting and no VR or AF.</p>

Ten years? Based on what level of usage? Every day or occasional? The design of the current Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 G is less than ten years old, so there's no way to determine whether they'll start dropping dead after a decade of shooting. This is one of Nikon's professional lenses. It's more rugged than your 24mm f/2.8 D. The lens is built to last, but if you abuse it or if you use it heavily or expose it to a lot of moisture, it's bound to wear out eventually. I love my 24-70. I use it all the time. I tested the 24-120 f/4 as a potential alternative, but it wasn't nearly as sharp as the 24-70. Just keep in mind that it's larger and heavier than your primes.

If you open a raw file from the camera in Photoshop, you can get the shutter count from a section in the metadata. I don't remember where it is exactly, but do a search. This has been discussed many times before.

Pure Photograph is captured upside down and backwards under a dark cloth while employing movements and exposing film that you loaded by hand in bag that fills up with your perspiration. Anything that uses a viewfinder or automatically advancing frames isn't Pure Photography. That said, I'm not a Pure Photography snob. I use my modern, mechanized, computerized, brilliantly engineered D800E every single day, and I never lose a wink of sleep over its blatant impurity.

<p>I notice that all of your examples were shot in very soft light. What I mean by that is that there is no direct sunlight falling on either the subjects or the backgrounds.</p> <p>Except for the Ferris wheel photo, which someone explained well above, the examples of others' work were probably under overcast skies. You used the same kind of light in your photos which demonstrates a sensitive eye for quality of light.</p> <p>Suggestions for the group shot - maybe shoot from a slightly lower position. It's flattering to look up slightly at people in the photo. Also, try to blur the background more by moving your camera a bit closer to the people and shooting wide open. If you are closer to the subject than the subject is to the background, you stand a better chance of blurring the background.</p> <p>Suggesting for the lady shot - nice lighting, nice pose, nice expression. The background is nicely obscured with blur. Two areas for improvement: (1) you cut off her legs, and (2) the line on the ground near her hands (better to eliminate it by moving her elsewhere).</p> <p>P.S. Your T3i is a fine camera and will serve you well.</p>

<p>1. Understand the basics thoroughly - quality of light, exposure, composition, focus. Consult books, video tutorials, classroom instruction, and read your camera's manual.</p> <p>2. Shoot frequently and strive to improve continuously.</p> <p>3. Photograph in a way that stirs your imagination and passion. You can imitate the work of others as a learning method. But in order to do something special, trust your own instincts and follow your own muse.</p> <p>4. Never give up. Realize that improvement takes time and effort.</p>

<blockquote> <p>Prosumer falls in the middle somewhere. Nikon D800 or D7100, Canon 5D etc. </p> </blockquote> <p> <br> This is precisely the sort of statement that confuses me.<br> <br> The Canon 5D series is used widely by pros for several types of still photography (and by video pros, as well). For the past six years or so, 5D models have featured the highest-rated sensors of any Canon body. (I think that Art Wolfe uses one, for instance.) If such a body is considered "prosumer", what is the distinction for "professional?" A $40,000 Hasselblad? A $60,000 Phase One?<br> <br> The Nikon D800 family features the highest rated sensors ever put into a small format camera. Is the term "prosumer" synonymous with "best performance ever engineered?" It doesn't seem to be used that way.<br> <br> The Nikon D7100 is a far less impressive body than the D800 family or the 5D2 or 3. I'm not sure why it was lumped in with the other examples.<br> <br> On my last visit to London a few years ago, I walked past the Palace of Westminster on a day when some important business was going on. In the press corps, I saw several examples of each of the following camera bodies: D3, D700, 5D Mark II. These were professional photojournalists, not tourists trying the photograph Big Ben. I doubt that any of those gents referred to their gear as "prosumer."</p>

Not long ago, Nikon charged $7,995US for a 24MP full frame camera. Now you can get one for $2,295 (even less for a D610). Does anyone remember what maximum frame rate for the ultra expensive D3x was? I bet that the D750 is faster.

Thank you for all of the thoughtful and insightful responses. I asked because I could never figure out what this commonly used word was supposed to mean. I'm tired of guessing. Now that I have read the responses, "prosumer" seems to be one of those Humpty-Dumpty words that means what the speaker wants it to mean in the moment - "nothing more, nothing less," per our old friend Lewis Carroll. Special thanks to Matthew Currie and BeBu Lamar for making me laugh out loud (literally, not just the Internet LOL variety).

<p>I see this word, "prosumer," mentioned in discussions on camera gear.</p> <p>- The Blarkus QZ45 is a prosumer camera.<br> -- OR --<br> - Will a prosumer lens cause damage if it's mounted on the Nerkvoid XP7?</p> <p>Could someone explain what this term means?</p> <p>I'm guessing that "prosumer" is a concatenation of "professional" and "consumer."</p> <p>Is a "prosumer" a professional who is also a consumer? That doesn't really make sense, as all professionals are also consumers. Pros buy cameras and batteries and office supplies and clothing and groceries and toothpaste, so they're already consumers. What use is calling them prosumers? It would be redundant.</p> <p>Is a "prosumer" a consumer with the budget for buying professional camera equipment? Is that's what's meant by "prosumer gear?" Professional cameras and lenses that consumers use? I would think that a D4s or a 1DX is still considered professional gear even if your grandmother takes it to Bingo Night and shoots some photos of her friends (assuming that your granny isn't a pro).</p> <p>Or is "prosumer" simply a dismissive term for gear that some people assume is not up to professional build standards? If a professional takes a Canon 7D to the Olympics and grabs a shot that ends up on the cover of Sports Illustrated, do we call the 7D a prosumer camera because even though professionals use that model, it doesn't shoot at 10 fps, and it's a popular camera with tourists and other non-professional users?</p> <p>As you can see, this is all very confusing. The word isn't in the dictionary (I checked). So, whatever you can to do shed some like on the great prosumer mystery would be greatly appreciated.</p>

<p>Does it really matter whether one camera model "replaces" another? Is that something that can even be determined? It seems like a judgment call. </p>

<p>The D750 looks like a solid choice for events with a good combination between resolution (better than the D4s family) and file size (smaller than the D800 family). The anti-aliasing filter should all but eliminate <em>moiré</em> in textured fabric. I haven't used Group AF or Highlight Priority Metering, but I can see how they could be useful in event shooting.</p> <p>I love the articulating LCD screen. I'm tall, and I have to bend or squat or stoop to photograph most standing adults at the proper height, i.e not looking down on them. I wish that my D800E had this feature.<br> <br />At about a third the cost of the D4s, working event photographers can buy both a main body plus a spare. Everyone knows how important it is to have a back, right? RIGHT?</p> <p>Max flash sync of 1/200s is a little disappointing - I like to shoot at 1/250s when working handheld - but I'm sure that the D750 supports Auto FP high speed sync. Just make sure that you have enough SB-910's to handle the load.</p> <p>6fps is more than fast enough for event shooting. I you need a faster frame rate, you know which camera to buy.</p>

<p>Sometimes people need to sell things in order to pay the bills. If you have a lens that you don't use very often and it will give you a good return for your money, it might be a good candidate for liquidation.</p> <p>I cherish my TS-E 24 II. Many of my favorite images were taken with this lens or with the Nikon version (which isn't as good as the Canon but good enough in most cases). The Nikon has an actual aperture ring, which completely eliminates flicker from time lapse sequences. Want to shoot video at f/11? Now you can.</p> <p>I have used view cameras extensively over the years. Transformation functions in photo editors are okay when you need to fix unavoidable distortion problems and you're willing to sacrifice some resolution, but physical movements are extremely powerful problem solvers for architectural and landscape photography.</p>