aubreyp

This is a pretty good assessment of the two lenses.

 

http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/ef50/

 

I own both and I like the better focusing and build on the 1.4. However you go break 3 1.8s before it would be the same cost as a 1.4. That said I wouldn't go back to the 1.8.

DP Review does some good noise comparison tests for the 5D:

 

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS5D/page21.asp

 

I just upgraded from a 10D to a 5D. I'm impressed by the lower noises in the 1600-3200 range, but it's far from noise free. I've also been very impressed by the auto focus perf compared to my 10D. It seems to do low light focusing much better and be able to use the non-center focal regions more reliably.

 

Here's an example of 3200, pushed about 1 stop in post processing. (It looks noisier than it would with proper exposure)

 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rendermack/555038046/

Hi. Thanks for the advice. I had formatted the card in my 5D prior to using it. I use a card reader to download my images from the CF card to my computer using iView Media Pro. All iView does (to my knowledge) is copy the files from the CF card to the computer.

 

I will try formatting the card a few more times and see if I have better luck.

I recently bought a 5D and noticed it's giving me a number of corrupt images.

The image looks fine in iView, but when I load it into Photoshop with ACR I get

a big white chunk taken out of the image. Some images won't even open. This is

the same memory card I was using on my 10D last week with no problems. Any ideas?

 

Thanks!

 

-Aubrey<div></div>

If you're on a PC, there's another tool called PT Lens that does distortion correction based on profiles. I think the PT profile has more lenses than the DX0. I cannot attest to the quality of the profiling on PT Lens, but I've been happy with the results. The price is quite reasonable as well.

Hi Paul,

 

There are probably many places in the UK that can fix your camera. It doesn't have to be Canon. I had the shutter and electronics on my 10D replaced recently by Precision Camera in the states for less than US$250. Surely the 30D is worth at least that to fix.

 

The 5D/1D mIII argument depends on what you are shooting. I'd get the 5d if you are really into wide-angle landscapes, but the 1D if you concentrate on events/action or low-light. If money was no object I'd get the 1D mIII, since it's got a lot of good tech in it.

 

-Aubrey

Maybe this is too "budget" for you, but I absolutely love my 35mm f2 from Canon. I've used the Canon 28mm f1.8 a bit and found it quite nice as well.

 

If you're used to 24 and 50mm and like them, I'm not sure there's a point in trying switch focal lengths.

Softness shouldn't really be a factor in your portrait shooting, unless you really want tack-sharp images of someones face -a look that is usually not required in standard portraiture. I find that when I shoot "normal" portraits on a 10D with the 50 1.8, I usually shoot at f2.8-f5.6, which either lens can do.

 

You may want to consider which lens has more accurate focusing. I notice the 50mm 1.8 does a lot of hunting, especially on low contrast subjects, or when not set to center point focusing. Perhaps your Sigma is better.

 

If you end up having to shoot a lot more portraits consider the Canon 85 1.8 or the Canon 50 1.4, I've found them both much more pleasent to use.

I *love* my Tamron 17-35 f2.8 - 4. (about $500) I use it on a 1.6 crop body and it does fine for interiors. It's also possible to hand-hold shots b/c of the large aperture. If I was shooting real estate, I'd use a tripod and longer exposures though.

Thank you both for your feedback. I have expressed my desire to the client that my rate

should follow the success of her business. In addition we have come to an agreement about

the rights fees that we are both happy with.

Greetings all,

 

Here's the situation:

 

For the past year I've been the official photographer for a bi-yearly conference. For the first conference,

I did the work in exchange for travel expenses to the location of the conference (where I wanted to

visit). The organizer is a friend of mine and I did the work somewhat as a favor, but also because I

thought it would lead to more work, since this conference will happen twice a year for a while.

 

The first conference did well, and the organizer asked me for a quote to do the second one, now that

she has the "money to pay me what I'm worth". I gave her an hourly quote ($65) and said that we would

negotiate use fees after the conference, since not only would her organization be using the photos, but

the attendees and the sponsors would also be wanting to use them.

 

I suggested a rate of $2/per image of uncorrected photos for attendee personal use and $200/image

for unlimited use within the organization's internally published materials (conference catalog, ads,

marketing materials, etc) for a year. In addition it has been my plan to sell separate rights to the

sponsors of the conference at slightly higher rates.

 

My client came back and said that she thought the use fees were too high and too restrictive, since she

wanted to give away photos to the sponsors. She said based on my quote she was going to have one of

her volunteers take pictures from now on.

 

I came back with a counter offer, but I wanted to ask a few questions about the situation:

 

1) Is it customary when working an event to turn over authorship and/or full rights to the client?

 

2) Do you think my numbers seem unreasonable? I feel they are very generous based on what I've seen,

but mostly the reference I have is for selling rights to photos you haven't already been commissioned to

take.

 

3) If the client wants to own the work (or unlimited rights), should I instead increase the hourly fee or

provide a flat rate?

 

Thanks in advance for any light you can shed on this. I know pricing photography is an art in itself, and

I appreciate any advice or insight you can provide.

 

-Aubrey