Art Wolf is a good example. He shoots Canon with zoom lenses. When asked about what camera or lens is the best he says he doesn't deal with those technical issues. He avoids any direct answers. For anyone who doesn't know who Art Wolf is. .. . . http://artwolfe.com/http://artwolfe.com/2014/10/16/whats-in-arts-bag/ "Wolfe has released more than 65 photo books and instructional videos of photographic techniques." Wikipedia
Agree, but, there are some folks who I think deserve some attention, the ones who shoot outstanding images, the ones some of us try to emulate in our own work.
On this thread and on any thread which is critical of someone, I hope the idea is to stimulate thinking, not to actually denigrate another individual.
His Christmas card shots were taken with a D3200...?? Clearly he is going to support Canon ..they sell more cameras and he gets commission from his approved suppliers. He is not a millionaire because he is stupid. For me a camera must have its on off switch by the release, have two cards, no AA filter ,fine focus adjust and at least 24 mp. DX is better for weddings due to more DOF, Better light sensitivity with a FX is cancelled out by the need to stop down more.
His Christmas card shots were taken with a D3200...?? He is not a millionaire because he is stupid.
He can't be that stupid... he knew to use a Nikon instead of a Canon to take important shots :P
DX is better for weddings due to more DOF, Better light sensitivity with a FX is cancelled out by the need to stop down more.
To me its the dang shutter. The shutter on the 7K series is so much louder than the 810. On the other hand, maybe the shutter bang of the 7100/7200 adds to the ambiance of a shotgun wedding
Ha ha both of you ...I made a mistake and changed to a D810 and its only advantagve is it is quiet which is good ..my wife still uses a D7100 from the back of the church. More expensive(less profit) heavy with a 28-300 and less DOF but we carry on.
You use a 28-300 with a D810 ? Yes, I can see why you don't think there is any benefit. DOF *control* is an *advantage* - helps to melt those backgrounds away and gives 3D pop to images.
You use a 28-300 with a D810 ? Yes, I can see why you don't think there is any benefit. DOF *control* is an *advantage* - helps to melt those backgrounds away and gives 3D pop to images.
DOF control and the advantage that a fast lens can give you is clearly an artistic advantage. However, you run the risk of missing focus on important shots due to the limited DOF. Based on what I have read from Pistnbroke, I doubt that many of his clients care and/or appreciate the benefits of this artistic advantage.
Yes but sadly you don't understand the customer who does not understand out of focus backgrounds as they are normally looking at mobile phone images...I am there to take the images they want and have paid me for not to get into a lot of hassle or to educate them. Your way is your way and mine is mine ,neither is right but its wrong to poke fun when you don't understand my work.
I hope you don't think it was me poking fun at you? I was quite serious. Artistic advantage is clearly in the eye of the beholder. My objective was to acknowledge your razor sharp focus on your clients without being distracted by "art", whatever "art" is.
Since I have no real clients, I can focus on my "art", which can involve fuzzy backgrounds or not.
And another comment on the "fuzzy background". A fuzzy background that does not make the subject pop with a 3d effect often leaves me wanting.
I used to get angry when I first moved from crop to full frame for the missed focus of subjects (the dof on a FF shot at 200 2.8 is really thin). But then I got better and better with the full frame focus and now I love the images for the subject isolation as it is noticeable what comes off a professional camera and what can be shot with a iPhone. I would still shoot with background blur if I had the option even if the clients don't appreciate it, maybe one of their house guests might and that could be enough for a referral.
Differential focus is ok on a few shots once the essentials are in the bag, but more than that and well, you've misjudged the job. Referrals come mainly from the bride and her mother.
Rockwell Smockwell. Get a Sony 7xxx, an adapter, and the best glass you can find from any manufacturer and take some pictures! Fa gid abou KR. For that matter Fa gid abou Canon Nikon and even Sony for their limited lens selection. I do use his site to research older Nikon lenses when considering a legacy Nikon lens purchase (f2.8 35-70 & 80-200 zooms currently bought used localy).
Rockwell Smockwell. Get a Sony 7xxx, an adapter, and the best glass you can find from any manufacturer and take some pictures! Fa gid abou KR. For that matter Fa gid abou Canon Nikon and even Sony for their limited lens selection. I do use his site to research older Nikon lenses when considering a legacy Nikon lens purchase (f2.8 35-70 & 80-200 zooms currently bought used localy).
Rockwell Smockwell. Get a Sony 7xxx, an adapter, and the best glass you can find from any manufacturer and take some pictures! Fa gid abou KR. For that matter Fa gid abou Canon Nikon and even Sony for their limited lens selection. I do use his site to research older Nikon lenses when considering a legacy Nikon lens purchase (f2.8 35-70 & 80-200 zooms currently bought used localy).
Differential focus is ok on a few shots once the essentials are in the bag, but more than that and well, you've misjudged the job. Referrals come mainly from the bride and her mother.
I agree. The point is that event photographers generally don't often have the luxury of time to compose and focus a nice "artsy-fartsy" shot. If you miss the focus on a photo of the cake being cut, or the "you may kiss the bride" moment, or you take a great pic of the couple, but "why is aunt Susie so blurry in the background?" A once in a lifetime event is no time for artistic creativity, most people want to document the event. The exception to this is if you have more than one photographer, one of you can be a bit more creative, but not both.
I started out with Nikon cameras, I own Nikon, Sony, and Fuji cameras now. Instead of Nikon focusing its digital technology on high-end, niche markets, like Kodak did, Nikon needs to focus on the market desire for mirror-less technology and cameras. Simple advantages of smaller lighter weight cameras, less moving parts, and high quality imaging are what consumers and professionals want. I think the only thing holding Sony in check is the not so intuitive menu system their cameras have. If Sony combined their technology and designs with Fuji's X-T1's photographer intuitive controls, buying a Nikon (or Canon) would become a rare Kodak moment.
Of course in the mind of Nikon and Canon executives serious users don't use crop cameras, so good luck with that. Not saying I agree, but unless people can change the top brasses mind, nothing will change.
Post edited by PB_PM on
If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
For myself image quality and field reliability are paramount at the expense of comparative conveniences. I try to stay open to recommendations of pro users not just testers, and those who work systems "in the field". Brad Hill, Diglloyd, Ming Thein, and Steve Huff (along with Nikon PS and Ambassador) sites have provided enough perspective for me to know that Sony does not produce a product that would suit me, at least not at this point, and the DR and accuracy of color in the Nikon 810 still runs ahead of the pack. On the other hand, I tend to steer away from Zeiss because of the lack of autofocus which for me is a necessity. I recently used an 85mm Milvus and found the manual focus frustrating. Without LV the lens is useless IMHO and in the field I don't have time to mess with LV most of the time.
You may see bias on any one of these sites due simply to their receiving higher commission rates for certain products, or the simple economics of selling new product the result of their own adoption. Huff shifted from Leica to Sony and many of his fan club have followed the pied piper. Yet, he, like Ken, do offer hands-on results of Leica, or Nikon/Canon which is enough to satisfy me.
By the way, check out David Yarrow's website for unique images of African wildlife using Nikon pro lenses. Stunning stuff and his favorite lens is the Nikon 35mm f1.4g which is maligned by many compared to the Sigma. But look at the results.
Comments
In contrast Thomas Mangelson uses Nikon gear: http://blog.creativelive.com/tom-mangelsen-gear-guide/ Thom also says that any brand of gear is ok.
Agree, but, there are some folks who I think deserve some attention, the ones who shoot outstanding images, the ones some of us try to emulate in our own work.
On this thread and on any thread which is critical of someone, I hope the idea is to stimulate thinking, not to actually denigrate another individual.
Clearly he is going to support Canon ..they sell more cameras and he gets commission from his approved suppliers. He is not a millionaire because he is stupid.
For me a camera must have its on off switch by the release, have two cards, no AA filter ,fine focus adjust and at least 24 mp. DX is better for weddings due to more DOF, Better light sensitivity with a FX is cancelled out by the need to stop down more.
More expensive(less profit) heavy with a 28-300 and less DOF but we carry on.
Your way is your way and mine is mine ,neither is right but its wrong to poke fun when you don't understand my work.
Since I have no real clients, I can focus on my "art", which can involve fuzzy backgrounds or not.
Canon and Nikon have a limited lens selection?
They are all excellent, but the 90 F2 and the 56 F1.2 are game changers.
... H
Nikon N90s, F100, F, lots of Leica M digital and film stuff.
You may see bias on any one of these sites due simply to their receiving higher commission rates for certain products, or the simple economics of selling new product the result of their own adoption. Huff shifted from Leica to Sony and many of his fan club have followed the pied piper. Yet, he, like Ken, do offer hands-on results of Leica, or Nikon/Canon which is enough to satisfy me.
By the way, check out David Yarrow's website for unique images of African wildlife using Nikon pro lenses. Stunning stuff and his favorite lens is the Nikon 35mm f1.4g which is maligned by many compared to the Sigma. But look at the results.
PDM