catchlight

<p>Artie Morris calls the 400/5.6 the best lens there is for capturing birds in flight.<br>

<a href="http://www.birdsasart.com">www.birdsasart.com</a><br>

You will be shooting at 400mm nearly all the time, and probably wishing you had more reach, so the prime makes more sense IMO.</p>

<p>It's horses for courses, when it comes to shooting action indoors under iffy lighting.<br>

You need an aperture of f2.8 or faster to get the shutter speed you need to stop the action, and enough reach to fill the frame with the subject so that you do not have to crop a high-ISO image.<br>

Shooting from the stands puts you at a huge disadvantage (too far away; wrong angles; people and stuff in your sightline; can't move around, etc.). Could you apply to the organizers of future events to get a press pass, or hang out at ringside with a team of competitors in exchange for their use of your photos?</p>

<p>Well, I've gotten my 5D soaking wet at soccer games on more than one occasion with no ill effects.<br>

OTOH, a friend totalled his 30D covering a bunch of cowboys driving wild horses in huge clouds of dust.<br>

I'm much more comfortable using my 1DMkII under those circumstances, though, especially with a weather sealed lens like the EF 70-200/2.8.<br>

Several companies make excellent rain/dust shields for DSLR/lens combinations of various sizes. That would be safer than risking a short or other fatal problem in hostile environments. </p>

<p>Some essentials:</p>

<ul>

<li>Clarify expectations with the bride and groom, and develop a shot list with them for the ceremony and before and after. (Google "wedding shot list" for samples).</li>

<li>Take light readings and test shots in the church right away at the same time of day as the wedding ceremony will be to find out if you need a strobe. </li>

<li>Talk with the minister about do's and don't's. If (s)he allows flash, get a good Nikon strobe and a Really Right Stuff wedding flash bracket. If (s)he doesn't, get a 35mm or 50mm f1.4 lens and take test shots in the church. Attend the wedding rehearsal, and take more test shots.</li>

<li>As stated above, don't use your on camera flash for anything.</li>

<li>Get that second body and a fast telephoto prime (135mm f2) to get reaction shots during the vows (closeups of faces of the B&G, wedding party members, parents), as well as your wider shots of the wedding party and B&G and minister, etc.</li>

<li>Get Steve Sint's classic book on wedding photography: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Wedding-Photography-Art-Business-Style/dp/1883403367">http://www.amazon.com/Wedding-Photography-Art-Business-Style/dp/1883403367</a></li>

<li>Once you have solved the technical issues, "Look for the love" through the whole event, and capture the emotions of their wedding day. If you do this, they will love your shots.</li>

</ul>

<p>After the "fast 50's", the 70-200mm f4L (non-IS).</p>

<p>I haven't read the entire thread, and will assume it's not a trolling expedition.<br>

If your priority is excellent photography, and not just shopping, buy one superb lens, and shoot with it for a few weeks until you begin to master your camera and that particular focal length.<br>

Then, when you have a definite need for another focal length for a particular type of photography (portrait, sports, landscape, etc.), add a second lens and repeat the process.<br>

For example, start with an 85/1.2L, 135/2L, or a 70-200L and take portraits of family and friends, then move on to a wide prime or zoom and try landscapes.<br>

If you buy the whole lot at once, you will wind up with lenses you don't need, and will likely never get the most out of any of them.<br>

I second Stephen Asprey's suggestion of a visit to Ken Rockwell's site.</p>

<p>Excellent post above by Michael, both about the technical settings and the challenges of shooting fast action.<br>

I find that I have to go through my own "training camp" at first just like the players to get my anticipation and reflexes back up to game speed to follow whatever sport I'm shooting. After a period or quarter or two, I'm getting a higher percentage of keepers, but I'm sure rusty at the start of every season.<br>

Firing the first frame at what I think is the peak action, and taking a burst of three to five, usually gives me at least one decent shot. If I fire too soon, the peak action tends to elude the camera, falling between frames.<br>

It's pretty much essential in sports like hockey, basketball, football, and soccer to pre-select your subject in advance of the play, and fire when (s)he makes a nice move, or collides with someone, etc. <br>

I'm just not fast enough to switch subjects on the go in a fast-moving sport, and neither are most other shooters. Getting the puck or ball in the shot is another challenge.</p>

<p>If you are shooting sports, birds in flight, or other fast-moving action, you want the 1DMkIII for its high frame rate and better weather and dust sealing.<br>

For static subjects, the 5DMkII would do a good job, and give you full-frame perspective with wide-angle lenses. </p>

<p>We see so many photos of musicians that the only ones that are of sufficient interest to sell are "peak action" shots during performance.<br>

You've got a few nice wide angle captures of this type near the end of the portfolio. Most of the rest are snapshots that would interest only the band members and their most hard-core fans. Backstage shots of established, big-name musicians are interesting and in demand; the same shots of relatively unknown musicians are not.<br>

Go for faces, eyes, and emotions at high points in the music and you will be capturing the essence and uniqueness of this particular band in action.</p>

<p>You may already have one or more of them, but I'm referring to the 85/1.2L MkII, the 135/2L, and the 200/2L IS lenses, and possibly one of the fast, wide primes.</p>

<p>If you want noise-free images at 3200 ISO and up, your best choice right now is a Nikon D3, and possibly the new high-MP Nikon body.<br>

I'm a Canon user, with a case of Nikon-envy since three friends got D3s and starting bringing back astonishingly clean images at 6400, 12800, and beyond from the same concert, theatre, and club settings in which I've shot for years.<br>

From what I've heard and read, the 5DMkII offers only an incremental improvement in low-light performance, not the quantum leap Nikon achieved with the D3.<br>

I won't switch to the Dark Side, at least not yet, because I'm hoping Canon will catch up when they release the 1DMkIV, or whatever they name it. You might consider waiting, too, because at this point Canon cannot offer you a big improvement over the bodies you have.<br>

If you have $$$ and an urge to shop, a really fast EF prime lens or two would enable you to dial down the ISO during a wedding in a dark church.</p>

<p>Here are links to G10 shots and a few comments on the camera by my friend, who usually shoots with a Nikon D3 and pro lenses:</p>

<div>Here is the link to a few of my G10 shots:    <a href="http://public.fotki.com/TimPenney/hiking-trips/canon-g10-ice-and-s/">http://public.fotki.com/TimPenney/hiking-trips/canon-g10-ice-and-s/</a></div>

<div>a few more here as well:     <a href="http://public.fotki.com/TimPenney/hiking-trips/first-snow-november/">http://public.fotki.com/TimPenney/hiking-trips/first-snow-november/</a></div>

<div>The G10  is certainly a nice camera to use as long as it is kept to </div>

<div>about 80 to 100 ISO although I have seem some results at much higher </div>

<div>ISO that still look pretty useable.</div>

<div>The best sharpness is at f2.8 up </div>

<div>to f4.0 and at f8 the lens produces too much diffraction. The IS </div>

<div>allows for shots as low as 1/6 second without a tripod or monopod.</div>

<div>It is certainly not great for every type of photography but as a small </div>

<div>camera to carry around on my hiking and snowshoeing trips it would be </div>

<div>hard to beat. The edge to edge sharpness is good and there appears to </div>

<div>be very little CA.</div>

<p>Olive, there's a thorough, impartial review of the G10 here:<br>

<a href="http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong10/">http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong10/</a><br>

 </p>

<p>A friend of mine gets professional quality results from his Nikon D3 and a stable of Nikon pro lenses.<br>

However, since he bought his Canon G10 six weeks ago, I don't think he's shot a frame with his superb Nikon

gear.<br>

Like you, he is a hiker (and XC skier and snowshoer), so weight and bulk are issues. Not with the G10, though

which he takes everywhere, usually with a lightweight Gorillapod, and brings back super landscape and macro shots,

and prints them up to 11"x17" with flawless results.<br>

The only things you would lose with a G10 compared to a DSLR are optimal ability to cover sports and other fast

action, and the capability to use shallow DOF to create a smooth bokeh in portraits and other shots. If those factors

don't matter, the G10 might be exactly what you need.<br>

I shoot with Canon pro bodies, but will be getting a G10, possibly in the post Christmas sales, because I'm so

impressed with the IQ and convenience it offers. </p>

Some high ISO still samples and some video clips from the 5DMkII appear in this article:

 

http://www.bebbblog.com/index.php?link=94

I have a dozen rolls of colour print and slide film from my pre-digital days which have been taking up fridge space

since about 2001.

 

I'd like to mail it to a friend who shoots landscapes with film.

 

Most of the expiry dates are 2004. Is it worth the postage to ship it to her, or would even refrigerated film be past its

prime by now?

 

Thanks for any advice.

Ryan, only you can answer some of the questions you pose.

 

One thing to keep in mind, though, is that full-frame DSLRs like the 5D expose any softness or other flaws a lens might exhibit, particularly out near the corners of the frame, the part which is cropped out on 1.6X cameras.

 

Therefore, depending on your expectations, getting satisfactory results from a 5D might be more costly than you think if it requires lens upgrades.

We spent a week at Sacha Lodge in Equador two years ago, and the experience was flawless. You're very fortunate!

 

It's amazing how dark conditions can be under the rainforest canopy, though, so your f2.8 zoom is an excellent call. I understand the D300 shares some of the D3's excellent low-light capabilities, so you're nicely prepared.

 

You are wise to travel light, with thoughfully chosen gear, instead of turning yourself into a beast of burden.

 

I used a Think Tank Airport Addicted to get my gear safely through the flights from Canada to Equador, Quito to Galapagos, and Quito to Puerto Francisco de Orellana, locally known as Coca, and from Coca to the Lodge by river boat and canoe. My clothes and other stuff were in a Red Oxx carry-on bag.

 

In the field, I used a Think Tank Digital Holster with a chest harness for my DSLR with long zoom, and a TT belt system for other gear. The belt system met my needs very well while jumping in and out of pangas in Galapagos and hiking trails and wading across or even down streams in the jungle. Everything was accessible without stopping to take off a pack and rummage through it.

 

If you prefer a single bag for photo gear and clothing, the Think Tank Rotation 360 is worth a look:

http://www.rotation360.com/

 

I'm not sure how big its capacity is compared to the LowePro Dry Zone. Either one would probably work quite well there.

 

Have a memorable time!

Here's a tip for monopod use: get a quick release head for it, so you can attach and remove the camera without any (ahem) screwing around.

<p>

Really Right Stuff sells an excellent one for heavy lenses, and Manfrotto makes a good, cheaper one for lenses up to a 300/4 or 70-200/2.8.<p>

 

<li>Low Capacity Solution: http://reallyrightstuff.com/tripods/03.html

<li>High Capacity Solution: http://reallyrightstuff.com/tripods/04.html

I have a MkII and would go for the bigger LCD if I had a choice. The typical MkIIN might be newer, too, with a lower shutter count, which you can ask the seller to verify with CanCount.

Our family wants to go through our albums and digitize a few hundred photos in order to create digital presentations,

establish a more permanent photographic record, and make archival prints.

 

We would appreciate suggestions on what might be the best high-resolution flatbed scanner with an LED light source

to buy. We are interested in high quality scanning of photographic prints, and not transparencies.

 

The unit could be linked to either a Windows machine or a Mac Pro, both of which have Adobe CS3 installed.

Suggestions on which platform to use for this project would also be welcomed.

 

Thanks for any assistance.

I'm pretty happy with my 100-400mm.

 

It's the lens to carry when you can't use a tripod in places like Galapagos:

 

http://www.brentreid.exposuremanager.com/g/nature

 

Darn good for outdoor sports, too, when you want to move around and not be tethered to a 400/2.8.

Bargain solution: EF85mm/f1.8

 

Mid-priced solution: EF135mm/f2L (I use this with my 1DMkII and love the results)

 

Expensive solution: EF85/f1.2L (MkII version only; slow AF on the original)

 

If any of your subjects are going to be intimidated, it will be your brick of a 1DMkII N that does it, not any of these lenses.

At the risk of belaboring the point, Lightroom's summary of the ISOs the Auto-ISO feature on Tim's D3 selected while he shot the play indicates the following:<p>

<li>40/271 of the photos were captured at ISO 6400,

<li>and 87/271 were shot at ISO 3200 and above.

<p>

All of the shots are either astonishingly, or acceptably, free of noise, and all were shot at the lowest ISO level that would attain his chosen shutter speed of 1/125 sec.

<p>

I look forward to buying a Canon DSLR with at sensor that will match or surpass the D3's exceptional low-light performance, and a professional quality Auto-ISO feature.<div></div>

At the risk of belaboring the point, Lightroom's summary of the ISOs the Auto-ISO feature on Tim's D3 selected while he shot the play indicates the following:<p>

<li>40/271 of the photos were captured at ISO 6400,

<li>and 87/271 were shot at ISO 3200 and above.

<p>

I will email the ISO table to anyone who wants to see it.

<p>

I look forward to buying a Canon DSLR that will match or surpass the D3's exceptional low-light performance.