chuckunderhill

<p>Well I have been shooting both for a few years, so I can say for sure that there is no merit to the remark. I stopped shooting Nikon recently simply because I couldn't afford to shoot both, and most of my higher end glass was on the Canon side. Each has it's good and bad points, both system will each do the job very well.</p>

<p>(Note to self: Don't talk to salespeople at Ritz in MA)</p>

<p>Well... ummm. Ok, I will pipe in here a bit. I still use a D1H, the lower pixel brother of the D1X. For what it is, it shoots well. But the D1X/H are also horrible for low light shooting, and quite a few other issues. For what they are, and the time frame they were built in, they work just fine. As a matter of fact, if you happen over to the strobist page, a large number of the "on location" shots were taken with a D1 series camera.<br>

The D1H I am currently shooting with is a back up to my back up D70. I like it for when the weather is bad and I am out in it, or just to play around with. I picked it up in December of FleaBay for $105 shipped, with 5 batteries, charger, original box, manuals, etc. It is the second one I own. For some reason the D1X bodies still bring some decent money, for their specs and image quality. And yes, I will be adding one to my collection some day. :) The AF is the fastest I have seen, when in good light (say a sunny day). As in lighting fast.<br>

The X is simply a higher pixel version, and does produce good pictures. That being said, for $500, you could grab any number of better Canon or Nikon bodies. A D80 with a18-70 for example, Or a D200, which all but replaced the D2H for photojournalism. (The D2 series cameras still have low light issues) Either will blow the doors off any D1 series there is. The D series cameras use a different TTL flash system as well, and if you go Nikon you are going to want the i-ttl (verses D-ttl). No two ways about it, Nikon's creative lighting is one of the best things it has going for it.The D1X is going to use a SB28DX/SB50DX/SB80DX for the D-ttl, but I don't know if the current speedlites will work.<br>

On the Canon side of things, you have many options for a second body.<br>

Your 5D MK I (a camera I would personally kill for) is so much higher quality then any Nikon D1 series camera, you'll hate yourself for buying it. Even the D100/D70 series are going to give you better results.<br>

Nikon does still offer buffer and BIOS upgrades for all the D1 series cameras. So I would say unless you can get it for a real budget price and have a specific use for it in mind (i.e. studio only) give it a pass, put the $$$ into something more current. (Low shutter count 30 or 40 D maybe?)</p>

<p>Hi everyone,</p>

<p>Thank you for your info and suggestions, it is all very helpful. I will look into getting a 18-55 IS, I believe a friend of mine has one that he got with his Canon.<br>

While the 15-85 Canon is out of my current price range, I do plan to purchase one, but until it was mentioned here, it wasn't even on my radar. This is all great information to know. :) The Tamron lens and Sigma 28-70 range was on my list for my next lens purchase. But it is going to be a while.<br>

Honestly, I was fairly impressed with the Nikon lens for the price and sharpness, and I tried to think along the lines of my Canon, and drew a blank as to which Canon lens was comparable.<br>

Thanks again everyone!</p>

 

<p>Hi Everyone,<br /> <br /> Ok, I am using a Canon XSi at the moment, and I am trying to find a lens that is basically equal to my 18-70 F/3.5-4.5 Nikon lens for sharpness. I have a Canon 50mm F/1.8 which works well, but ireally prefer a zoom, and the Canon 24-85 F/3.5-4.5, isn't nearly as crisp. My Tokina ATX Pro 28-80 F/2.8 is god awful soft past 50mm at F/2.8. The reviews say it is ok if stepped down to 4.0 at 70-80mm, but I find it has to be at least 5.6 for the shot to be sharp.<br /> <br /> I really (REALLY!) can't afford a high end Canon L-series Lens, so I was hoping there might be something mid range that was sharp like the Nikon, which is an incredibly good lens for the money. <br /> <br /> Lens I have tried:<br /> Canon EF 28-70mm F/3.5-4.5 USM<br /> Canon EF 35-70mm F/3.5-4.5 USM<br /> Canon EF 24-85mm F/3.5-4.5 USM<br /> Canon EF 35-105mm F/3.5-4.5 USM<br /> Canon EF 35-135mm F/3.5-4.5 USM<br /> Tamron 28-105mm F/4.0-5.6<br /> <br /> I was seriously considering the Tamron 28-70 F/2.8 or the Sigma 28-70 F/2.8 but both are a bit more then I have to spend.<br /> <br /> At the moment the primary use for this lens will be portraits, but I also need to be able to shoot proforming arts and low light. Prime lens are a possibility, but I would prefer a zoom.<br /> <br /> Thanks in advance for any advise or suggestions.</p>

<p>Thank you all for the replies. I am going to skip the D1X, even thou I have a bunch of batteries for it, since I already have the D1H. I am still considering the D2H, mostly because one of the things I DO shoot a lot of is Paintball, and while the 4MP isn't great, a $1200 or so camera getting slammed by paint traveling at 300 fps makes me really cringe. So far I have only shot with Film at paintball, so I wouldn't damage one of my DSLRs. I have however gone thru 2 A2E's over the last couple of years.<br>

So if everyone was shooting Canon.... what were that using? 1D Mark II? The Classic Canon 1D is only 4MP as well, isn't it?<br>

I do shoot both Nikon and Canon, I like both systems quite a bit, and for me, it is a bit of an ego thing. As in, "it isn't the Arrow, but the Indian". So as far as Nikon vs Canon gear, I have some of each, but my only real "pro" level lenses are a Canon 28-70 F/2.8, a Nikon 35-70 f/2.8, and a couple of f/1.4 lenses I picked up for each.<br>

I did also receive an email from a a working photojournalist who I knew actually was shooting with a D2H, and her opinion was that for under $250 it was an ok deal for the D2H, otherwise, it wasn't a decent deal. Hmmmmmm.<br>

Anyways, thank you all for the information.</p>

<p>Hi Everyone,<br /> <br /> I have a friend that just upgraded to a D3, and he has offered me his D1X or D2H before he dumps them on eBay. I do realize that both are a bit dated, but I currently shoot with a D1H some of the time, and I really love the camera. Both have under 20k on them, and have been well taken care of. He wanted around $300 for the D2H and $275 or so for the D1X. The price is very good compared to KEH, and pretty good compared to eBay. I can't afford a D3 or a D90. (Saving up for them, but not there yet) I guess I was wondering if folks in the"real world" are still shooting with the D2H or the D1X.<br /> <br /> At the moment, I am covering a couple of sporting events a month, and not a whole lot more then that. Still do a lot of other shooting in the meantime, which I pretty much cover with my Canon gear. I am thinking mostly alone the lines of street/documentary/photojournalism, verses portrait/glamour shooting.<br /> <br /> Thanks in advance for any thought, advice or suggestions, <br /> MrC</p>

<p>Hi Steve,<br>

In general, the switching back and forth between Nikon and Canon hasn't been an issue, simply because I don't normally shoot sports. Most of the time it is just portrait, landscape and general shooting. There are some features I like on each of the cameras, as well as my D1H, so I just grab the body that I want at the moment.<br>

And of course, I plan to pick one and choose that as my "upgrade path". But of course your right. I just haven't figured out which brand I prefer yet.<br>

Shooting thru the fence was actually easy, with the 50mm on either body. As long as the fighters weren't right at the spot I was, I could fit the barrel through the chainlink fairly easily. A couple of times I had to jump back so that the fighters wouldn't hit the camera!<br>

But using my 28-70 Simga was a totally different story, with it's 77mm front glass.<br>

I guess what I was really trying to figure out was if moving to a 35mm or a 30mm f/1.4 might not give me better use of the available light, yet still allow me to press in close to the fence. The lighting was bright.... most of the time, but not great for photography. And everything else was really dark, outside the cage that is.<br>

I did think about Nikon's dynamic focusing, but actually shot most of the last fight with the Canon.</p>

 

<p>@ Craig ... not even sure how I should respond to this. What you are saying is impossible, "cutting" the fence???? Not even a remote possibility. As far as the attitude... ummmm, I am being given access to an event not many other have, and I am pretty sure it would be both unprofessional and impolite to try and demand that they rearrange the setup around my shooting. Normally at these events ONE PHOTOGRAPHER has access in association with the filming crew, and that's it. There are several other photog's that were at the last event, and will be at this event as well, and they are shot thru the fence, same as I have it, no complaints. And I am not complaining either, I just wanted to try and figure out the how to do it better. This is a opportunity for ME. As well as a great chance to learn how to overcome some difficult shooting challenges. I am shooting for one of the promoters, BTW, not the organization putting on the event. Telling them that if I can't have equal access, I am going to take my camera and go home and pout isn't a very useful course of action. They will say fine, and offer the spot to any one of the dozens of people that would love to have it, or just say scrrew it, no more access to anyone but our guy.<br>

@WW and Scott, thanks, I looked at Jeff's stuff and I am going to try to fire off a message to him. I am also contacting the main event photog, and see what he has to say. :)<br>

And spend a great deal of time working on my groveling skills, so I might be able to upgrade some of my gear and remain breathing and married. :D</p>

<p>Hi Guys,</p>

<p>Thank you so much for the replies, very helpful, and made me realize that I have a ways to go on my learning curve (which is fine, I love learning more about photography). After reading these posts, and the ones from another forum where i posted the question, I decided to step back and not buy anything.... yet.<br>

I am going up to shoot again in early April, and when I do, I cam going to speak to the primary photographer (he was really nice when I met him at the last shoot) maybe buy him a beer and see what direction he suggests.<br>

I will admit, I am kind of keen on the idea of picking up the 35mm, mostly because I want it for my other shooting too.<br>

Thanks again everyone!</p>

<p>Hi James,</p>

<p>Both my DSLRs are cropped. I looked at the Canon 50mm 1.2L and honestly, it is beyond my current means. (As in purchasing it would be a marriage altering event).<br>

I think you are refering to the Friday Night Fights photographer who sits on a ladder above the cage, and next to the main video camera. I can't remember his name, but he is THE MMA photog for Friday Night Fights, and has access that I do not have. He is also able to shoot within the ring before and after the fight, so his shots are a different beast then what I can do. I THINK he was running a Canon 85mm but not 100%.<br>

And of course, his gear is top of the line, while mine is good quality, older gear.<br>

Is it possible that the issue is my skills and not the lens at all? Should a 50mm f/1.8 lens be able to handle a action/low light shoot? My thoughts for getting a new lens was that if I KNOW that the lens can do what I am trying to do, then I can focus completely on my skills, if that makes any kind of sense.</p>

<p>Hi Hector,<br>

Thanks for the reply. I was using both a Canon 50mm F/1.8II and the Nikon F/1.8D (mostly the Canon).<br>

Your image is great, nearly prefect example of shooting thru a fence. But in my scenario, the fighters are moving VERY fast, not static the way the ship is. So the fence becomes a much great challenge to deal with. I will post a shot when I get home from work and have access to my pictures. But had several shots where some of the more important action (a kick or punch landing) was blocked due to the fence when I went to the larger glass. Anything over 58 is going to have issues with the fence cropping the shot.<br>

Thanks!<br>

Chuck</p>

 

<p>I have been asked to help cover a local sporting event, and I am looking to figure out what lens to use.<br>

The event is a Mixed Martial Arts match. MMA events are in a "caged" ring, the ring is actually surrounded by Chainlink fence.<br>

My issue here is that at the last event, the only lens I could use was my 50mm F/1.8 simply because everything else the glass is so big that you end up shooting the fence more then the subjects. I had some success shooting between the fence strands.<br>

But being the type of event it is, the lighting is truly horrible, and because there are other photographers there covering the event, as well as it being filmed for TV, a flash is off limits.<br>

The 50mm did ok, but a lot slower and not as sharp as I would have liked. Since I plan to cover these events often, I would like to invest in something that is going to give me sharper shots, even with the low light.<br>

Just looking for ideas, or suggestion at this point, before I commit to purchasing something.<br>

Lens I have considered so far: 35mm f/1.4 (or 30mm), 50mm f/1.4, 35-70 f/2.8 (Nikon). If the glass is over 62mm or so, it won't work well. I don't really care about brand, as long as it works and I shoot both Canon and Nikon equally, so either of those mounts are fine with me. Prefer AF, since things happen REALLY fast in a fight.</p>

<p>TIA for any comments or thought,<br>

Chuck</p>

 

<p>Well, I am still shooting quite often with my A2's and my Elan. I have a Rebel G and 2000 someplace that I never use, but I am sure they would be fully functional if I wanted to. For the record, my A2 and my Elan have been thru hell and back, I have not been gentle with either of them, and I still have no issues with them. (I have two A2's and 2 A2E's). I happen to like how quiet they are. They are no way as spendy as the EOS 3, but still give you a great selection of functions/features.</p>

<p>Jeff and Lacey both have good points, especially Jeff's about the wedding you plan to shoot. He IS wrong about getting weddings booked thou. I went to a wedding of a couple of friends a few years back and took some decent, nice shots that their pro didn't get. Next thing I knew I had friends of friends calling me up and asking for price quotes on shooting their wedding. Which I did of course and it was the worst choice I ever made. I was (and still am not) no way good enough, nor skilled enough to justify being paid for my services as a "professional" photographer.<br>

So yes, you can book weddings and other events as a beginner, and yes you might even get some good shots, the question that really comes to my mind, is should you? When you look at the portraits and the wedding shots posted here by the truly skilled photographers, do you feel that you can do as well? Seriously.<br>

I like a number of your shots, not #3, but the rest are fine. I would say that if you can take that good a shot after 5 weeks, then you are going to be come very good very fast as long as you pursue learning, learning, learning. We all started somewhere and it looks like you are off to a good start, but it IS just the start, don't forget.</p>

 

<p>Hi Mark,<br>

Thank you. I didn't have the manual, but right after I posted the message I found a reference to the custom menus on Google, that I had missed when I searched before. And a PDF of the manual too :)<br>

Will give it a shot when I get home.</p>

<p>Thanks!<br>

Chuck</p>

 

<p>Hi Everyone,</p>

<p>I have a used D1H I purchased a while back and I just started using it. I was wondering if anyone knew of a way to set the camera back to the factory default settings for all menus and setting? Turning the camera on, it comes up with a number of custom setting, unless I go thru and reset them one at a time. I am getting a ton of shots that are overexposed, almost completely white out, unless I go in and reset the image quality, white balance, and a number of other menu selections.<br>

Anyway to put the camera back to the setting from the factory? I just want to be able to tell if there is a repair issue with the camera, or it is just my own operator issue.</p>

<p>Thanks!</p>

<p>Thanks everyone for the replies... was going to work with the model again this weekend, but I have the flu, and I don't want to share it.. :/</p>

<p>Will post my results when I am feeling better and we do the shoot.<br>

Thanks! :)</p>

<p>Hi Everyone,</p>

<p>I am going to be working with a model in the next week or so, and looking at all of the images she has had done to date, almost in every kind of light, she has a unhealthy "yellowish" tone to her skin, something she has commented about. Having met her in person, she is pale. I was wondering if I use a gold reflector, if that might not help with the tones.<br>

Suggestions, ideas, thought welcome!<br>

Chuck</p>

 

<p>Thanks everyone! Looks like I will be looking to get a 18-70, and maybe a nice 50mm to start... Now the only issue is sitting waiting for the camera to arrive! :)</p>

<p>Hi Everyone,<br>

I got a call from my aunt the other day, and she has upgraded her cameras, and is sending me either her D1X or her D100 as a late Birthday present, because she heard from my Mom that I am still shooting on film. :) :) :)<br>

Anyways, I have used a number of Nikons over the years, mostly hand me downs, and all my current gear is Canon. The Nikon isn't going to come with a lens, and I need to find one. My favorite Canon lens is my 35-105, or my 28-105. I do a lot of portrait style shooting. I have no idea what thou compare to in the digital world, and worse, I can't figure out what Nikon lens work with the D1X. I do have a 28-90 Tamron Nikon AF lens I used with my Nikon 6006. I do plan to buy a really nice crisp prime at some point, as well as a decent zoom for which ever camera I end up getting, but at the moment funds are pretty low.<br>

Anyways, suggestion on lenses to look at, info on the D1X etc appreicated!<br>

Chuck</p>

 

<p>Thank you all for your replies, and thoughts. I had some time to think this all over and after talking to my friend, he is going to hold onto the D60 for me as well, and if I decide to pass on it at that point, so be it. I honestly wouldn't be making the change over, but it seemed to good to pass up after checking the closing prices on eBay and KEH and Shuttleblade.<br>

The primary goal for going digital is for candid and portrait work, I expect 99% of it will be indoors, controled lighting. Fast action stuff I will continue to use my A2's for now. Working with the A2 my favorite lens has always been my 35-105, and I am not exactly sure how that will translate over to Digital. I do have a 50/1.4 and a 28-135. A couple of Tamron's as well. I was actually thinking that maybe I would save the money and try for a prime lens.<br>

It all boils down to I am not doing this to make money, I am not a photograpger for a living, I am simply doing it because I love to take pictures. My A2's won't be going anywhere, I love the camera and will always have at least one with me.<br>

Thanks again everyone!</p>

<p>I understand that none of them will use the newer, EF-S lenses, of which I own none. All mine are EF. Seriously, all my equipment is based around my A2E's, and none of it is new. The D60 is likely to be $150, the D30 around $100. This is probably the most money I can spend to move into Digital, I REALLY can't afford a lot of cash layout at this time, nor in the forseeable future.</p>

<p>Hey Everyone,</p>

<p>Currently I am still working with film and my Canon A2's, but a friend of mine is upgrading his equipment, and has offered me first dibs on his gear. I have already decided to buy his 10D, but he also has a D60 and a D30 for sale. I was thinking of getting one or the other as a backup. They would be around $125/$150 each. In pretty good shape, but he wasn't afraid to use them.<br>

So is it a good idea to grab one of them, or should I hold off and wait until I can afford to get another 10d or maybe even a 20d.</p>

<p>Thanks!</p>

 

<p>These pictures were taken quite some time ago, but I could swear I used my bounce flash for them.... I see what you are saying about the light being directly on them thou.<br>

I will scan some more (everything I have is on film) and see if I can come up with a better example.<br>

Thanks!</p>

<p>Ok, well now that you mention it... I never noticed the "horn" before, but now... ugly! :(<br>

She applied her own makeup, and to the eye it didn't look shiny at all. I probably need to go back thru my photos and pull out two that don't have such glaring errors in them to provide a better example. I am using a flash, there just wasn't enough light inside to do otherwise. We had schedule to do an outdoor shoot, but it was pouring. Sigh.<br>

I do have a couple of flash umbrellas I can use, I just hadn't planned to be inside.<br>

Thanks for the help, and please keep the suggestions comming. While I am very new to photography (verses just snapshots), I really enjoy doing portrait port, and would like to improve my skills.<br>

Chuck</p>