The Photography Thread

[Kkel]

I love shooting people and architecture on the EF-S 10-22mm Wide @ 10mm. The distortion effect can actually be pretty hilarious and creates some bizarre perspectives. It's not too bad @22mm, but once you start to swing low, it turns into a fun house mirror pretty quickly.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dropsla...1738/lightbox/

[Doombear]

Nice Kkel, I actually really like the two "Phantom Landscape" images. Color (lack of?) and blur are very surreal. That said, how do you like the 60mm Macro? I actually have that on my list of possible lenses as well. More for portraiture, and the random abstract macro like you have there. Oh and how do you like the battery grip? I am actually planning on a Hakuba strap for mine, so not sure if the grip makes sense for me. Still I am curious to know how you like it, how the heft is, etc.

[Kkel]

I hadn't put the 60mm through any real paces until I shot all those Ice photos for the Gizmodo Shooting Challenge. I only put up about a dozen of the 150ish I took over the course of the day but the 60mm performed amazingly. I was really happy with the detail that lens pulled out. It's a 1:1 Macro lens, so that helps, and I rarely shoot anything I can't get right on top of, so the focal length works out just fine for me. The "Phantom Landscape" ones are actually full color, but they're just a grey and black sock against a white background, stopped down to 2.8. It's funny how you start to look at things differently when you know you have a strong macro lens with you.

I've also shot portraits with it, which is funny because between my EF 28mm and this EF-S 60mm, I rarely use my EF 50mm f/1.8 II any more. That will probably change once I add the EF 50mm f/1.4 USM to my collection (I love that lens).

I shoot a lot in portrait, so I dropped for the Canon BG-E9 grip. It feels great and makes portrait shooting so much more comfortable. The added battery life is amazing too. It does add some heft. I've been shopping around for a new strap since I still use the stock (with the grip, I have it attached to hang it in portrait) but I'll be honest, straps like the Black Rapid series, while awesome, make me paranoid as hell. I know they're thoroughly tested, but with the BG-E9, L glass, and a Speedlite, I just feel like there is too much weight for them to be safe.

Adding the grip also makes finding a good bag a little more difficult.

[Salodin]

I just got a rebel xt handed down to me, and I'm lovin it so far. Can any one point me to any place to learn more about digital slrs and some ways to do the cool effects you guys do? I'd love to get into this as a hobby, I think I'd really enjoy it. Thanks.

[Doombear]

Oh lord, where to send you... Personally? I wouldn't be too anxious to jump into the 'crazy effects' as it will fast become about what you can do TO the photograph after you take it. I feel that your actual learning process for the shooting itself suffers if you focus on post processing right out of the gate. I think that the digital format is such a safe way to learn. You aren't wasting the money on countless rolls of film, learning about aperture, learning how to see light and meter in your head... and that is as much of a downfall as it is a bonus depending on your viewpoint. Coming from a film background I love that I have that knowledge to fall back on though. Not everyone is interested in that though and with Digital being much more accessible as a whole, it isn't even needed to take a good picture.

All that said, what do you want to learn? Do you want to learn about exposure/aperture/shutter speed? Do you want to learn how to use lights both natural and flash? There are tons of great reference books and sites out there to turn to, depending on what you want to start with.

The Rebel line is a great line and I think it does exactly what it is supposed to, it is accessible, it is easy and it gives you a remarkable image with very little messing about under the hood. My wife has an XTi and I still like to steal it from time to time. I see gorgeous pictures all the time from XTs... the camera holds up damn well. Anyway, what are you looking to start with, we can maybe suggest some places/books from there.

[Salodin]

I'm really interested in doing portraits, and messing around with lighting while doing that. That's really the biggest reason why I wanted to take this up as a hobby. I've made myself familiar with shutter speed/iso/aperature, but I'm finding it hard to figure out how to use each optimally for what I'm doing when using them manually. I figure that will come with experience, but any help on that would be greatly appreciated.

I wanted to get into photography as a hobby for things like portraits mainly. I have two lenses atm, I've pretty much figured out how to use them but I don't know exactly when to use one over the other lol. The longer lense is 70-300mm 1:4-5.6 (whatever that all means), and the shorter one is 28-70mm 1:2.8-4 (whatever that all means).

[miokomioko]

The "#-#mm" is the range of the lens' adjustable focal length, or "zoom." A lens with a focal length of 50mm will have about the same view as the human eye. Shorter than 50mm will be "wide-angle" where you can see more than normal but it all looks further away (the extreme of this being "fish-eye"). Longer than 50mm will be "zoomed in" but having a much more narrow perspective.



After that, the "1:#-#" is how large the lens' aperture can get under certain conditions (the "1:" is unnecessary and redundant). A smaller number means the aperture can open wider, allowing light in at a faster rate (allowing for quicker shutter speeds) and making the area of critical focus smaller (allowing for more blurry foregrounds/backgrounds).

When the aperture number is a range between two numbers, it means at its maximum focal length (zoomed all the way in), the aperture can only open up to the larger of the two aperture numbers. When you shorten the focal length, the aperture will be able to open up to the smaller of the two numbers. Depending on the lens and the brand, being in the middle will usually allow you to have a maximum aperture of somewhere between the two as well.


The more you shoot, the more you'll realize the quality of fixed-length lenses. Also, the value of an adjustable focal-length lens that does not sacrifice any aperture width.


Of all my lenses, I find myself really only using:

50mm fixed f/1.2 My primary lens for most things. No distortion at all and sharp as a tack. A solid 50mm fixed should be a staple in everyone's bag.
135mm fixed f/2 My sweet spot for blowing backgrounds out of focus if I have the room to get far enough from the subject.
35mm fixed f/1.4 I use this probably second most for getting more surroundings/architecture/background/etc. in the shot, making the subject look smaller, or if I have very little room between myself and the subject.

If those three fail me because I'm getting stressed out or annoyed at my location and its lack of room for me and the subject to move around, I'll fall back to my 24~105mm f/4 just for the versatility.

These are all Canons, by the way. I use a 5D.

Keep in mind I primarily do fashion/portraiture. I don't shoot moving cars or sports, so I don't need a $12,000 white bazooka. I also don't shoot insects or water droplets on leaves, so I don't have some extremely unnecessary macro lens.


ProTip: Get and play with polarizing filters. They are fucking amazing little tools for controlling (eliminating) reflections assuming you have enough light to expose correctly through it (they are pretty dense).

[Zansho]

While I agree that the Prime lenses (fixed focal length) are without peer for sharpness and color rendition, I think it's a bit foolish to sniff at the zooms. They are still useful tools, and I know you shoot a lot of fashion/portrait type work, so often you're able to choose your location and your situation.

Just to play devil's advocate - what if you were to be given a plum job that you had to shoot a great headshot for a CEO of a major corporation, that will be seen by millions of people, in a room that really won't allow for you to use your prime lenses? 17-40 might actually be a viable tool on your 5D (I had one, and sold mine after getting a 1D series body), you'll be able to take the shot (with the proper lighting, of course) without too much trouble. Zooms have their place as a useful tool for a pro photographer.

That being said, I probably should invest in one myself - I'm actually looking at the 17-40L now. All the prime lenses are useful, but their one caveat is that you really need to be sure you have the room to maneuver to use them effectively, especially the 135L.

[Zansho]

Local Ford Dealership I was at had the F150 Raptor. This is a test shot I took using the 40D (was curious about high ISO ability), at 1600 ISO, using a 35L at 2.8.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4129/...f4071b97_b.jpg

[Salodin]

Is an aperature of 2.8 decent for taking portraits in medium to low light conditions, or should I look at perhaps getting an extra lense with a lower setting. And what kind of lense should I look at getting? There seem to be so many choices at so many different price ranges.

[Fhqwghads]

I think that the digital format is such a safe way to learn. You aren't wasting the money on countless rolls of film, learning about aperture, learning how to see light and meter in your head... and that is as much of a downfall as it is a bonus depending on your viewpoint. Coming from a film background I love that I have that knowledge to fall back on though. Not everyone is interested in that though and with Digital being much more accessible as a whole, it isn't even needed to take a good picture.

I'm not sure I'm reading what you wrote the way you intended, but it sounds like what you're saying is with digital people can get away without learning the basics because the cameras are usually smart enough to take a good picture. I agree, to an extent. If it's a very easy scene with everything pretty much lighted properly then yes, setting everything full auto will usually turn out a picture that most people will find perfectly acceptable. Point-and-shoot cameras make those shots their bread and butter. Being a bit of a camera snob though, I have yet to see a point and shoot camera create a fantastic picture. There's just too many variables if the scene needs even a small bit of hand-holding in order to walk away with a great image that a point and shoot can't tackle.

I'd hope people that aren't into photography who wander into this thread walk away wondering what they're missing by not having a decent DSLR and the knowledge of how to use one to its fullest potential. The difference between a point and shoot and a DSLR in capable hands is the difference between a child with crayons and an artist with oil and canvas.

[Fhqwghads]

Is an aperature of 2.8 decent for taking portraits in medium to low light conditions, or should I look at perhaps getting an extra lense with a lower setting. And what kind of lense should I look at getting? There seem to be so many choices at so many different price ranges.

2.8 is fine for portraits, though you probably won't shoot at that aperture since most lenses aren't as sharp wide open. You can always slow your shutter and/or increase your ISO to compensate in low light situations since your subject should be sitting still. 2.8 and lower would be for silly low light environments, or if you want shallow depth of field, or for stopping fast moving subjects in relatively low light, especially if you can't use flash.

It certainly won't hurt to get a nice fast lens though, so if you can afford it, get a lens with as low an f-stop as your pocketbook allows, that way you're more flexible and have the means to get a shot while other people with junky cameras or kit lenses are struggling. Just make sure you're getting a good lens. Huge aperture doesn't mean it's automatically a good lens. The larger the aperture the more difficult it is to manufacture a piece of glass that doesn't have a lot of flaws and pitfalls, like chromatic aberration, pin-cushioning, distortion, vignetting, etc.

As for Mioko, I can see him in that CEO situation trying to get a headshot with his 50mm prime. The look on the CEO's face as Mioko is shoving the camera right in his pie hole would be priceless. Personally I have 2 awesome zooms that I couldn't live without, and I don't understand why some people shun zooms the way they do. Granted they aren't as sharp as a prime, but how often is someone going to snap a shot and then get poster-sized prints made? Most people when they're getting "large" prints will get 8x10s, and there's no way 99% of the population is going to tell the difference if the shot was taken with a zoom or a prime.

[Zansho]

I do understand that, and it's all well and good. However, to completely dismiss zooms and say primes are the best way to go for everything, is a bit close minded.

I've shot things with my 70-200 that are simply just stunning sharpness wise. And you're right, most people probably can't tell the difference between a shot taken with a prime and one taken at the extreme spectrum of the 10-20mm range for portraits, but I certainly can notice that sort of thing. Point is, lenses are an extension of the camera, and the camera is a tool. Right lens for the right job just sometimes happens to be a zoom.

I do know of some GREAT "point and shoots" that do a very good job of taking photos, most notably the Canon G"x" series cameras, (G10, G11), as they offer a wider range of control than the typical P&S. I know some pros who just bring that along just for everyday bumming around. My bum around camera is my 40D, usually attached with a 35L for walkaround stuff.

[Doombear]

Stumbled on a used 5D Classic last night, with battery grip and L Clamp that looks like it is in amazing shape all for $1200. I have to force myself not to cave... trying so hard. I really cannot dismiss it over a new 60D though, and it is likely going to come down to whether or not it is still available in a few weeks time.

Otherwise, I have also found the Sample Photo Archive at PotN to be an amazing help in my decision making. I am taking a look at what other people are shooting with the lenses I am considering and the 85mm 1.8 is looking nice for outdoor while the 50mm 1.4 or even Sigma 30mm 1.4 is also impressing me. Of course the Canon 17-40 2.8 IS USM is still on my list as well.

Again though... now I keep coming back to just grabbing the 5D classic, the 50mm 1.4 and maybe the 85mm 1.8 and starting with that for a year or so...

I'm not sure I'm reading what you wrote the way you intended, but it sounds like what you're saying is with digital people can get away without learning the basics because the cameras are usually smart enough to take a good picture. I agree, to an extent. If it's a very easy scene with everything pretty much lighted properly then yes, setting everything full auto will usually turn out a picture that most people will find perfectly acceptable. Point-and-shoot cameras make those shots their bread and butter. Being a bit of a camera snob though, I have yet to see a point and shoot camera create a fantastic picture. There's just too many variables if the scene needs even a small bit of hand-holding in order to walk away with a great image that a point and shoot can't tackle.

I'd hope people that aren't into photography who wander into this thread walk away wondering what they're missing by not having a decent DSLR and the knowledge of how to use one to its fullest potential. The difference between a point and shoot and a DSLR in capable hands is the difference between a child with crayons and an artist with oil and canvas.

I guess I really was just saying, that DSLRs just aren't as much of a learning curve as picking up a Nikon F2 or the good ol Pentax K1000 would be to a new photographer. I remember the first 20 rolls that I put through my Olympus OM-10 and how with each roll I was forced to learn what I did wrong and retain that information and improve.

With a DSLR you CAN pick one up, set it to EASYMODE and just run with it. Will you be doing yourself a disservice? Absolutely, but the option is there. Hell I would say that the Rebel line was designed with that kind of 'just push the button' mentality in mind.

So yeah, don't get me wrong, the DSLR has just as much for the user to learn to use it to its full potential as a 30 year old film SLR. I am still pushing "Understanding Exposure" on my wife to read. It still feels 'like school' to her however and she is happy just learning how to use M on her own through trial and error.

GODDAMN it that 5Dc is just haunting me right now. Opinions? Am I going to regret not getting a 6 year old camera?

[Zansho]

You can do things with a 5D Classic that you can't do with your 60D potential purchase. Bokeh will be a lot stronger and more present at shallow f-stops, you get full frame, and quite honestly, probably one of the best DSLRs still out there today.

If you get the 5D, don't get the 17-55 IS 2.8. It's meant for crop sensor bodies. Get the 85mm 1.8 prime, and call it a day. :D

[Zansho]

And dude, don't get hung up on the camera's age. I know people using a 1D Classic body (4MP) that are producing images that are fucking amazing. Go get that camera body, have it checked out by a reputable shop before you buy (the buyer should be ok with this, especially if you're dropping 1.2k), and if you want, I can even refer you to a forum where people sell their used gear ALL the time. I bought a backup 1D Mark III for 1.6k on there a while back, and it's in really great shape with less than 18k shutter actuations (shutter is rated to 250k).

[Doombear]

Yes, very likely I would get the 85 and possibly the 50mm 1.4. GOD DAMN IT now I am torn. Over $1k on a used item from a selling forum has me worried. Reputable forum does not make a reputable seller. Any tips on places to look that have purchase security in place? Anyone familiar with places other than Photography on the Net, FredMiranda, or Dpreview for buying? Any negative/positive feedback from any of those?

Hell... anyone have a 5D here they want to sell? =P

EDIT: Oh and the seller is from FredMiranda, so I cannot check the camera out in person first.

EDIT2: I did however just call a local Pro Photo store here, and they have one currently for $1200 with the grip. I will have to go check that out I suppose... providing it is still there in a few weeks time.

[Zansho]

LOL, I can get you one in my area - with a battery grip for about 1k. Let me scrounge a bit, I know a great camera shop here that knows me on a first name basis and they'll probably help me out.

If you want to look at their used offerings yourself, you're welcome to do so - http://www.precision-camera.com/used - I can call for up to date stuff too.

[Zansho]

Nevermind, found one. :D

http://www.precision-camera.com/used...-eos-5d-w.html

[Doombear]

Awesome, bookmarked. Thanks Zansho. I really am leaning this way now. Coming from a film background I have to think that I would be more comfortable with 50mm = 50mm. I know that may sound silly, but I know some amazing photographers who shoot with nothing but a a 5DMkII and a 50mm (one that comes to mind is Joseph Dirty NSFW at all though ...)

Then there is The Sartorialist... love, hate or be indifferent of him, he uses his 85mm almost always when he is street shooting. Granted they both use L's but still. Is it starting to sound like I am just talking to convince myself yet? =P

I will definitely get back to you in a few weeks, thanks again!