ZachOly wrote:
Didn't I hear that Canon has better highlight recovery than Nikon? To me, that's more important than shadow recovery.
I don't know about "better" because i've never used Nikon, but once I learned about highlight recovery mode I am not afraid to over expose a shot. It's pretty remarkable.
I do wish canon had better shadow recovery, but since I know that is a flaw in the sensor, I can compensate by always opting to push the ISO further up to avoid underexposure.
The 5D3 is SO much better for weddings than the 5D2. It's like a totally different camera when you don't have to worry so much about backfocusing or whatever. I can understand people hesitating at its original asking price of 3500 or whatever it was, but it's dropped down significantly. If you're using it to make money, it's worth it.
also, I use canon bc that's what i started with. i thought about going to nikon for a short while because the canon AF system was driving me mad on the 5d/5d2.
In all seriousness though I went from pentax dslrs to Canon when I decided to make a career out of this and start shooting weddings. I felt both brands would give me great results but Canon was more affordable. I bought all my gear used and ended up grabbing two full frame 5ds, a 16-35L, 50 1.4 and 70-200 2.8 and a couple 430ex's, cf cards and accessories for under $4,000, which was within my budget and gave me a nice, capable system. I've since switched my gear around a bit and shoot primes almost exclusively but I'm still happy with Canon and have no intentions of switching. Also the gripped 5d Canons fit my hands perfectly which is important when you're shooting all day.
joelconner wrote:
Somehow I missed the memo on this. What is highlight recovery mode?
He might be talking about HTP, but if you shoot raw that is the same as just underexposing by 1 stop.
I often underexpose (with iso, everything else is pushed) with the d800 since the files are so easy to push, but I am less likely to do so with a D3/D700.
SloPhoto wrote:
He might be talking about HTP, but if you shoot raw that is the same as just underexposing by 1 stop.
I often underexpose (with iso, everything else is pushed) with the d800 since the files are so easy to push, but I am less likely to do so with a D3/D700.
I never used to do it when I shot canon.
Yeah sorry--Highlight Tone Priority... I'm not actually sure what it does technically. I just know when I pull back highlights on my raw file i have a LOT more information to work with. I don't think it's the same as underexposing by one shot or what affect it has on RAW files (i only shoot raw, and I expose correctly or push to the right).
dhp_sf wrote:
Yeah sorry--Highlight Tone Priority... I'm not actually sure what it does technically. I just know when I pull back highlights on my raw file i have a LOT more information to work with. I don't think it's the same as underexposing by one shot or what affect it has on RAW files (i only shoot raw, and I expose correctly or push to the right).
Yea, it simply records the raw file 1 stop under marked iso and then puts some meta data in the raw file telling the converter to push the file 1 stop using an altered tone curve (not sure if LR handles the meta data correctly).
ISO 200 is really iso 100 pushed 1 stop.
ETTR when in HTP is almost ETTM (expose to the middle)
*but the underexposure is due to ISO, which does not affect shot noise, only read noise.
SloPhoto wrote:
Yea, it simply records the raw file 1 stop under marked iso and then puts some meta data in the raw file telling the converter to push the file 1 stop using an altered tone curve (not sure if LR handles the meta data correctly).
ISO 200 is really iso 100 pushed 1 stop.
ETTR when in HTP is almost ETTM (expose to the middle) :-D
dhp_sf wrote:
Hm. makes sense. I'll have to revisit this then.
It depends on the sensor you are using, and where you need the DR. The D800 and D600 are near iso-less, so it would be almost logical to shoot everything underexposed at iso 100. (Iso 100 on a d800 pushed to 6400 is not much worse in noise than a native iso 6400 shot. What it does have is 6 stops more dynamic range in the highlights)
With a canon, there is a bit too much shadow read noise at low iso to go that wild... but it is not crazy to use HTP if the situation calls for it.
I wish Nikon had an auto-HTP mode which locked the camera at a set iso and just faked a 1-5 stop HTP type push.
SloPhoto wrote:
It depends on the sensor you are using, and where you need the DR. The D800 and D600 are near iso-less, so it would be almost logical to shoot everything underexposed at iso 100. (Iso 100 on a d800 pushed to 6400 is not much worse in noise than a native iso 6400 shot. What it does have is 6 stops more dynamic range in the highlights)
With a canon, there is a bit too much shadow read noise at low iso to go that wild... but it is not crazy to use HTP if the situation calls for it.
I wish Nikon had an auto-HTP mode which locked the camera at a set iso and just faked a 1-5 stop HTP type push....Show more →
Basically I've found it incredibly useful during outdoor ceremonies and clear sky, bright sun....Maybe it's good in those scenarios but then better to turn it off during receptions/low light situations? I think I read that HTP doesn't have any affect at high ISO (3200+) -- is that true?
dhp_sf wrote:
Basically I've found it incredibly useful during outdoor ceremonies and clear sky, bright sun....Maybe it's good in those scenarios but then better to turn it off during receptions/low light situations? I think I read that HTP doesn't have any affect at high ISO (3200+) -- is that true?
Not that familiar with it, but It would make sense that they would limit it at higher iso (where DR is already limited).
I shot Nikon for years. I shoot Canon now. I shoot an X-Pro1. I shoot a ton of film mainly through a Leica or a Contax. Cameras are cameras, merely tools that facilitate your vision.
I just spent more than 20k on Canon cameras and lens to upgrade the studio gears. Still need to spend several k more to finish the upgrade. The purpose is to provide better images for my clients next year.
I am also downsizing Nikon gears but will keep some essential ones such as 24-70, 35 1.4, etc.
I use Nikon, because my first DSLR in 2005 was a D70s. I am now heavily invested in Nikon equipment (based on 2 D700 bodies). I do have a close friend who shoots Canon (currently using the 7D?), and I have tried each one of his bodies over the years, and honestly, I prefer the feel, build quality, and ergonomics of my Nikons. PS, I have never tried a pro-Canon DSLR...
I use Nikon because I'm using Nikon and it'll cost me A LOT if I change the system now.
Although, I'm thinking of using X-Pro1 for next wedding. I've asked and the couple seems happy for me to try out.
