New here. My name's Phil and I come from a 2 year D70 background. 95% of the images on my site are from a D70, and I just recently got a D200 in the end of January.
I was also sponsored by Fuji this month to film Fashion Week. I have always been a fan of the FUJI sensor but never actually had the chance to use one. I was deciding if I should get another D200... or the S5. My clients are very image-quantity and speed demanding and they only want jpegs. My post here is not to be all go-for-Fuji. I am just writing from a standpoint of a photographer who needs to deliver the BEST looking images as fast as possible and make money doing it without having to spend $5000+
So naturally, I wanted to see how fast the S5 can shoot in a fast-paced next day or same night turn-around environment. To my surprise, I was able to get alot more shots than anticipated. I shot about 1000 images (no flash) with a single battery. Whereas my D200 is a battery hog even with vertical grip. It's no Mark II or D2X in terms of speed, but I would definitely say anyone with Nikon lenses, should seriously consider this camera. After I pay off my lenses, I will be getting this camera. My background comes from a D70. So I am used to working with underdog cameras.
I love my D200 and it has it's advantages. But for the money shots, I will definitely be using an S5. I don't have any environment samples up online, but I did test it out with my Nikkor 16mm f/2.8. My brother had a 16x20 printed of the Manhattan Beach pier at night, and it looks amazing. I know alot of people here have different backgrounds and uses for the camera. But from my the way I see it, this goes beyond just being known as a wedding camera. I was laughed at the first time I filmed a fashion show. A guy with a Mark II and nice L-lenses, Turbo pack, the works... and here I am with a small D70. Sometimes you just have to work with what you've got, and let your photography pave the path for you.... not the camera.
I was laughed at the first time I filmed a fashion show. A guy with a Mark II and nice L-lenses, Turbo pack, the works... and here I am with a small D70. Sometimes you just have to work with what you've got, and let your photography pave the path for you.... not the camera.
Man, in all the threads we see on photography forums about gear being needed or required this is a statement so true and so very often not considered. Well said.
Now, I'm pretty sure if I had time to tweak my D200, I could have gone to change the kelvin temperature WB to make it look like the S5. But I don't have that much time to setup for these events. Such as the cake shot. Sometimes agents only give us 30 seconds to shoot. What matters in the end is if you "got the shot and as long as the subject isn't purple or some off the wall color". Not the color of skin skin-tone (as long as they aren't purple). BUT... if I had to just pick up one camera and take a picture I would rather pick the SD.
Edited by Philip Cuenco on Mar 21, 2007 at 08:50 AM GMT
Edited by Philip Cuenco on Mar 21, 2007 at 11:43 PM GMT
Well, not just skin tones, just available light in general. I even turned the saturation down on my D200 because it generally tends to shoot slightly warmer.
For runway, I always WB meter off the back wall where the models come out. Otherwise for a regular shoot, I normally use an expose disc or a lastolite.
After a while, I had to quickly change the WB from my D200 to 3600K. I looked better and less warm on the LCD. Almost white runway. But then when I took them into the computer, I should have just gone down to 3400 or so.
Philip Cuenco wrote:
Well, not just skin tones, just available light in general. I even turned the saturation down on my D200 because it generally tends to shoot slightly warmer.
For runway, I always WB meter off the back wall where the models come out. Otherwise for a regular shoot, I normally use an expose disc or a lastolite.
After a while, I had to quickly change the WB from my D200 to 3600K. I looked better and less warm on the LCD. Almost white runway. But then when I took them into the computer, I should have just gone down to 3400 or so. ...Show more →
Phil,
Are you shooting RAW, then? With the Fuji as well?
Are you shooting RAW, then? With the Fuji as well?
Thanks!
Gerald
Actually, no. My clients usually want the images the same night so they can send them out to the presses the next morning. I shoot 500-1500 images a night between 2 cameras. So, I only shoot RAW if I have more than a day's turn-around. But even then, the only time i see raw really helping me out is if I forget to change the WB. I shoot 80% my stuff in manual. So once in awhile for the 20% where I just want a safe and sure shot (P* at night. A during the day) I may forget to switch my WB from PRE to Auto and they turn out blue. But for those SURE shots, I ALWAYS make sure to check them. Then I kindly ask to shoot one more.
This is where the Fuji has saved my butt twice. That auto-face find feature. I took a shot. Then quickly shuffled through the faces. There was one face out of 4 that wasn't focused that great and I asked them to take one more pic for the full body. (usually I will sneak in 2 shots).
I do shoot RAW, just not when I have a fast turn-around. I also feel that shooting jpeg makes me more aware and makes me more careful to be aware of the settings on my camera. As much as stuff happens at these events between publicists dragging me around to take shots, going from outside to inside and having limited time to shoot certain people posing, mistakes are bound to happen. (like forgetting to change shutter or WB).
I can't always rely on RAW being there to save my butt or save my image from mass destruction. Like say I shot RAW, and my laptop went down. I guarantee my client is not going to have their Lightroom or Aperture ready to go for me to read in. Don't get me wrong. I LOVE RAW. but, my clients and type of stuff I shoot, do not.
Honestly, when I show my images, the clients mainly care about "Did you get this shot of so and so?" They may not even care if it is slightly blurry. As long as the shot is there. They don't look at skin tone like we do. Or how harsh the lighting is off the lighting from their hair. So it depends what you can do with it and what your market is.
Also as dumb as this sounds, I am practicing keeping my camera glued to the screen. I see pretty much 99% of the camera guys changing their settings through the top of their camera. But during the 5-10 seconds they spend changing something, they could miss something huge. I've missed stuff because of that. Since the D200 and S5 are same bodies, I try to keep my eye on the viewfinder and change my WB, shutter, fstop while shooting, and actually pay attention to what is going on in that screen, rather than only focusing on the subject.
Edited by Philip Cuenco on Mar 19, 2007 at 10:34 PM GMT
What I'm seeing is a difference in white balance between the two cameras. I don't think I would be able to see any difference otherwise if the white balance was the same between the two. Plus, these images are tiny. Enlargements of 16x20 would give the D200 the upper hand. BTW- Great shots! That's what really matters!
I definitely agree that in a perfect world, AWB and skintones would be flawless so you wouldn't have to tinker with settings. Phil mentioning how changing settings could make you miss a shot is very true.
poisonpill wrote:
I definitely agree that in a perfect world, AWB and skintones would be flawless so you wouldn't have to tinker with settings. Phil mentioning how changing settings could make you miss a shot is very true.
So with JPG, is the speed good enough?
IMO Yes. The jpg speed is good enough (if you have a good compact flash card).
Now, it is no D200. I only get about 1/2 the shots I can with the D200, but I am not a spray and pray shooter. I like to pan with the subject and anticipate.
I shot the first show with a 2gig Ultra Sandisk II. The thing maxed out the buffer, and then I would switch to the D200. However, during the bebe show I shot 400+ shots from the moment the runway lit up until the finale. The camera never had to stop and think into the buffer with a PQI 2gig x120 speed CF.
I honestly wish that one of these cameras would give you an option on the viewfinder that would say "MODE HAS CHANGE? WB OK?" to warn you that your WB has changed. Little reminders wouldn't help. Even better, let you bank it into A,B,C,D with the different color and image settings you custom to.
Edited by Philip Cuenco on Mar 20, 2007 at 01:57 AM GMT
Liquidpics wrote:
What I'm seeing is a difference in white balance between the two cameras. I don't think I would be able to see any difference otherwise if the white balance was the same between the two. Plus, these images are tiny. Enlargements of 16x20 would give the D200 the upper hand. BTW- Great shots! That's what really matters!
My thoughts as well. I definitely liked the pics from the S5 better but with such a huge difference in color cast, the comparison can't really be made.
The S5 uses the D200 body and I assume MultiCam1000 as well. Did the OP notice any difference in focus between the two?
thanks for the post Philip. Really nice photos too. Is that Eva? She is just too much, but that's a different post.
I think its a master stroke of fuji to use the D200 body for the S5. The F80 was a good little camera in its own right (actually if you don't mind a lot of plastic, the F80 is just suburb, the results speak for themselves), but in my mind wasn't really semi-pro build. I'm sure fuji will sell a few of these if they are as good as you say, so if I was nikon I'd be a little bit annoyed, but at least they get to make some money on the lenses.
Hi Mark, yes it is Eva. Stalking does pay off. JK JK lol!
No but really, if anything, if this S5 could shoot as fast a D200 and show it's images just as fast to check up on, things would be golden. But for now, I am going to use the 2 to compliment each other.
Below are both images shot with a 2.8 lens. Both with Lumiquest bounce flashes aimed up.
Both cameras were PRE- WB off the background wall. Main lighting came from x2 honeycomb flourescents in the back.
This isn't an official test or anything. This is me, setting the camera to P* and taking as many shots as I can take in 2 minutes. I am sure I can sit there and toy with the WB. But unfortunately I don't have the novelty to ask the subjects to wait while I get my D200 WB properly lol. D200 color saturation was set to normal.
The thing is, I am only using D200 as example, because that is what I shoot with. And I want to show that the 2 definitely can work hand-in-hand for a job. If anything, this S5 should be image compared to a 5D, not the D200.
And not the brick wall, color wheel, focus chart tests lol. I like real scenario results.
Edited by Philip Cuenco on Mar 25, 2007 at 10:09 AM GMT
i wasn't there, but the pics from the D200 look more realistic to me. The S5 lacks any saturation although the effect is quite pleasing I guess (in this case). Light skinned subjects may end up looking very pasty with the S5 though (using these settings). Anyway, no right or wrong, depends what look you want.
