Wow, that top is so hawt
Thought I'd get creative with a Death-Metal band. No brick walls, railroad tracks, or cemeteries allowed!
The photography thread
- Thread starter kramer1309
- Start date
Wow, that top is so hawt
Potshot
Member
Hey dude, I just read your post and I thought I'd chime in as I was in the exact same position, had a hacked GH2 with a voigtlander 17.5 for video and got an OMD for better photos, ended up selling it all and getting a D600 with a 50 1.4, had the accursed brutal oil splatter/dust problem and got the absolute shits with it, ended up selling that lot and getting a 5DmkIII, a 50 1.8 and a 24-70 2.8 L.
I have tried a friends 6D and I find the AF system atrocious, it's really much like using a 5DmkII and focus/recomposing a lot, perfectly fine if that's your style, though having gotten used to the brutal AF, especially the tracking ability on the mkIII, I could never be without it, super handy for chasing musicians around with on stage. Another thing to consider is the buffer and continuous burst speed, the 6D is 4.5fps and craps out after about 8 RAW shots, whereas the mkIII is 6fps and you get around 17-18 to CF, I find it's limited to about 13 on SD. IIRC the D600 was 5.5, and I think it managed about 12 as well.
The D600 had much better dynamic range than the 5DmkIII, could pull shadow detail up from hideously underexposed photos and have them come out looking fine, was really quite an exceptional stills camera, unfortunately marred by poor QC issues for me.
The mkIII has much less DR and has really forced me to expose correctly, pulling up shadow detail even a couple of stops from base ISO images often results in a lot of nasty colour noise.
The 50 1.8 is a fantastic lens, one of the absolute sharpest you will ever get, feels like a toy, but awesome images from it, tack sharp! Even still with the faster aperture on the 50, the 24-70 rarely leaves my camera, pretty much covers all the range I want for general stuff, sometimes I wish it had a bit more width but I'm going to grab a Samyang 14mm and then I should be quite happy.
Anyway, in my experience all 3 cameras are fantastic at low light, high ISO performance is great on all of them. I've run into no issues focusing in very poor light with the mkIII, but the D600 really struggled quite a lot without the AF beam.
I'd suggest save up the extra and go the mkIII, if you don't mind looking at grey import stock you can get them at a fairly reasonable price, and Canon USA seem to do refurbed stock with full warranty for about $600 less than usual every other month.
Having said that, the images you take with each camera are not going to be any different with the equivalent glass, you're really paying extra for the experience of the process to be a lot smoother and less limiting. Good luck!
I have tried a friends 6D and I find the AF system atrocious, it's really much like using a 5DmkII and focus/recomposing a lot, perfectly fine if that's your style, though having gotten used to the brutal AF, especially the tracking ability on the mkIII, I could never be without it, super handy for chasing musicians around with on stage. Another thing to consider is the buffer and continuous burst speed, the 6D is 4.5fps and craps out after about 8 RAW shots, whereas the mkIII is 6fps and you get around 17-18 to CF, I find it's limited to about 13 on SD. IIRC the D600 was 5.5, and I think it managed about 12 as well.
The D600 had much better dynamic range than the 5DmkIII, could pull shadow detail up from hideously underexposed photos and have them come out looking fine, was really quite an exceptional stills camera, unfortunately marred by poor QC issues for me.
The mkIII has much less DR and has really forced me to expose correctly, pulling up shadow detail even a couple of stops from base ISO images often results in a lot of nasty colour noise.
The 50 1.8 is a fantastic lens, one of the absolute sharpest you will ever get, feels like a toy, but awesome images from it, tack sharp! Even still with the faster aperture on the 50, the 24-70 rarely leaves my camera, pretty much covers all the range I want for general stuff, sometimes I wish it had a bit more width but I'm going to grab a Samyang 14mm and then I should be quite happy.
Anyway, in my experience all 3 cameras are fantastic at low light, high ISO performance is great on all of them. I've run into no issues focusing in very poor light with the mkIII, but the D600 really struggled quite a lot without the AF beam.
I'd suggest save up the extra and go the mkIII, if you don't mind looking at grey import stock you can get them at a fairly reasonable price, and Canon USA seem to do refurbed stock with full warranty for about $600 less than usual every other month.
Having said that, the images you take with each camera are not going to be any different with the equivalent glass, you're really paying extra for the experience of the process to be a lot smoother and less limiting. Good luck!
Kalapuikko
Kuru
Tried my girlfriends camera yesterday, it was basically the first time I had someone to show what all the settings do and taking pictures without "auto-everything". I really liked it! We came up to this stream in the middle of the countryside and I tried taking a couple of shots, heres one of them:
Looking at the pics what you guys have shot is also really inspiring as well, I gotta start practicing.
I really liked it! We came up to this stream in the middle of the countryside and I tried taking a couple of shots, heres one of them:
Looking at the pics what you guys have shot is also really inspiring as well, I gotta start practicing.
I actually ended up going with the 6D. I've always used a camera with a small amount of focus points, so I'm not really missing a lot personally with it. The extra AF point spread would definitely be cool, but for the price I paid for the 6D, I really couldn't justify the extra cost of the 5D3 or D800. I could buy 2 nice L series lenses with the price difference, which is a better use of the money right now IMO. In time (once more hit the used market and prices aren't so close to new), I might eventually upgrade to the 5D3, but I'm pretty happy with the 6D for now. I really couldn't afford the 5D3 either way, it was really either the 5D2 or 6D when it came down to a decision, and feature wise, it just had to be the 6D.
ISO performance on this thing is insane. I went camping this weekend and took it with me - I ended up shooting quite a few shots in low light around the campfire and the results were ridiculous. My cameras before were barely usable past ISO 800... I tried shooting at 26,500 on the 6D and the grain is nearly equal to what I was used to on my XSi at ISO 400
Now... my hacked GH1 took great video, but shooting video on the 6D is just so much easier, and it looks amazing without any editing at all. Quite impressed! 720p at 60fps is pretty cool when you're filming fire
Nice! It's always a good thing to invest more in better glass. And that ISO performance sounds really awesome.
My Nikon D5100 does a great job at ISO3200, but ISO6400 is already too much. In regular situations i never felt the need for more then 11 AF points ... but the "focus and re-compose tactic" is not working ideally for concerts so i might want/need a better body for that.
My Nikon D5100 does a great job at ISO3200, but ISO6400 is already too much. In regular situations i never felt the need for more then 11 AF points ... but the "focus and re-compose tactic" is not working ideally for concerts so i might want/need a better body for that.
Potshot
Member
Yeah dude, good choice if you are happy with the AF system, lenses will make all the difference. As far as I'm concerned it really doesn't matter what body you shoot with as long as you have good glass on it, you won't be disappointed with the 6D!
I actually ended up going with the 6D. I've always used a camera with a small amount of focus points, so I'm not really missing a lot personally with it. The extra AF point spread would definitely be cool, but for the price I paid for the 6D, I really couldn't justify the extra cost of the 5D3 or D800. I could buy 2 nice L series lenses with the price difference, which is a better use of the money right now IMO. In time (once more hit the used market and prices aren't so close to new), I might eventually upgrade to the 5D3, but I'm pretty happy with the 6D for now. I really couldn't afford the 5D3 either way, it was really either the 5D2 or 6D when it came down to a decision, and feature wise, it just had to be the 6D.
ISO performance on this thing is insane. I went camping this weekend and took it with me - I ended up shooting quite a few shots in low light around the campfire and the results were ridiculous. My cameras before were barely usable past ISO 800... I tried shooting at 26,500 on the 6D and the grain is nearly equal to what I was used to on my XSi at ISO 400
Now... my hacked GH1 took great video, but shooting video on the 6D is just so much easier, and it looks amazing without any editing at all. Quite impressed! 720p at 60fps is pretty cool when you're filming fire
Soundlurker
Member
- Nov 19, 2005
- 3,730
- 0
- 36
LeSedna
Mat or Mateo
Gorgeous! Really professional shot. How did you make the background brown? Split-toning in Lightroom, selective color in Photoshop, or?
Soundlurker
Member
- Nov 19, 2005
- 3,730
- 0
- 36
grywolf627
Member
I don't want to post a ton of pictures here, but if anyone is interested, I have quite a few of my pics from our trip to Romania last month on my Flickr photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/35570017@N07/
Here's a couple of pics:
Here's a couple of pics:
LeSedna
Mat or Mateo
Glenn Fricker
Very Metal &Very Bad News
What are you shooting with Glenn (camera, lenses, settings)? There is something weird going on with some of your pictures. They are in focus, have great lighting and most parts seem sharp ... but they don't look "clean". It looks like you got a lot of Chromatic aberration which is probably caused by your lens?
There is nothing wrong, ugly or bad with your pictures ... it just fucks my brain because i'm really anal about image quality.
There is nothing wrong, ugly or bad with your pictures ... it just fucks my brain because i'm really anal about image quality.
Glenn Fricker
Very Metal &Very Bad News
My stills camera is a Canon 60d... the space I'm shooting the calendar shots in is somewhat confined, so I'm using a Nikon AI 20mm f4. I've got a thing for vintage primes, and the Nikon 20 really has some character to it. Don't mistake it for modern glass.
Not too bad with the distortions, as I'm shooting on an APS-C sensor, so it's "straight down the middle" of the glass. But, if you're seeing CA, I'd love to know how to spot it. Bear in mind, I'm partially color blind, so spotting subtle purple/green fringing is damn difficult.
On the other hand, it could be Model Mayhem re-sampling the image.. I'm noticing a bit of "posterization" in the skin tones... I've reuploaded the first pic in my last post to my own page... that might clean it up a bit... or not.
Got another shoot coming up in a few weeks... I'm going to try out some of my Super Takumars.
My Black background stuff was shot on the same camera with the Canon 35mm f2... it's razor f'n sharp & probably would have been an "L" series if the motor wasn't so damn noisy
Not too bad with the distortions, as I'm shooting on an APS-C sensor, so it's "straight down the middle" of the glass. But, if you're seeing CA, I'd love to know how to spot it. Bear in mind, I'm partially color blind, so spotting subtle purple/green fringing is damn difficult.
On the other hand, it could be Model Mayhem re-sampling the image.. I'm noticing a bit of "posterization" in the skin tones... I've reuploaded the first pic in my last post to my own page... that might clean it up a bit... or not.
Got another shoot coming up in a few weeks... I'm going to try out some of my Super Takumars.
My Black background stuff was shot on the same camera with the Canon 35mm f2... it's razor f'n sharp & probably would have been an "L" series if the motor wasn't so damn noisy
arv_foh
Brian K
My stills camera is a Canon 60d... the space I'm shooting the calendar shots in is somewhat confined, so I'm using a Nikon AI 20mm f4. I've got a thing for vintage primes, and the Nikon 20 really has some character to it. Don't mistake it for modern glass.
Not too bad with the distortions, as I'm shooting on an APS-C sensor, so it's "straight down the middle" of the glass. But, if you're seeing CA, I'd love to know how to spot it. Bear in mind, I'm partially color blind, so spotting subtle purple/green fringing is damn difficult.
On the other hand, it could be Model Mayhem re-sampling the image.. I'm noticing a bit of "posterization" in the skin tones... I've reuploaded the first pic in my last post to my own page... that might clean it up a bit... or not.
Got another shoot coming up in a few weeks... I'm going to try out some of my Super Takumars.
My Black background stuff was shot on the same camera with the Canon 35mm f2... it's razor f'n sharp & probably would have been an "L" series if the motor wasn't so damn noisy
It occurs mostly in outdoor stuff where you have subjects against sky, I circled bad areas of chromatic aberration in your above image, I'm sure it's not that noticeable in your original images but your post production and what is done with the saturation makes it immensely worse. It is a phenomenon that occurs any time you use curved glass so any lens has it, just some lenses are a lot worse than others depending on the quality and the amount of curvature of the glass (fisheye is especially bad for obvious reasons)
There is purple CR in the bracelet, the hair is almost pure purple, there is red CR along the arm and hand that make it look over saturated. There is cyan and purple CR in the trees. The bushes have really bad cyan CR, the car has purple/green CR. There are a couple more areas I just marked the ones that are particularly bad.
I'm not sure if it's your monitor is not correctly calibrated or what, but your skin tones in some of your images are so over saturated to the point that your models look sunburnt.
I use a tool called DXO Optics Pro to remove CR from my images.
Hope this helps!
Glenn Fricker
Very Metal &Very Bad News
Thanks for the help! Yeah, that's the Canon 35.... hmm maybe I should step it up a bit & use a 50.
FWIW, that's a shot from a year ago & I was just getting the hang of post-processing. I've really backed off the color saturation in the last month or so & been trying to work at it almost every day. the newer "white background" stuff has very little color enhancement going on...
But thank you for pointing out where to look. I never realized how bad that 35 was... hmm.... maybe I'll use my Super Tak 35 f3.5. instead.
FWIW, that's a shot from a year ago & I was just getting the hang of post-processing. I've really backed off the color saturation in the last month or so & been trying to work at it almost every day. the newer "white background" stuff has very little color enhancement going on...
But thank you for pointing out where to look. I never realized how bad that 35 was... hmm.... maybe I'll use my Super Tak 35 f3.5. instead.
Ah, being color blind sucks ... but CA also happens in black and white (film) photography.
The purple/green fringing is not really bothering me, but its more the blur on the image. Like the picture with the girl and the drums, the left feet of the tom stand is blurred.
Luckily CA can be fixed with some tools, but i don't have experience with that. And i can imagine it's a bit problematic to fix something you can't see due to your color blindness.
But i can see your love for vintage old primes. I still have a old Minolta camera i use for shooting film with a 28mm, 50mm and 135mm prime. Sadly it doesn't get enough use
Glenn Fricker
Very Metal &Very Bad News
Ah, being color blind sucks ... but CA also happens in black and white (film) photography.
The purple/green fringing is not really bothering me, but its more the blur on the image. Like the picture with the girl and the drums, the left feet of the tom stand is blurred.
Luckily CA can be fixed with some tools, but i don't have experience with that. And i can imagine it's a bit problematic to fix something you can't see due to your color blindness.
But i can see your love for vintage old primes. I still have a old Minolta camera i use for shooting film with a 28mm, 50mm and 135mm prime. Sadly it doesn't get enough use
Ah! The issue with the stand isn't the lens. ... its the brush tool I was using to brighten the background! It's got a bit of a "soft edge". Maybe less feathering will clear that up.
StefTD
Member
Would love to get .raws from some of you guys, I just got a new PC and screen and
started working with CS6 so it would be cool to play around with photos of someone
else.
Really digging to work with color looks and stuff at the moment, got only photos of my
gf at the moment and a friend of mine, and both don't want them to get posted here...
But I may get the chance to try a friends Mark III with his 2 new lenses and a friend of
him wants to get into modelling, so if that works out, I am gonna post some shots.
Too bad that she already pointed out that we're not allowed to shoot her naked
started working with CS6 so it would be cool to play around with photos of someone
else.
Really digging to work with color looks and stuff at the moment, got only photos of my
gf at the moment and a friend of mine, and both don't want them to get posted here...
But I may get the chance to try a friends Mark III with his 2 new lenses and a friend of
him wants to get into modelling, so if that works out, I am gonna post some shots.
Too bad that she already pointed out that we're not allowed to shoot her naked
