Probably so. I want to be very tiedous about making all my adjustments on-camera than in post processing. If i can have that mindset then it's lesser work I need to do in post production and I can put the extra time on other stuff

 

see for me... a decent light meter is about $300... If I can put that towards something else, I'll just deal with adjusting exposure accordingly, I'd rather do that (for now). I mean... seriously... it takes just a few seconds to adjust and take another photo. I always start with ISO100, F4, and "guesstimate" on the power (of the monolight or flashgun). Plus IMO that's how you'll learn to "eyeball" the condition...

I mean... I can see if you're booked back to back with gigs and time is THAT important to you... but why buy a meter first when you don't even have strobes to use it with yet?

 

True, I guess I'm kinda worried I don't get the proper exposure in my shots. What may look proper to me, might be way off

 

practice? You don't need a person or model to practice on... just photograph random things around your room... hell, use a blow up doll if you have to

 

There is a reason for this. I cant find a reference immediately but it has to do with types of AF sensors (cross-type vs vertical line) and their sensitivity rating. I read once that Canon only promises that AF will work at f5.6 or less. Not sure if you tried this but if you set your AF to use only the center AF point and found a suitable high contrast focusing image it probably would have worked.


http://www.the-digital-picture.com/P...Explained.aspx

 

I have a light meter, it gets some use but not a lot. I use it when using my vintage cameras - it takes out the guess work. I also use it when I setup a 'photobooth' for wedding receptions.

I don't use it for 'normal' shooting.

Where is shines is the photobooth stuff. I set the strobes and backdrop up and then take a few lighting samples with the meter and make manual exposure adjustments until I have what I want - I dont use auto exposure at all. Where it becomes an advantage is it doesn't matter what the subject is wearing and I have the right exposure every time. In a photobooth I am shooting a hundred different people wearing black, white, and every other color and shade. Because the light is right I don't have to worry about the in camera light meter metering a white dress as 20% grey and throwing off the exposure.

Note though that a grey card can be used with the in camera meter to setup and then going from there but the convenience of a meter is much easier.

Bottom line though is with digital and the ability to use trial and error for the setup you can get by without a meter and spend the money on glass.

 

I did - switching to center AF is probably the first thing that came to mind since it can't get simpler than that for the AF system.

I went to Penn Camera on Friday evening to get another CF card... When I told the guy behind the counter what lensrentals said, his reponse was "baloney, we've sold tons of them and never had that problem".

They promised a CC refund which may take a few weeks to show up.

 

this is what they mean when they say you get a shallower DoF on FF

so, I was just messing around today and decided to do some comparison shots between:

200mm f2.8 @f2.8 on a Full Frame vs 135mm f1.8 @f1.8 on a APS-C

Can you guys tell which one is which (w/o cheating?)

 

Bottom one is the 200mm @ 2.8.

were the ISOs the same???

 

They couldnt be, because than the 135 would be a stop and 1/3 over exposed...meaning you had to go to a faster ISO....which would decrease your DoF....making your comparison "test" void.

You need to do it with both at a 2.8 at the same iso.

 

no, on one camera it was ISO100 and the other was ISO200

 

Well, thats a stop difference... I actually reverse my answer based on that.

The bottom picture looks abut a 1/3 more brighter...so that the 135mm.

A stop and 1/3 aperture more open, plus the ISO change = less dof.

 

Of course the other side to the problem is no two digital cameras treat ISO the same way.

Example...iso 3200 on the Nikon D800 is vastly different than the same iso on the 5d III.

Shoot the test on your FF camera, and switch it to crop mode. Use the same lens. Best way to do this.

 

changing ISO would change DOF?

new to me. good to know.

 

ummm yes.

Going from a iso200 to iso100 means you have to open 1 stop to compensate, which = less dof.

Same thing as using ND filters to help shallow your dof.

 

ohh thats what you meant.

i dont know what i was thinking there.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uIRBx...ature=youtu.be

 

in the iphone thread

 

but im not on the iphone thread

 

 

Srika, new faster FB app is out.

 

got it earlier........ it is SWEET!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

nice iphone 5 video............ LOL!!!!!!!!

 

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/0YnhJk4hoq8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

I'm surprised that Henry didnt include a Sony in that test

 

Sony's new FF comes out later this year.

 

they got rid of the blue LCD backlight

now its the same color as the lower level models

 

I'm finding some good deals (I think) on 1Ds Mark III's. Does anyone have anything to say about buying one now?

 

What's the price on them?

 

well I decided against it. I decided I want current generation NR and DR performance.

2500-3000

 

At that price I'd spend a little more coin on a mkIII

 

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en....(brand3)/Canon

 

i wonder how much a 1D mark IIN, 24-70, 70-200 2.8 and 580ex II would each sell for

 

probably around 3500 or so

 

what about the 1-3 second recycle time? is that "OK"? asking generally, to anyone who has any comment on it


Re: http://www.calumetphoto.com/eng/prod...system/cf0506k

 

thanks - what is this Dynamic Range about... those numbers look jacked.......

 

uhhhh................. this sucks

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cam...rand3%29/Canon

 

My camera rules!!!!!

 

Then you're going to hate this one as well.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cam...(brand3)/Nikon

 

Now thats just harsh!