|
Yeah one body with the 70-200 and another with something wider on tends to be the go to for single shooter weddings. No messing around with lens changes or anything.
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 22:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 22:22 |
|
|
I've been loving up my dev a lot recently, first I forgot to put the retaining ring on top of the film spools in my daylight tank doing some B&W earlier in the week resulting in uneven development at the top, and I'm not 100% sure what I did today with C-41 but I guess it's temperature related, all my pictures have a really awful blue cast. Need to shoot more and get back into practice.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 22:29
|
|
|
EL BROMANCE posted:Yeah one body with the 70-200 and another with something wider on tends to be the go to for single shooter weddings. No messing around with lens changes or anything. I do solo weddings with 2 bodies and primes. It's not difficult for a full time prime shooter to judge when and where to swap focal lengths.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 22:54
|
|
|
It helps that for people using Canon gear, the 70-200 is basically everyone's first L lens.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 22:56
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:I do solo weddings with 2 bodies and primes. It's not difficult for a full time prime shooter to judge when and where to swap focal lengths. I did like 80% of my last wedding with a 24 1.4 and a 50 1.2. I like to stay close ish when I can.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 00:28
|
|
|
dakana posted:I did like 80% of my last wedding with a 24 1.4 and a 50 1.2. I like to stay close ish when I can. I generally keep an 85mm equivalent on one body then cycle the other body through 24, 35 and 50mm depending on room size and scene.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 04:10
|
|
|
How do you deal with the distortion at 24? Lots of time in post?
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 06:39
|
|
|
A Saucy Bratwurst posted:How do you deal with the distortion at 24? Lots of time in post? Own a good 24mm? The 16mm Fujinon I use for that FOV is amazing.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 07:21
|
|
|
Can you show me? I was under the impression that it was just an inherit thing at those focal lengths to have a tonne of distortion. It's kinda why I haven't looked into getting one.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 07:26
|
|
|
A Saucy Bratwurst posted:Can you show me? I was under the impression that it was just an inherit thing at those focal lengths to have a tonne of distortion. It's kinda why I haven't looked into getting one. Well "distortion" can mean lots of things. If you mean barrel distortion then most better wide angles are highly corrected for that , if you mean exaggerated perspective because a wide angle allows you to fill the frame with a thing very close to the camera then that's different. Anyway here's a quick Flickr tag search so you can see for yourself: https://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/Fujinon%20XF%2016mm%20f1.4
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 07:56
|
|
|
If you're shooting digital it's very easy to correct for that kind of distortion in LR anyways.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 13:22
|
|
|
spog posted:I have it and I like it. Follow up question, does it work with zoom flashes like the SB-800 or SB-900?
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 19:29
|
|
|
Ezekiel_980 posted:Follow up question, does it work with zoom flashes like the SB-800 or SB-900? Lenses don't affect flash compatibility. Both of those flashes will work fine.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 20:12
|
|
|
VelociBacon posted:Lenses don't affect flash compatibility. Both of those flashes will work fine. I'd assume they meant if the lens works with the auto-zoom feature of the flashes. As in: does the flash zoom when you zoom the lens?
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 20:54
|
|
|
Caryna posted:I'd assume they meant if the lens works with the auto-zoom feature of the flashes. As in: does the flash zoom when you zoom the lens? yes, this was what i meant
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 20:56
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:Well "distortion" can mean lots of things. If you mean barrel distortion then most better wide angles are highly corrected for that , if you mean exaggerated perspective because a wide angle allows you to fill the frame with a thing very close to the camera then that's different. Anyway here's a quick Flickr tag search so you can see for yourself: I meant the barrel distortion yeah. How does it look before editing? I know a kit lens is going to have it way worse than a proper prime but I assumed theyd still need post work to correct it
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 04:21
|
|
|
A Saucy Bratwurst posted:I meant the barrel distortion yeah. How does it look before editing? Which brings me back to "buy a good 24mm", a modern well corrected one shouldn't need much if any post for distortion. This is SOOC in the kitchen at work:  (no I don't know which of my dumbass coworkers puts paper towels in the recycling but it drives me loving nuts)
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 04:46
|
|
|
Ezekiel_980 posted:Follow up question, does it work with zoom flashes like the SB-800 or SB-900? Dunno, sorry. Buy me an external flash and I'll test it for you.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 12:22
|
|
|
Sooo this is my first time in this room to see if I could find some kind souls to help me fix some blurry photos, my friend thought they knew how to use a camera that was too complicated and all my graduation photos with my parents came out blurry. Any suggestions on where I could post to ask find help and see if they can be sharpened at all. I've linked them below, possibly willing to pay for help depending on results. If anyone can help or point me to where I might be able to find help I would appreciate it. Also feel free to tell me this is a lost cause, I know literally nothing about photography or photo editing. http://imgur.com/a/4JA6I
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 14:44
|
|
|
That blur is unfortunately from missed focus (or no focus it looks like). I don't think there is anything anyone can do to fix that but I would love to be wrong.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 14:50
|
|
|
A photoshop expert could probably "fix" them but they'd basically be creating the image from scratch on top of the out of focus original. It would look terrible unless they're really good at their job (and expensive). And then it still might look terrible. Whatever that camera is, throw it away or get it serviced because there's no reason it should have missed focus like that.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 15:18
|
|
|
Ah, I see well reshoots it is!
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 15:43
|
|
|
xzzy posted:A photoshop expert could probably "fix" them but they'd basically be creating the image from scratch on top of the out of focus original. It would look terrible unless they're really good at their job (and expensive). And then it still might look terrible. All the shots look to have the same wrong focus. Coulda been in manual focus instead of autofocus.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 16:20
|
|
|
Dren posted:All the shots look to have the same wrong focus. Coulda been in manual focus instead of autofocus. This is my guess as well.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 16:36
|
|
|
Alternatively shooting Nikon with a AF lens on a AF-S body.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 17:24
|
|
|
Yeah, they're all focused on that wall in the background. I agree, it was probably in manual focus.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 17:26
|
|
|
Well then that's the second lesson, always check all settings prior to using a camera.  Or leave the focus beep on if you're prone to stuff like that.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 17:54
|
|
|
Yeah, Was not me or my camera but the person taking them had one of the complex cameras and apparently they forgot how to use it. Oh well, actually knowing there is nothing to fix just takes some stress off and we'll just have to retake the pictures
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 18:02
|
|
|
Stop asking soundmonkey to take your photos imo
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2016 18:19
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:Which brings me back to "buy a good 24mm", a modern well corrected one shouldn't need much if any post for distortion. This is SOOC in the kitchen at work: Thanks, I'll look at canons options and see how good they are. I don't know why but adjusting for barrel distortion drives me insane, I can't get it right
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 00:44
|
|
|
A Saucy Bratwurst posted:Thanks, I'll look at canons options and see how good they are.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 01:54
|
|
|
A Saucy Bratwurst posted:Thanks, I'll look at canons options and see how good they are. Adjusting for distortion is done for you by modern bodies/lenses if you're shooting JPEG and if you're shooting raw you click "enable profile corrections" in Lightroom to correct it. What is there to get right?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 03:48
|
|
|
I'm shooting my first event next week - the commencement banquet for a university that I work for. I'm excited and a little nervous - I normally shoot street photography and friend get togethers. Is there anything I should keep in mind? The woman who hired me said she'd prefer to not use flash. I have the Sigma 18-35mm 1.8 - is that going to cut it or should I plan on bringing a flash? I figured I can just bump the ISO up and shoot wide open(or close) and it should be fine. Karl Barks fucked around with this message at 18:48 on May 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 18:34
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:I'm shooting my first event next week - the commencement banquet for a university that I work for. I'm excited and a little nervous - I normally shoot street photography and friend get togethers. Is there anything I should keep in mind? Do you have anything longer than a 35? I'd try to borrow something with a lot more reach so you can get useable shots of people interacting. Something like a 70-200. Also I tend to stop my aperture down a bit more when shooting live events than I would when I'm walking around shooting for art's sake. f/1.8 bokeh is nice but you often won't have time to double check that you're focusing properly and risk missing shot oppourtunities that could come up. I'd leave it in f/4 aperture priority and autoISO/shutter no less than 1/60 if you're not comfortable switching exposure settings quite quickly.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 18:49
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:I'm shooting my first event next week - the commencement banquet for a university that I work for. I'm excited and a little nervous - I normally shoot street photography and friend get togethers. Is there anything I should keep in mind? Things to consider are where the banquet will be held (indoor vs. outdoor, big space or more enclosed) and the lighting, including the time of day if it's indoors with windows or outdoors. The 18-35 is something like 27-52 equivalent, which gets you moderately wide to normal. You may want something even wider depending on the venue. I also like something on the longer side to get isolated pictures of people. I find that capturing one or two people having a "moment" is a lot more effective than just wide, faraway shots with a group sitting around a table. It's not impossible with something like an 18-35, but it's harder to get candid moments when you're shoving a camera in people's faces. My 85/1.8 (on full frame) is great for this purpose. As far as dealing with the lighting, you can raise the ISO and lift shadows in post, but if there's a lot of hard lighting, it'll still be hard to make things look more natural--exposing for the lights and then pushing the shadows is liable to give you some really muddy tones. A flash will help a lot here, but make sure that a flash is allowed, and also check to see if the venue has walls or low enough ceilings that you can bounce the flash.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 18:52
|
|
|
Thanks guys! This is on a D7000 so 404 has it right - it's 27-52 equivalent. I have the Tokina 11-20mm f/2.8 which I will bring as well, just not sure how it will perform without flash. The only other lens I have is a 50mm f/1.4, which I will bring for more candid close ups per your suggestion 404. It's in Annenburg Hall from 6-9PM, so a giant cathedral like structure with very high ceiling. I don't actually own a speedlight, though I could get a hold of one pretty easily. I assume the camera flash is not enough?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 19:22
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:Thanks guys! This is on a D7000 so 404 has it right - it's 27-52 equivalent. I have the Tokina 11-20mm f/2.8 which I will bring as well, just not sure how it will perform without flash. The only other lens I have is a 50mm f/1.4, which I will bring for more candid close ups per your suggestion 404. Camera flash is awful. You want to be able to bounce the flash off of a neutral wall or ceiling which is one of the reasons a speedlight is preferable.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 19:23
|
|
|
spog posted:Why not LR and a local NAS? Geektox posted:LR would be horribly unwieldy for that many photos. Also LR refuses to run off of catalogues stored on network storage and I'm guessing that's gonna be a dealbreaker. Just curious, but what's stopping someone from keeping all their photos on dropbox, and then selectively only downloading to desktop the files you want to work on? The catalog you've created would be searchable, but you wouldn't be eating into your local storage. jackpot fucked around with this message at 20:08 on May 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 20:02
|
|
|
jackpot posted:I don't have any idea which system to use, but this sounds like a really good option and I'll do some googling, thanks. Just to add to this debate, I have close to 250,000 photos in my LR catalog. I store it on a local drive (it's about 4GB, and I purge previews every now and then), and all of my photos are on my NAS connected via gigabit ethernet. Everything runs pretty smoothly. This is on my main editing machine with 16gb ram and an i7, though it's not noticeably faster to use a new catalog vs loading up the gigantor one.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 22:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 22:22 |
|
|
dakana posted:Just to add to this debate, I have close to 250,000 photos in my LR catalog. I store it on a local drive (it's about 4GB, and I purge previews every now and then), and all of my photos are on my NAS connected via gigabit ethernet. Everything runs pretty smoothly. This is on my main editing machine with 16gb ram and an i7, though it's not noticeably faster to use a new catalog vs loading up the gigantor one. How is your LR catalog so small with that many photos? I have about 10k photos and my catalog is 12gb
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 19:07
|
|
