jml

I'm late coming into this posting, but I would also recommend Fotomagico. I just

finished a project and absolutely love it. It is configured to automatically allow you to

send your project to iDVD when finished. Check it out, you won't be sorry!

Hey German,

 

Good for you! I did see the piece and thought it was great. Your work is excellent and you well deserve the recognition. It's nice to see a fellow "Utahn" get noticed.

 

Jan

Hi Malcolm, et al....

I will try to contribute something to this thread and not totally hijack it. I too am planning a switch "back to my roots" in the fall. My first Mac was in the mid 90's and then went into PC world for software compatibility but am gnawing on the bit to jump ship. Anyway, I'm really looking forward to Leopard which will come out hopefully in October, but was told by two different Apple people last Spring that the inside rumor mill was saying that to accomodate the new cat there were perhaps going to be some minor hardware changes as well, and I was advised to wait and not get a Mac now. Has anyone else heard this?

You might take a look at Zenfolio. Right now clients can order prints but at the labs price and they only use MPIX and EZ Prints. But they say in a couple months they will be changing to a system similar to Smugmug. It won't be $45.00 anymore, but it's a nice clean site. Many Smugmug users have switched to it for proofing as they like the low cost etc.

Way to go Jeffrey! Congratulations!!

Most newborn shots are with the baby sleeping because if they are awake then they are usually crying to be fed! :-) Probably the mom should do most of the moving around if you are inexperienced in handling a baby. Have everything set up with the sequence of shots planned so it can be done as quickly as possible. Get ideas as you've been doing of possible creative settings if that's the look you are going for, and again be prepared and efficient and patient! If baby wakes up you just have to go on their schedule, but again if they are very newborn they will go back to sleep quickly. Have fun!

Anne, which model Think Tank bag do you use? I just purchased a Shootsac and will use it next week for the first time, but looking at the Think Tanks I can see why you prefer them. Sturdy appeals to me also, and while my Shootsac is "pretty" I'll take function over form anytime.

I too recently applied as an affiliate to NILMDTS. I was motivated by the tragedy of a dear friend last year losing her baby just minutes after birth. The hospital not only allowed the photos to be taken but also had a service where her little feet were cast. At her memorial these were displayed; for the viewers I think it made her little life seem more real seeing these things and touched them even more.

Exactly Brian, guess the irony as well as the context was lost on you.

Hope I'm not being to vague.

"What are you asking, Anthony?

 

You might get answers that range from $50 to $1000, but you won't know any more about high-school senior photography (and the business behind it) than when you started.

 

What are you hoping to learn from this?

 

Perhaps this may have been less caustic: "You might get answers that range from $50 to $1000, depending on experience, region etc. Are you just trying to compare what you charge with what others do or are you trying to get into Senior photography and need help other than just pricing?

 

It's not just what we say...it how we say it. It's difficult to discern "intent" from black text, so that lays responsibility on the writer to convey that intent by choosing ones words carefully don't you think? It can attract or send them running to more "friendly" forums.

 

I mean, would it be kind to slam Brian for being so inexperienced that he would even "truthfully" think Senior pictures could mean anything but high school kids? Of course not. ;-)

Steve, well said, and I don't disagree. I think I saw his post as two separate entities. The first being his appreciation for what the lens "could" do (albeit in the right hands). The second being the question he was seeking an answer too. Really didn't mean to slam, but honestly if we dissect the way people ask their questions to the extent that the question itself gets lost, then what's the point? And again, if this was not the trend here then why so many apprehensive posters, prefacing their questions with pleas not to be too harsh? Anyway, sorry Steve if I offended, I truly wasn't targeting you per se, but the problem as I see it, in general.

Hey guys! I believe this was the question: "I am wondering if anyone uses either of these for weddings and which focal length they find more useful"?

If you don't use either of those two lenses then it's not useful for you to comment especially when the comments neither answer the question the poster posed or serve any purpose than to waste our time with useless editorializing. If "O" is floored...then good for him. People are more and more prefacing their questions on this forum with..."please don't slam me...etc. etc.... People, esp. newbies are apprehensive of posting and this is a good example of why. PN is getting a nasty rep because of the negative posts rather than positive help and educational criticism. Let's not continue to contribute to that okay?

 

Answers

Well, here we are a day later. Received the 24-105L yesterday. Spent about 8 hours yesterday and 4 today checking this lens out and doing comparison shots with my Tamron, just for good measure. Remember, I returned my 24-70L so could no longer compare to that. Here is what I've learned. At 4.0 my Tamron is just as sharp and I could hand hold at just about every shutter speed I could on the Canon, no kidding. That was a surprise. Anyway, the flare was bad, then I removed the UV filter and voila...that improved quite nicely. The vignetting of this lens is indeed really bad, and yes the distortion is lousy as well. So, in comparing what I have in that range, the 24-105L just doesn't warrant the thousand dollars when what I have is "almost" as good...at least at 4.0. I won't be shooting my Tamron wide open anymore....will have to rely on the primes I guess. So, I'm disappointed..but will remain hopeful that Canon comes out with something soom more worthy of my money.

Hey Eyal, here is a link to wedding that was shot with the 24-105L a couple weeks ago by Peter Gregg. http://www.pbase.com/pgp777/neal07

 

Jan

I agree with Marc.....but don't we always? :-) As my experience grows I'm finding how advantageous it is to use my primes rather than the zooms in some situations. Speaking of which....Marc ever used the 28 1.8? I've heard some good things about this litte "sleeper lens"......and some bad, what do you think? Sorry to hijack the thread, but maybe Eyal will find this helpful as well for future reference. Thanks.

Sorry, almost forgot....you didn't say what camera you use but the 24-70L is most problematic on the 20D. Does better on the 5D which I use, but still didn't want the hassle on this otherwise great lens.

I just had this choice to make. I chose the 24-70L. Got it, sent it back for focusing ring problems. Got the replacement, noticed some backfocusing issues, then found through other forums (DWF) etc. that this is a major problem with this lens. Word has it that Canon is going to do a little re-do on this lens, perhaps this fall....who knows. Anyway, "if" you get a good copy of this problematic lens, you may be okay...otherwise just plan on sending it in to be re-calibrated after you buy it. I sent mine back. Replaced it with the 24-105L as I wouldn't be shooting at f/2.8 at the reception anyway. I have my little 50mm and 85 1.8 and 16-35L and 70-200L IS and also have my sweet little Tamron 28-75....which several pros have replaced their Canon 24-70L's with to cover that range! I love mine, the little cheapie is superb (does hunt a bit and is a tad noisy), but it covers that range quite well. Do some research Eyal, go to DWF, you will get some very good info there on this lens by top shooters. Oh, and btw Canon's insider comment on this lens is that they know it has this issue and they have just not been able to figure out what the cause is. Thus the planned refurbishing. Hope this helps.

I think you did a fine job Nick. I agree with David as regards the guy without a shirt, I would leave it out. I also agree with the the text, let the pictures tell the story. If that's a blemish, PS it out but looked like a mole to me....leave it unless the bride says otherwise. If I were the customer, I would be very pleased.

This is like asking "what is an f stop"? I've only used pbase to display

galleries and Collages for individual events. I need a website and have no

idea the best route to take. I'm not going to use Frontpage or Dreamweaver

etc. and sit for hours or days or weeks and do my own. Nor do I want to pay

someone a small fortune to do so. I just want a simple, clean looking site

that will accomplish what pbase and Collages does, display my work/events and

take orders for prints. So, is it better to use a site like Smugmug and choose

from their templates etc. which many seem to do. Or why not use a hosting site

like Dot 5 and use their sitebuilder? Everyday critiques are asked for here on

PN on peoples sites, it all seems so "back to the drawing board" after

receiving them. I want simplicity and easy here, and still attractive. So, I

would so appreciate not only advice but instruction on the way to go here to

get started correctly. Thanks all.

Wow, do I feel like I found a hidden treasure! Thank you William for your insight and thoughts....your "classically" wonderful and timeless work. I was probably about your age in 1978, I sometimes don't think these kiddie shooters get it, but those of us who do know gems when we see 'em.

Hi Jeff. Thanks for taking the time to do this. When available light just isn't sufficient, how do you modify your shooting style and still get a natural look...or do you?

Thanks Conrad, you're so right!

I was anticipating some line of sight problems. I will do some testing beforehand before purchasing the PW's. Those puppies are pricey! Of the next two weddings coming up one has both the wedding and reception in the same facility. Here's the link to that. http://www.saltlakebride.com/go/directory/listing/292913358/

 

As for the other, the bride wants the formals taken in her parents home in Las Vegas. I haven't gone down to see it yet but will in a couple weeks when I meet with them to finalize arrangements.

Thanks all. I went back and re-read my posting. Mea Culpa on the comment of using a softbox or Softliter at a wedding. I was combining too many thoughts there. I had no intention of doing that, but do entertain the idea of acquiring one or another at some point for portraits. But I do want to incorporate an umbrella for reception lighting if the venue lends itself for that need, and for couples and small groups at the venue. I was hoping to keep it simple and not have to invest in strobes etc, while giving me another option than just bouncing.

 

Nadine, could you be more specific as to your formals set up? I thought you did use some diffusion.

Thanks Ni. But no I wasn't planning on using all of them at the same time, if I indeed get all anyway. I do have the Sekonic L-358. I simply want to change and perhaps improve in certain situations the quality of my lighting. I prefer natural light with a little fill and just bouncing the flash. But for a couple up coming weddings I want to add a little more light. Thus the umbrella. I'm interested in your using two smaller umbrellas though. Many use just one large one, and some have said using two will cause some unflattering cross lighting on groups. Your thoughts? And to clarify, if I have my flash in the hot shoe then there is a cord from where to where? Remember I wanted hardware 101 here. Thanks