yeah, just an example. Saw your question and grabbed the camera. I am home as a single dad for the next few days while the wife is out of town, and this was literally the only thing that I could do with any kind of brighter background without pulling out any lights.
tgillespie wrote:
Looks solid. With the 5D3, I'd roll it +2 on EC and forfeit the background... which sucks. Or, move myself 45 degrees to change the light, but we're not afforded that luxury all of the time either. I'm not a huge fan of a high dynamic range in tight portraits, and more concerned about wider shots with skys... but I realize this is an example also. Thanks.
it only sucks if the background provides meaning
I carry a little stand with my flash and one hand my camera with 35 f2 IS. I'd sprinkle a little Hss ocf into the face for drama light and catch lights in the eyes. Also I'm noticing the shot is already ss 1/4000 (the max of the nikon 750) and f2.2 which is a real problem when you want wider aperture outdoors, you have to resort to using something like a ND filter. I appreciate that this is a sample also, but in the field I don't think I'd have the guts to shoot shots like this at iso 100 without flash - where on the review screen I had no clue how it would turn out in post. This in my opinion is why we don't see a lot of event samples where its on the line playing out. If I'm losing flash between the rapid shots, and I needed the dark shot, I'm thinking a more powerful flash or set of flashes with my odins that don't miss the sequence instead of switching systems
seriously, dude...you are critiquing something that I literally spend 20 seconds on from the time I picked up the camera to when I put it down...and this included the time it took to get my son into place. I am not debating the meaning of the background of the technique choices with shutter speed et al. I simply was posting something to shot how shadows can be pulled up. sheesh.
MAC wrote:
it only sucks if the background provides meaning
I carry a little stand with my flash and one hand my camera with 35 f2 IS. I'd sprinkle a little Hss ocf into the face for drama light and catch lights in the eyes. Also I'm noticing the shot is already ss 1/4000 (the max of the nikon 750) and f2.2 which is a real problem when you want wider aperture outdoors, you have to resort to using something like a ND filter. I appreciate that this is a sample also, but in the field I don't think I'd have the guts to shoot shots like this at iso 100 without flash - where on the review screen I had no clue how it would turn out in post. This in my opinion is why we don't see a lot of event samples where its on the line playing out. If I'm losing flash between the rapid shots, and I needed the dark shot, I'm thinking a more powerful flash or set of flashes with my odins that don't miss the sequence instead of switching systems ...Show more →
You're right MAC, but there are a lot of times I want to keep my sky in check. Blown out clouds look awful. I love shooting wide so I run into this quite a bit. As for the flash, in an ideal situation, that is doable, but you're going to need an assistant and a high powered flash to keep up with the flow of a wedding. If you're talking more along the lines of portraiture, then ya, recovering images isn't an issue when you're controlling the entire photo.
tgillespie wrote:
You're right MAC, but there are a lot of times I want to keep my sky in check. Blown out clouds look awful. I love shooting wide so I run into this quite a bit. As for the flash, in an ideal situation, that is doable, but you're going to need an assistant and a high powered flash to keep up with the flow of a wedding. If you're talking more along the lines of portraiture, then ya, recovering images isn't an issue when you're controlling the entire photo.
I hear you. I'm sure you'll find the new Canon's exposing better than ever before. I'm using the new 7d2 which has the new Canon exposure system that exposes better than the 1dx. I just also used the new anti flicker feature under Florescent lights and it worked as advertised to bring in more light when I was shooting iso 12,800 ss 1/400 and f2.8 for bball -- the new canon's will give good features - I expect the new 5d4 to have 1 stop better hi iso, no banding, and a better iso 100 noise floor. So be patient, the new cars are on there way this year
MAC wrote:
I carry a little stand with my flash and one hand my camera with 35 f2 IS. I'd sprinkle a little Hss ocf into the face for drama light and catch lights in the eyes.
two things. 1) do you have any photos of yourself doing this? 2) do you have any resulting images doing this? i just cant imagine doing that and getting 'in the moment' type shots.
using the d750 is a liberating experience. i was in a facebook debate earlier where a photographer friend of mine was talking about the virtues of constraints when embarking on an artistic endeavor. while i dont inherently disagree, I LOVE having almost NO constraints with the d750. I want a tool that will make my job as easy as possible. the d750 is doing that for me.
canerino wrote:
two things. 1) do you have any photos of yourself doing this? 2) do you have any resulting images doing this? i just cant imagine doing that and getting 'in the moment' type shots.
using the d750 is a liberating experience. i was in a facebook debate earlier where a photographer friend of mine was talking about the virtues of constraints when embarking on an artistic endeavor. while i dont inherently disagree, I LOVE having almost NO constraints with the d750. I want a tool that will make my job as easy as possible. the d750 is doing that for me. ...Show more →
Certainly you've seen photographers holding the flash stretched out in one arm and the camera in the other - in my case without a cord. Not for you. You're about no flash and that is fine. Be liberated. To each there own. I'm retired and enjoying other events with folks that enjoy my flash photos and sports shots. Many of us are still waiting to see a lot of event photos pushed 5 stops at iso 100/200
Certainly you've seen photographers holding the flash stretched out in one arm and the camera in the other - in my case without a cord. Not for you. You're about no flash and that is fine. Be liberated. To each there own. I'm retired and enjoying other events with folks that enjoy my flash photos and sports shots. Many of us are still waiting to see a lot of event photos pushed 5 stops at iso 100/200
sure, for an event photographer the d750 is a complete waste of money. grab a 5d classic for $400, throw on a flash with a fong diffuser and call it a day.
canerino wrote:
sure, for an event photographer the d750 is a complete waste of money. grab a 5d classic for $400, throw on a flash with a fong diffuser and call it a day.
never said that...in fact the lower cost nikon primes are better at this point imo - see below
never used tupperware here. don't own a 5dc. using ocf in events and weaving in videos and photos, music I have rights to, with premiere and pro show producer for clients in my retirement with no worries about customer satisfaction, because they know I've delivered for decades.
the d750 is a great camera with the 85 1.8 g and the 28 1.8 g without flash at hi iso
but the subject that is being talked about is DR which isn't a Nikon advantage after iso 400.
based on what I'm seeing with my 7d2, which I use for university and children's sports, the 7d2 is only 1 stop in high iso below the 5d3. the 7d2 is 2 stops better at hi iso than the old 7d. And 7d2 has no banding and a great exposure system. When experts extrapolate the sensor CMOS optimization that Canon has done, they predict a 5d4 that will be 1 stop better in high iso than the 5d3 and have no banding, and once again take the hi iso lead over the Nikon. This will again be even more liberating for non-flash shooters at high iso. The new Canon's cross types will also be better than Nikons. What Canon needs to do though is 1) put IS in their 135 f2, 2) release a new $500 updated 85 1.8 IS. 3) Release a new 50 f1.8 IS. The 35 f2 IS is already solid and lets me one hand it.
Both Nikon and Canon can do the job. Canon has lowered the price to $2549. Switching can be hard. I believe patience for Canon users may pay off by fall. If not, then more will "liberate". As I said, to each their own.
I think Joel's photo of his son says it all — you either get it or you don't. But could someone now please change the name of the thread to "D750 thoughts"
This is definitely cool. My thoughts. The shots to me almost seem HDR to a certain extent. Borderline overdone. I get the desired effect but digital cameras today (all of them) are getting to the point where they are starting to look a touch fake to me. I think people also get the wrong idea about using the features. The link you provided they are very deliberate and have a system to underexpose and bring it back which is fine but I think a lot of people just think F it I am going to forego proper exposure and technique and just fix it later.
Also as far as editing goes you know as well as me that having to do that for more than a few shots gets crazy time consuming and frustrating on the editing side.
The look could be achieved with film via lighting, split ND's etc. but the difference is with film (back in the day) people did one or two shots and were done. Everything done in camera and maybe a touch more in printing. Now we have the ability to take thousands of photos like crazy and then it leaves the person just glued to the computer editing. Maybe not a bad thing just an evolution of the craft.
I am somewhat torn about all this. Things are changing and that is that but as an editor the more that can be done in camera the easier things are IMO.
hardlyboring wrote:
This is definitely cool. My thoughts. The shots to me almost seem HDR to a certain extent. Borderline overdone. I get the desired effect but digital cameras today (all of them) are getting to the point where they are starting to look a touch fake to me. I think people also get the wrong idea about using the features. The link you provided they are very deliberate and have a system to underexpose and bring it back which is fine but I think a lot of people just think F it I am going to forego proper exposure and technique and just fix it later.
Also as far as editing goes you know as well as me that having to do that for more than a few shots gets crazy time consuming and frustrating on the editing side.
The look could be achieved with film via lighting, split ND's etc. but the difference is with film (back in the day) people did one or two shots and were done. Everything done in camera and maybe a touch more in printing. Now we have the ability to take thousands of photos like crazy and then it leaves the person just glued to the computer editing. Maybe not a bad thing just an evolution of the craft.
I am somewhat torn about all this. Things are changing and that is that but as an editor the more that can be done in camera the easier things are IMO. ...Show more →
Same feelings here. Its nice to have the range on occasion, but its too time consuming and ugly looking to shoot an entire session/event with it in mind. A few of the photos in the Peta article are solid, but most of them are attempting to turn flat light into something it isn't. If you show the photo of the two men to clients, they might think its cool, but even they know its been 'shopped'.
hardlyboring wrote:
This is definitely cool. My thoughts. The shots to me almost seem HDR to a certain extent. Borderline overdone. I get the desired effect but digital cameras today (all of them) are getting to the point where they are starting to look a touch fake to me. I think people also get the wrong idea about using the features. The link you provided they are very deliberate and have a system to underexpose and bring it back which is fine but I think a lot of people just think F it I am going to forego proper exposure and technique and just fix it later.
Also as far as editing goes you know as well as me that having to do that for more than a few shots gets crazy time consuming and frustrating on the editing side.
The look could be achieved with film via lighting, split ND's etc. but the difference is with film (back in the day) people did one or two shots and were done. Everything done in camera and maybe a touch more in printing. Now we have the ability to take thousands of photos like crazy and then it leaves the person just glued to the computer editing. Maybe not a bad thing just an evolution of the craft.
I am somewhat torn about all this. Things are changing and that is that but as an editor the more that can be done in camera the easier things are IMO. ...Show more →
The colour information does start to fall apart just not as quickly as most other cameras. Pushed hard it is always going to look fake but people often like to take things to extremes however processed the result; tech gives us new tools but not with baked in restraint.
Andrew Welsh wrote:
Another big barrier to switching... Nikon NPS suuuuuuuucks compared to Canon's CPS (weeks to get stuff back, terrible service record, way more $$$, have to be Ansel Adams to get in, etc). I like knowing that if I happen to break my stuff on a Saturday, I send it in and have back in my hands by Thursday. And they pay the shipping.
NPS has definitely had problems in recent years but turn around has not been one of them at lease for me. I generally get stuff back in a week or less. Last Thursday shipped two 70-200 f2.8 for cleaning and servicing and got them back at 8:30 am this morning.
