bfmelton
-
Posts
62 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by bfmelton
-
-
Hello,
I shoot ballet from the audience (or at least within earshot of the audience) and need a high fps rate in silent mode. My Canon 5D mk4 only gives me about 3 or 4 fps in silent. I understand that shooting electronically, the A7 III can fire at 10 fps and most of what I have found online indicates that it can do 10 fps in silent mode. But someone told me last night that in silent mode it slows to 5 fps. I tried it briefly but didn't have time to verify either way. Can someone here speak to this issue and let me know what fps i would get shooting at ISO 3200 @1/500? 5 fps isn't enough of an improvement over my Canon to justify a switch but 10fps would be.
I'd also be interested to know the silent fps on the A9, same settings.
Any help would be appreciated. Thanks!
-
[ATTACH=full]1222390[/ATTACH]
Thanks, Mark,
What I was actually trying to do was to eliminate step 2. I did this by setting the joystick to direct AF point selection in Custom Controls.
-
1
-
-
EDIT: Problem solved. Under custom controls, I set the joystick to direct AF point selection.
Hi all,
I have just purchased a 5D IV, moving up from 5D III, and I have a problem. I think and hope it's operator error, but if the solution is in the manual it has eluded me.
When I half-press the shutter button, I am unable to select/move the AF point with the joystick (and the focus points, incidentally, stay black). To activate the joystick and use it to move my AF point, I first have to press the AF point selection button, at which time all AF points light up in red and the joystick can then move to different AF points.
back-button focus by using the AF-on button yields similar results.
Is this a bug or a feature? Have I unwittingly set the camera to do this, or did it come this way? If the latter, how can I make it work like my 5D III and have the AF point selectable immediately upon shutter button half-press?
Please note I am NOT here talking about changing the AF area selection mode (toggling among single point, zone, large zone, etc. by pushing the AF point selection button and then turning the main dial); I am talking about selecting/changing a focus point.
Any help would be appreciated.
-
Hello,
I'm going to be be doing some dance photography in the near future. I'd like to place one DSLR on a tripod with a wide-enough lens to capture the full stage/corps de ballet while holding or monopodding a second body with a longer lens to catch principal dancers from a different angle. I'll be working with 1DX II, 5D III, and 5D IV, so any combination of those will be acceptable. I need a way of firing the tripod camera whenever I fire the one I'm holding. No need to be able to adjust the remote camera's exposure settings--I'll just have to adjust that directly at the beginning of each scene. Is there any kind of remote firing/slave system that would enable me to do this? Thanks for any info.
-
Glad it worked out. What exactly were your setting? ISO? F-stop and shutter? 3 or four stops down means 1/8 or 1/16 power?
ISO 200, 1/125, 8.0, @1/8 or 1/16 (power settings changed a bit during the shoot, but in that neighborhood).
-
This looks like it's South Asian Katak dancing where exact hand and foot position is important?
Which dance company - if you're allowed to say?
My daughter is a dance graduate and would be interested. Thanks!
Not a dance company, actually; just an individual in my studio doing standard classical ballet.
-
Update: I just completed a shoot with the rented Einsteins, shooting around 3 or four stops down from maximum. Result:
http://www.hacklightphotography.com/frozen.jpg
Hard to tell from this crop, but this girl was completely in the air flying across the studio.
Ghosting problem solved. Now to save up for Einsteins. :)
-
Hi all,
I need some help. I'm using the Pentax 645Z in studio for dance photography, which means that my dancers are engaging in fast movement. The only ambient light is coming from the modeling lamps. The strobes are Alien Bees, both 400s and 800s.
The unretouched pics below show a marked amount of what I assume is flash ghosting on the dancers' feet (which are obviously the fastest moving thing in the frame). Interestingly, other fast-moving objects, such as hands, hems of skirts, hair, and even dust are nicely frozen, but none of that matters due to the unacceptable ghosting with their feet.
http://www.hacklightphotography.com/ghost1.jpg
http://www.hacklightphotography.com/ghost2.jpg
The 645Z is notorious for its slow sync speed of 1/125 sec. My reading of the AB800 specs suggests that worst case I'm getting a t.1 flash duration of 1/550 seconds, and given my power settings I'm probably closer to 1/1000.
In an attempt to get the ghosting under control, with the dancer in red, I purchased and used a lens with a leaf shutter to get the shutter speed to 1/500, thus bypassing the 1/125 X sync of the Pentax, but her foot is still ghosting.
My questions:
1) Am I diagnosing this correctly? Is this ghosting or simply too slow a shutter speed?
2) if it is ghosting, is it being caused by the modeling lamps, or by the flash duration of the strobes?
If the problem is the strobes, will switching to Einsteins eliminate the problem? Based on my reading of the specs (page 13) and my anticipated lighting requirements, they would let me get me to a t.1 of around 1/4000 seconds as opposed to my current 1/1000 or so. This is a pricey solution, but I'm willing to do it if it would solve the problem (and be really bummed if i dumped that money into Einsteins and the problem persisted.
Any input would be welcomed. Thanks!
-
Hi, all,
I attended an event some months ago at which I saw a photographer wearing a backpack. extended above the backpack on monopods or booms or something were two speedlites, fairly high (two or three feet) over the photographer's shoulders, both pointed forward,. Obviously there was an external battery (or two) in the backpack.
I currently use a flash bracket, but I've got an event coming up this summer that will have me on my feet and walking around a lot and shooting a lot, and I think that such a setup would give me more light and more battery duration, and let me carry the extra weight longer. The height of the arms also would serve to get the flash even farther off the camera than does my bracket.
I haven't been able to find such a rig and I'm wondering if a stock rig of this sort exists or if I would have to engineer it myself. Has anyone seen or done anything like this? Many thanks for any info.
-
<div>
</div>
-
<p>One way to approach this problem would be to ask yourself where you're feeling the greatest limitation with your t3i. If you feel like your frame rate is too slow of you're missing focus too much, go with the 7D. But if (as seems to me to be the case) your biggest concern is noise, then go with the 6D. The 7D has a focusing system that is a lot better and faster at nailing a moving target than the 6D--but is you haven't noticed a problem in that department, and the noise actually is worrying you, I'd probably suggest the 6D.</p>
-
<p>I wouldn't be so hasty to rule out boards just because they have features you won't use. If you plan to get five years out of your new system, a hundred dollar difference in boards is $20 a year, so that shouldn't be a deal breaker if you can get better performance from a more expensive board. My guess is that the higher end boards (read: more features) are probably better engineered than boards at lower price points. If a board is designed for overclocking, furthermore, my bet is that it will be more stable than other boards if not overclocked. So get a higher end board but make sure you wring all the performance you can out of it by plugging in fast high-quality RAM and fast drives. Go with a 64-bit OS to get the RAM advantage.<br>
OTOH, if you're transitioning from a five year old system to a 3770 as I did in December, trust me--you'll see a big difference with a 3770 on Lightroom even without trying to max out the hardware. My 7 year old box would take all night to process 500 RAW files to jpg, and you couldn't do anything else while it was doing that. My current 3770 Win8 64 8-gig takes far less time, and I can multitask while it's doing it (and while I have an SSD for OS, my data drive is a glacially slow caviar green).<br>
<br />Regarding Win7 vs. Win8: I like Win7, but I unwillingly had to migrate to Win8 a few months ago. First thing I did was put a five dollar program on it called Start8; it gives you back a default non-metro desktop and a start button. Within 15 minutes the look and feel was very much like Win7. I also turned off fast startup, which is on by default in the control panel power options under "choose what the power buttons do." I was getting bsod on start up on 2 different win8 machines until I made that change. Since then, no problems--both systems are very stable. And the win8 benchmarks uniformly are better than Win7's. Since you seem to need speed, that should probably be something for you to consider.</p>
<p>HTH.</p>
<h1 > </h1>
-
<p>I agree with JDM, especially about the full frame-crop combination you would have if you got the 5Dii. My main combo is 5Dii and 7D. The 7D is by far the better camera in every respect except the full-frame image quality, but that is a HUGE "except." Between the two, it's the 5Dii I always pick up, except for action shooting.</p>
-
<p>I own both a 7D and a 5DII. In terms of IQ (leaving aside AF and fps and such), the 5DII beats the 7D all silly in two respects: 1) less high-ISO noise and 2) high IQ when cropping way in.<br>
Such has been my experience, anyway. YMMV.</p>
-
<p>It seems to me that when Canon designed the mkIII it paid attention to the tons of people who said they wished that the 7D was FF. That's essentially what the mkIII is. It's got An AF that's as least as good as the 7D and a fps that comes close to it (well, a lot closer than the mkII does).<br>
I've not shot with the mkIII but I have both a 7D and a mkII and have shot night football with the 7D. I've always hated graininess, and the 7D has too much for my taste as low as ISO 800. On the other hand, this is sports we're talking about, and the grittiness of sports seems to me more tolerant of a bit of grain.<br>
Nevertheless, based on my experience, I would say go with the mkIII and do what you can with your existing glass until you can afford better glass (and good glass makes a whale of a difference). But 7D stuff is by no means bad. You could also go with 7D and good glass now, and then trade the 7D for a mkIII in a year or so when perhaps mkIII prices have dropped a bit. You might even find that the longer reach of the crop on the 7D is a quality that offsets the FF when shooting sports.</p>
-
<p>I agree that the next step is to pull the backup battery. If I remember correctly, it's inside the camera's (not the grip's) battery compartment.</p>
-
<p>I've never used the 35 1.4, being more of a 24 mm person FF myself, but it's an L, and that speaks volumes.<br>
I don't think it's redundant to get a prime in a focal length that's covered by your zoom--I have the 24-105L and also the 85 1.2 L. The things you tend to get are a faster speed and a sharper image. To compare the sharpness of the 35 and your 24-70, take a look here:</p>
<p>You'll notice a definite improvement in IQ with both lenses set to 2.8 (or at least I did).<br>
I do have the 135 2L. Probably the sharpest lens I've ever shot with. Back in the days of film before zooms became ubiquitous, I often paired a 35 or a 50 with a 135. Limiting yourself to those two focal lengths makes you zoom with your feet a lot more, but that is not a bad thing.</p>
-
<p>What John Wright said. :-)</p>
-
<p>In my experience, if you want to shoot wildlife from a distance, you need 300mm at a minimum on a crop body. 70-200 is a useful range, but just not long enough. You mention you do shooting that "require a large zoom," but I think you may mean a long focal length as opposed to a zoom (variable focal length) lens. Fixed focal length, or prime, lenses, tend to be lighter and less expensive than zooms, as well as sharper and faster. Since you also want to do macro work, I'd thus recommend the Canon EF 300mm f/4.0 L IS USM. It gives you more reach, and while not a true macro, can focus very close so you can do some macro-style photography. If you find you need still more macro capability, you can get the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 L IS USM Macro or, to save some money, the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro. If you find that you do want to supplement the above kit with a zoom, the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L USM Lens is a great lens with a lot of bang for the buck.</p>
<p>For a shorter lens that would be better for landscape, a good all-around lens would be the Canon 24-105 L or the Canon 24-70L. Prime lenses would be something like a 24mm or a 35mm lens--Canon makes both L and non-L models in both these focal lengths. For a crop, 24mm would probably be the better focal length for landscape work.</p>
<p>HTH.</p>
-
<p>I use my Sekonic for both studio and location work when using flash.</p>
-
<p>Hi,<br>
I'll speak to the Canon lenses since I know them better. (Plus, I'm a big believer in sticking with Canon lenses for canon bodies, although that's just me.)<br>
Any lens is an exercise in tradeoffs. The 70-300 and the 18-200 purchase a wide focal length range at the cost of optical quality. Both are decent optical quality, and thus decent values, but if you'd care to sacrifice some of the range, you could get better quality.<br>
One lens that should be on your list is the Canon 70-200 f4 L. It's still in your price range at around $650, and it's probably the best L series bargain there is--much sharper than the 70-300, although you do lose some of that focal length range. But be warned that once you try L series glass, you may never want to go back. :-)<br>
You may want to check this site for reviews of the lenses you're interested in:<br>
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/</p>
<p>HTH.</p>
-
<p>I have a 5DIi and a 7D. When doing portraiture I almost always reach for the 5DII rather than the 7D. I'm one of those who sees a big difference in FF vs. crop. But still, the 7D is no slouch in the IQ department, which would give you more money to put toward lenses.<br>
At this stage I wouldn't get another 5D classic. Good camera, but at some point in the fairly near future, it's going to be two generations old. let your current classic become your backup body and buy one of the others as your front-line camera.</p>
-
<p>Given your budget constraints, I, too, fall into the "fast primes" category. of all your possible ways to go based on your shooting needs (and none of your options will satisfy ALL of your shooting needs), fast primes will give you the most bang for the buck. And yes, it will make a huge difference over kit even on your body. The 70-200 2.8, if fast enough, would be a terrific lens for your uses, but the current model is way over $1500. You might be able to find the previous model (which is what I have) for close to that, though. It's an excellent portraiture lens, if a bit long on a crop. But you'd still have a low-light problem.<br>
The lenses that immediately come to mind are the 50 1.4, as everyone has noted, and maybe the 85 1.8--considerably faster than 2.8 even if not as good as the 1.4. Iffier is the 135 2.0L. Perhaps too slow, but good price and killer IQ.</p>
<p>The 5DII is the undisputed low-light champion, but if I understand your budget situation, buying one will leave you no money for glass. Additionally, while it's a dynamite portrait and wedding camera, it's going to be iffier if your live music stuff involves much fast action.</p>
<p>You mention build quality on the 5DII as a plus, but I've found the build quality of the 7D to be equally good, fwiw.</p>
<p>Remember that rental is your friend--it lets you experiment.</p>
<p>HTH.</p>
-
<p>I, too, have to disagree with Hocus's dismissal of the 24-105. Best all-around kit lens there is (in fact calling it a kit lens, even though it is, really gives the wrong impression about it), and as such it's an excellent value. I do get his point about IS, though. You need to keep in mind that it won't freeze moving people, and it will effectively compensate for hand shake only within a fairly narrow range of shutter speeds.<br>
But the 24-70 vs. 24-105 debate has gone on for years. Each lens has its advantages and disadvantages. Like the man said, you pays your money and takes your choice. :-)</p>
silent mode fps on Sony A7 III/A9?
in Mirrorless Digital Cameras
Posted
Thanks for the feedback. So to make sure I'm understanding correctly, with the A9, shooting RAW with electronic shutter in silent mode at 1/320 or 1/500, I should be able to get 12 fps? FYI I would probably be using the Sigma 135 1.8 lens.