laurentbaig

<p>I think if I knew what to do with my images, I certainly would do some pro bono work. But, honestly, I have no idea how to even begin marketing my images or where to start.</p>

<p>The E-520 is a great camera. I started using it about the end of last summer as a lightweight alternative to a 4x5 view camera. When I want image quality, I use 4x5. If I want light weight, I use the E-520. I think up to 16x20, depending on the image, the E-520 holds up very well. The 12-60mm lens is a superb companion. For me, the 4:3 aspect ratio is a benefit as it more closely matches my 4x5 usual view of the world. I personally can't stand 3:2 anymore - it feels like a stunted panoramic.</p>

<p>Sean, low light is always problematic. The autofocus algorithms require light to perform properly and the lower the light, the worse they _all_ work and so you are left to focus-ing manually. I'd almost be tempted to say you're better off with a full frame camera so you don't have such a small viewing area through the prism. Rangefinders were probably a little better in this regard as well as you'd have a brighter image through the range finder screens than through the pentaprism.<br>

Anywy, you need to ask yourself what your main subject will be. If you're going to earn bread doing portraits and fashion, you have control of light. Add more which will allow any camera to work well. If you're going to concentrate on weddings and candids, the Oly may not be the right choice. Hope that helps.</p>

<p>I stopped using my Canon DSLR a couple years ago and sold it last year. A couple months ago, I purchased an E-520 with the 12-60mm lens which I never take off. The 5D wins hands down in terms of noise, and smoothness of tone. I'm not sure the 5D with 24-105 vs E-520 with 12-60 is really that much more weight. However, I am very pleased with my results from the E-520 and 12-60 glass.<br>

Why don't you get a Canon G10? Not sure what your image use is, but if you really want to drop weight, the G10 is a powerful little camera. I use a G9 when I'm carrying a 4x5.</p>

I don't know anything about the 14-54 but I've read it is a nice lens. The 12-60 is funtastic! It's a great range to work with and I haven't seen an image I've taken with it where I'm disappointed in the image quality. Autofocus is ok, I think my old Canon EOS-3 was much faster, but I doubt the D90 is seriously that much better, I'd think you'd need a D300 or D700 to get Nikon's really good fast focusing algorithms. You would be able to get some fast primes, though, which _would_ give you faster focus and is a distinct advantage over Olympus.

 

Try adding some strobes, a couple Vivitar 285 HVs will only cost you a couple hundred. That will do more for you than a new camera/lens system.

75mm for super wide, 135mm for normal, 240mm for longer, 400 for longer still. I probably use my 135 more than any other lens.

Let's see, let's compare a 35mm system that might give close to 4x5 quality in a 16x20 print.

 

1dsMk3 + 16-35/2.8 + 24-105/4 + 70-200/4 + KirkL bracket = 3570g = 7.9 lbs

 

4x5+75/4.5+135/5.6+240/9+QLholder+20QLs+hood+meter+watch = 9.73 lbs

 

I estimated 3.5 lbs for a Chamonix 4x5, 2 lbs for 20 QLs, 1 lb for meter, and 1/4 lb each for hood and watch. The rest of the weights are available on LF site.

 

Tripod weight will be the same (don't tell me you'll put 4.5 lbs of camera&lens on a 1.5lb tripod) at 3-3.5 lbs (including head). Filter's will be heavier for the digital system as you'll need 82mm filters or larger. The 4x5 system will use minimum of 67mm filters.

 

My conclusion is the weights for either system are pretty similar give or take a lb. Sometimes I carry a 400T which adds an extra 1.5 lbs to the 4x5 kit, but if I'm backpacking, the above list is exactly what I take. Not to mention, my 4x5 kit is a lot cheaper :-)

 

If I want to go light, I'll carry my Olympus E-520 + 12-60mm lens ==> 2.5 lbs

If I want to go lighter, I'll carry a Canon G9 ==> .8 lbs

Good luck, Anish. I can see an ice ringed green pool in your future :-)

So some of cave creek is done. Specifically the upper part is toast. However the middle part is still very much green. Weird. This time last year I was shivering in the morning while working comps. This time I was hot!

The maples are pretty much toasted out and past prime. The Cottonwoods (not aspen, they don't grow that low) were looking really nice on Friday/Saturday. So get there now if you want them. Outside the park, there's still a mix of green/yellow so there's still time.

Anish, I thought about doing the same thing this winter. Navigating up the slickrock would be the one thing I'd be concerned about as the canyoneers won't grip anything if iced over. Probably just the last ramp up would be of concern as the rest of the trail is mostly dry till the crack, although if you plan on going all the way to the tree, I'd be careful if the pools freeze over. I'm not sure there's enough water flow over the pools to keep them from freezing.

There might be some color along Bonita creek, but I recall more evergreen foliage in the monument than deciduous.

 

Sedona might be running late, but upper oak creek including the west fork is done. I'm hopefully going to check out cave creek tomorrow.

First off, you're using a digital camera. Once you set up your light take a test shot and check the Histogram. That will tell you if you are over-exposing. Some of the images have skin tones that look hot to me, but it's the histogram that will tell you if you are blowing out your pixels. In my opinion, #19 is the best of the series in terms of quality of light. There's nice modeling of the face. A reflector to the left of the models face might be nice to soften the shadows a bit, but the image is nice as is, too.

 

50mm on your APS-C sized sensor is fine for head & shoulder's portrait and is typical.

The AB800 is a great light, I love mine. But if you're not planning on doing anything more than photographing your kids, just get a single strobe, a reflector, two stands, and a shoot through umbrella. Learn to use that 1 light and reflector first. Get to know how your camera acts with the strobe. Start simple. The kit I just mentioned will probably cost $200-$250 max including supporting cables (assuming a Vivitar 285HV strobe). And, you'll also have a portable system you can take to the park.

I've been shooting 4x5 for the last two years, almost exclusively. I was ready for a DLSR a couple months ago and after much research discovered that Olympus was the only system that was designing high quality lenses specifically for their camera format. NO other camera maker is making excellent optics for the APS-C sensor in the range of focal lengths that I wanted. I got an E520 and a 12-60 which suits my style of shooting with 4x5. I can't get that type of zoom from ANY other manufacturer and that 12-60 glass is freaking amazing! 28mm-e is just not wide enough for me.

 

See, I didn't want to spend that much for the camera, I'd rather spend it on the lens.

I'd add cyan to background light if you're trying to pop the red. It's the contrast that will make the red stand out. Keep the main subject light clean. I'm just starting out with strobes, so that may be a quack idea.

I just bought an E-520 recently, but I got the 12-60mm lens as I wanted a single lens to cover the range of focal lengths I use with 4x5. I'm very impressed with the quality of the lens and the rendering of the camera. I took this image

http://thewildlight.wordpress.com/2008/09/29/weavers-needle-superstitions/

recently and am very pleased with it. So much so, I'm going to see what a 22x28" print looks like. I don't expect 4x5 quality, but when I want that, I'll shoot 4x5.

AA filter has nothing to do with reducing noise - in fact, the filter reduces light, thus would lead to an increase in noise. It only has to do with reducing spatial frequencies (what you are calling moire patterns) and that's it. Noise is controlled by the quality of the photon collectors (CCD or CMOS) and the image processing algorithms on the backend.

 

My guess is it was over-engineered.

Why does everyone think you can only do landscape with a wide angle lens? This is the dumbest thing.

 

Pick whatever camera you like better. You have Nikon lenses, it would make more financial sense to stay with Nikon, except...Nikon has been behind the curve in full frames for quite some time and will probably stay that way. Before I get flamed, they make great cameras and have good features, but they ARE running behind Canon and Sony right now in the megapixel count. I mean please, their first 2nd tier full frame offering is 12mpix? That's pretty sad considering a few months later Canon and Sony are popping out 20+ megapixels at the same price point.

 

If you're happy with Nikon, stay with Nikon. If you don't like their offerings, try the Sony.

Why would you need another camera? Get a lens, learn how to use it, learn to see compositions without the camera at your eye. If you have a scene that's wider than the widest angle you have, stitch frames together. Also, there's plenty of great compositions to be had without a wide angle lens.

Justin,

 

I agree with you that it is more rewarding to explore the landscape on your own, but I come from the mindset of a climber, and an adventurer. I like a little beta (like knowing something is do-able), but I don't need to know the details beyond go here, then go there. My photography comes from the same place I think. I have very few recognizable locations in my images.

 

I think most people/photographers, and especially photographers in this digital age, easily acquire the skills and abilities to make technically good images. This doesn't mean that they have the imagination to make good images on their own. Or they can't because they live in the middle of concrete jungle - they don't have the opportunites to "just explore" but they want to make an image, so they go specifically where they've seen good images already made.

 

So many nature 'togs do this: have you been here, have you been there, it's like being a birder with a tick list. You can't deny them the right to play on public lands. All you can do is try to educate those you see not being careful of the steps they leave.

Ok, you've got multiple similar answers for the technical aspect. The next thing is to try front tilt only and rear tilt only and both and see which you like. I'd also recommend Steve Simmons' book, lots of good examples in there.

Most all modern lenses are going to be good. I have both a Rodi N and a Fuji CM-W 135mm lens. I can't really tell the difference between them, though I haven't done any rigorous tests.

I'll speak to both as I have had and used both.

 

The Tachihara is an awesome camera, is easier to set up than the Chamonix, and thus a bit quicker (in my opinion, no flames please), It's easier to get back into "square." It is a a bit sloppy when locked down. That is, you can rock the standards back and forth a we bit (they go where they need, but you need to check focus once you've locked down. It can move.

 

The Chamonix is an awesome camera, has front axis movements (I like front axis better than front base), has a longer bellows. When locked down, it is very rigid, nothing flexes (within reason, you could certainly rip it apart with 50lbs of force). It's a bit fiddlier to square up. It weighs .5 lb less.

 

I would not get a Shen Hao. I didn't like it. It weighs too much, though it has a nice range of movements, I felt the weight didn't warrant the sloppiness. At that weight, I'd buy a used Toyo or Wista technical.

 

I think overall, the Tachihara might be a better camera to start with. Look also for Osaka, or the Calumet wood field. Either way, you'll take good pictures, just always get in the habit of double checking focus and the lock knobs.

 

Cheers.

http://www.amazon.com/Radio-Flyer-UA18-Umbrella-Accessory/dp/B00002MZ8A

 

And a clear plastic bag if needed.