 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / December 2006Canon's 5D. Does shallow DOF ever hamper what you do?
I thought about this after a wedding photography complained that his 5D was causing problems and that a smaller sensored camera offering better DOF for a given lens setting got him more usable shots more often. > I thought about this after a wedding photography complained that his 5D > was causing problems and that a smaller sensored camera offering better > DOF for a given lens setting got him more usable shots more often. Use a higher f/number, not that hard really. Scott > Use a higher f/number, not that hard really. Might not be possible if you are doing indoors avaliable light shots. cheers adrian www.boliston.co.uk > > Use a higher f/number, not that hard really. > > Might not be possible if you are doing indoors avaliable light shots. But the 5D has much lower noise and so you can boost its ISO, this has been gone over many times, the math works out that there is no advantage to a smaller sensor in terms of greater DOF. Scott >>"Scott W" <biphoto@hotmail.com> wrote >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > has been gone over many times, the math works out that there is no > advantage to a smaller sensor in terms of greater DOF. Scroll down on this page to "Discussion: Another Way to Look at the Problem" http://www.clarkvision.com/photoinfo/dof_myth/ The example is two identical cameras, one is miniaturized to half the size... the larger camera captures more photons so it's aperture can be stopped down 2 stops and the ISO can boosted 2 stops for the same exposure time and same signal to noise ratio as the small camera. In the real world though, with the same lens on a 5D & a 20D the 5D would not be able to stop down any more than the same lens is capable of and the 20D would not be able to open up any further so you'd need a different lens to get comparable results. You'd want a wider faster lens for the 20D and a longer slower lens with a tighter aperture range for the 5D to equalize things. So for macro work for example, my 105 micro nikkor stops down to f/45 and I don't think you can get a 150mm macro lens that stops down to f/80 or whatever that works out to. On the other hand if you want to do wide angle shooting with shallow DOF, the 5D would 'outperform' a 20D, like say a 28mm f/1.4 you simply would not be able to find an 18mm f/1.0 lens. > In the real world though, with the same lens on a 5D & a 20D the 5D > would not be able to stop down any more than the same lens is capable of [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > would 'outperform' a 20D, like say a 28mm f/1.4 you simply would not be > able to find an 18mm f/1.0 lens. The problem is that if you stop a lens down to f/16 or more diffraction blurs the photo to the extent that you would not be happy with it. The problem is that if you stop a lens down to f/16 or more diffraction blurs the photo to the extent that you would not be happy with it. If I need more DOF then I can get at f/16 I will most often just go with a shorter focal length lens. Scott > > In the real world though, with the same lens on a 5D & a 20D the 5D > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > I need more DOF then I can get at f/16 I will most often just go with a > shorter focal length lens. OK in this case the larger format has the advantage because the cropped format is diffraction limited quicker than the large format. Here's a good calculator & discussion: http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography.htm I figured two scenarios: 1.6 crop 10MP dSLR becomes diffraction limited by f/16 full frame 10MP dSLR becomes diffraction limited by f/32 This had not occurred to me. I don't think a shorter lens will change anything though. Hmm, another good description from that site: http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/depth-of-field.htm "*Note: We describe depth of field as being virtually constant because there are limiting cases where this does not hold true. For focal distances resulting in high magnification, or very near the hyperfocal distance, wide angle lenses may provide a greater DoF than telephoto lenses. On the other hand, for situations of high magnification the traditional DoF calculation becomes inaccurate due to another factor: pupil magnification. This actually acts to offset the DoF advantage for most wide angle lenses, and increase it for telephoto and macro lenses. At the other limiting case, near the hyperfocal distance, the increase in DoF arises because the wide angle lens has a greater rear DoF, and can thus more easily attain critical sharpness at infinity for any given focal distance." >> > In the real world though, with the same lens on a 5D & a 20D the 5D >> [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > This had not occurred to me. Hmm, I think I was mistaken though. The larger format needs a higher f-stop to achive the same DOF so I'm guessing it's a wash again. The only real advantage (pushing the limits) to the larger format is if you are on a tripod and can afford longer exposures without boosting ISO then you get less noise & more dynamic range. This is an advantage for sure, and a good reminder to myself to use a tripod more often or I'm just about as well off with a P&S digital. > Hmm, I think I was mistaken though. The larger format needs a higher > f-stop to achive the same DOF so I'm guessing it's a wash again. The [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > sure, and a good reminder to myself to use a tripod more often or I'm > just about as well off with a P&S digital. Well it is a wash if you need the same DOF. But if you can live with or want the smaller DOF of say f/4 on the 5D a point and shoot is out of the running, to get the same DOF it would have to be shooting at somthing like f/1, which most don't. Scott > Hmm, I think I was mistaken though. The larger format needs a higher > f-stop to achive the same DOF so I'm guessing it's a wash again. The [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > sure, and a good reminder to myself to use a tripod more often or I'm > just about as well off with a P&S digital. You're right, for the same number of megapixels, two different-sized sensors become diffraction-limited at exactly the same DOF (ie at different f/stops such that the DOF is the same). There was a long and tedious thread some time ago which was title something like "a step backward" where I posted photos of calculations I did demonstrating this (amongst other things). Or you can just look up the various eqns for DOF and do it yourself, it's not hard. > > In the real world though, with the same lens on a 5D & a 20D the 5D >> would not be able to stop down any more than the same lens is capable of [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Scott There I'd have to disagree with you. I've never seen diffraction as a problem for 35mm equipment. Matt Clara wrote:> > There I'd have to disagree with you. I've never seen diffraction as a > problem for 35mm equipment. Note Paul was talking about f/numbers in the range of f/45, if you don't see a problem at f/45 then you are getting from very soft photos indeed. I see a noticeable softer image at f/16 then I do at f/8 and if I shoot at f/22 it is getting softer then I am willing to deal with. Scott > Matt Clara wrote:> > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > I see a noticeable softer image at f/16 then I do at f/8 and if I shoot > at f/22 it is getting softer then I am willing to deal with. I think that's just due to limitations of the lens, not even diffraction yet. At least according to the calculations on that page I linked, for a 10MP 1.6 crop sensor diffraction only just begins to have an impact at f/16, and given antialiasing & bayer filters it might not be significant till stopped down quite a bit more. For macro work, (or even some landscapes) one sometimes cares more about getting the entire subject in focus more than fine detail sharpness. With macro work, the DOF becomes impossibly narrow so some compromises are often very worthwhile. With landscapes, one sometimes wants impossibly large DOF so it's worthwhile there too although landscapes are more often printed huge where it doesn't look so great. >> Matt Clara wrote:> >> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >wants impossibly large DOF so it's worthwhile there too although >landscapes are more often printed huge where it doesn't look so great. I mostly agree, at least as far as landscape work is concerned. However, there is one factor which is often overlooked, especially relevant to macro work. The diffraction effect is governed by effective aperture, not the figure marked on the lens. N(effective) = N(marked)*(1+m), where m is the magnification. Thus a 1:1 shot at a marked f/32 is actually taken at an effective f/64, and shows diffraction accordingly. This would limit resolution to about 22-24 lp/mm, enough to show a marked degradation on a medium sized print. David  SignatureDavid Littlewood > > I thought about this after a wedding photography complained that his 5D > > was causing problems and that a smaller sensored camera offering better [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Scott Here's the actual argument: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1022&thread=21384083 > Here's the actual argument: > > http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1022&thread=21384083 Thanks for posting the link. I must say that all those pictures taken with the E-1 have some appalling bokeh. If this pea-brain idiot likes those images he's got a screw loose. Even with the E-1 it seems like he's struggling with focusing issues. No surprise the 5D is giving him problems. The boy simply needs to learn how to start shooting full manual. Master the aperture ring and the focusing ring before releasing the damn shutter. From what I see there is no argument since it's evident he's mindlessly blasting away full auto. So, what was your point again, Rich? I find absolutely nothing wrong with the 5D with the proper glass attached. Rita >> Here's the actual argument: >> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > away full auto. So, what was your point again, Rich? I find absolutely > nothing wrong with the 5D with the proper glass attached. I liked the guy who said people shoot in ""P"(rofessional) = wide open, instead of choosing the DOF themselves." That sort tells me where he's at, at least. "P" is "Professional?" SignatureSkip Middleton www.shadowcatcherimagery.com www.pbase.com/skipm > I liked the guy who said people shoot in ""P"(rofessional) = wide open, > instead of choosing the DOF themselves." That sort tells me where he's at, > at least. "P" is "Professional?" Wait! It's NOT?!? I thought the green rectangle was for mere amateurs and that the 'P' setting elevated my work to that of a professional. Signature<very big grin> JR >>I liked the guy who said people shoot in ""P"(rofessional) = wide open, >>instead of choosing the DOF themselves." That sort tells me where he's at, >>at least. "P" is "Professional?" > > Wait! It's NOT?!? I thought the green rectangle was for mere amateurs and > that the 'P' setting elevated my work to that of a professional. All grins aside... In a way the "P" mode is appropriate for a lot of professionals. Since it picks a potential aperture/speed combo, which can then be program shifted for any other aperture/speed, and for which exp-comp does apply, then for those professionals obsessed with speed (many photojournalists) it may be the right mode to operate in. Amateur "Manual" mavens are the ones who seem to obsess the most over operating non-automatically. Professionals worry more about delivering the goods in a timely manner. If A, S and the dreaded "P" do the job for them, then they really don't care what a bunch of amateur purists think. Cheers, Alan. Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. > Amateur "Manual" mavens are the ones who seem to obsess the most over > operating non-automatically. Professionals worry more about > delivering the goods in a timely manner. If A, S and the dreaded "P" > do the job for them, then they really don't care what a bunch of > amateur purists think. You seem to be foolishly confusing "obsess" with the basic need for this character to learn how to properly use the equipment. Well, it is true that "professionals worry more about delivering the goods in a timely manner." But, when I read stuff like this fool criticizing the 5D and the other yahoo that worries about wearing a shutter out while claiming to blast off 10K worth of shots per event makes you wonder what level of professionalism is really there. Many of these "pros" really need to get back to basics and learn how to improve their "keeper to sh.t" ratio. If this means shooting manual, so be it. And for the pros not caring what the "purists" think, you are dead wrong. The "pros" shake in their boots every day when they see some really stunning images by "amateur purists" that they only wish they can produce. The bottom line is shoot whatever mode you like, but don't bitch because your "keeper to sh.t" ratio is poor. You're only wasting your time and resources while doing a great disservice to your potential customers. Rita >> Amateur "Manual" mavens are the ones who seem to obsess the most over >> operating non-automatically. Professionals worry more about [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > You seem to be foolishly confusing You (particularly you) should not attribute confusion or foolishness to anyone. > "obsess" with the basic need for this > character to learn how to properly use the equipment. Well, it is true [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > that worries about wearing a shutter out while claiming to blast off 10K > worth of shots per event I did not see any claim of 10K shots per event anywhere in this thread or links. There is a "speculative" "wondering" of 10,000 over a two week period, which is a fish of another hue entirely. Criticizing any camera (regardless of how good) is easy as every camera has compromise or company philosophy built in. Getting all upset when somebody criticizes something, esp. at the extremes, is really not useful at all. > makes you wonder what level of professionalism is > really there. Many of these "pros" really need to get back to basics and [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > some really stunning images by "amateur purists" that they only wish they > can produce. I don't think any seasoned and talented pro shakes in his boots when he sees a "stunning" amateur photo. Many amateurs dedicate their free, unpaid and mostly unrewarded time to specific image goals. Professionals serve their clients with usually competent and often excellent to stunning photography. A professional photographer can and will only learn from the best photography without caring who made it. Professional photography falls into a lot of categories from evidence gathering (not what I think of as "photography" writ large), to PJ (in its various categories), to the local portrait maker to nature, product, fashion, "fine art", etc. etc. etc. Each of these sub categories requires different skills from mainly artistic to purely technical and all the possible mixes in between. A professional (a true professional) uses his talent and tools appropriate to what he needs to deliver. He may learn from an amateurs special techniques and he will hapilliy pass on his own nuggets of special knowledge to the amateur. A true professsional is always learning in the same way that an amateur is always learning. But a professional will not get bogged down in some other photographers purity obsessions (whether that other photographer is an amateur or professional (with or without the """")). I did portraits for a professional photographer who claimed 40 years of experience. It was really 1 year of experience repeated 40 times. Not surprisingly his "best photos" from 35 years ago resembled his best photographs from last year. They were very good, but nothing a lot of advanced amateurs would feel particularly challenged at. He earned his living (quite well, actually) from this, but not my admiration. I did learn a few tips about portrait photography, but not the ones I expected! (More about hustling extra shots and prints than photography). Another pro (that I hired for product shots) was _always_ in creativity mode which resulted in a long days shoot, but huge variety in the resulting images. We (being a somewhat conservative company) used some somewhat staid photos for the main advertising but used some of the more dramatic and impactful images in the PowerPoint presentations. I learned more about studio lighting in 1 day with him than in any book. The true professional is not interested in taking a purist standpoint on anything other than satisfying his customers. This is the main difference with many amateurs who corner themselves in some "purist" aspect. A professional can't afford to do so. And I don't mean to demean us "amateurs". The majority of amateurs, like me, explore. And we try different things in order to learn and improve and from time to time produce something beyond a keeper, that is something worthy of hanging on the wall, presenting as a gift, exhbiting, entering in a competition and selling. Another way of saying all of the above is that a true professional has enough confidence in his work, esp. as evidenced by repeat business, that he need not shake in his boots for any reason at all. Cheers, Alan. Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. >>> Amateur "Manual" mavens are the ones who seem to obsess the most over >>> operating non-automatically. Professionals worry more about [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > links. There is a "speculative" "wondering" of 10,000 over a two week > period, which is a fish of another hue entirely. There was some guy wondering if a certain camera would hold up because he was shooting 10,000 or more images at (I believe) triathlons. At each event. That's a lot, even for "spray and pray." It was on a thread a couple of weeks ago. SignatureSkip Middleton www.shadowcatcherimagery.com www.pbase.com/skipm >> I did not see any claim of 10K shots per event anywhere in this >> thread or links. There is a "speculative" "wondering" of 10,000 [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > triathlons. At each event. That's a lot, even for "spray and pray." > It was on a thread a couple of weeks ago. Actually, it was horses. I do like the "spray and pray" saying! It reminds me of our local cops. Empty three 17-round magazines and hope you hit something, even an innocent bystander. Rita >>> I did not see any claim of 10K shots per event anywhere in this >>> thread or links. There is a "speculative" "wondering" of 10,000 [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > me of our local cops. Empty three 17-round magazines and hope you hit > something, even an innocent bystander. That's actually where the term originated, or more strictly, in war. I've heard both WWII and Vietnam as the source. Start firing blindly (machine guns in WWII, M16s in Vietnam,) and you'll probably hit something. SignatureSkip Middleton www.shadowcatcherimagery.com www.pbase.com/skipm > Start firing blindly (machine guns in WWII, M16s in Vietnam,) > and you'll probably hit something. Sometimes even the enemy. >> "obsess" with the basic need for this >> character to learn how to properly use the equipment. Well, it is [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > or links. There is a "speculative" "wondering" of 10,000 over a two > week period, which is a fish of another hue entirely. No, it wasn't associated with this thread; JC Dill posted it several weeks back. > Criticizing any camera (regardless of how good) is easy as every > camera has compromise or company philosophy built in. Getting all > upset when somebody criticizes something, esp. at the extremes, is > really not useful at all. I agree. I don't think anyone got upset in this thread, I know I wasn't. I was just pointing out that the 5D is a capable tool that isn't being used properly by this "pro" photographer. >> makes you wonder what level of professionalism is >> really there. Many of these "pros" really need to get back to [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > and will only learn from the best photography without caring who made > it. You'd be surprised what the pros say. Some are bitching intensely about the "stock photo agencies" that supposedly take bread and butter from the "pro's" table. There are lots of stunning images in these services that are taken by amateurs that might be looking for some pocket change or to get some recognition. Then, of course, we have/had the argument here in the groups about how dSLRs in the hands of the average consumer has threatened the Pro. > Professional photography falls into a lot of categories from evidence > gathering (not what I think of as "photography" writ large), to PJ (in > its various categories), to the local portrait maker to nature, > product, fashion, "fine art", etc. etc. etc. And I agree that "pro" goes well beyond taking great pictures. There's too many behind the scenes logistics that many don't see or want to realize what is actually going on. > Each of these sub categories requires different skills from mainly > artistic to purely technical and all the possible mixes in between. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > photographers purity obsessions (whether that other photographer is > an amateur or professional (with or without the """")). Yep! And my point is that any person, pro or otherwise, that doesn't know how to use their equipment should learn the basics prior to publicly condemning it. > And I don't mean to demean us "amateurs". The majority of amateurs, > like me, explore. And we try different things in order to learn and > improve and from time to time produce something beyond a keeper, that > is something worthy of hanging on the wall, presenting as a gift, > exhbiting, entering in a competition and selling. Exactly! Having fun doing what you like doing is key. The recognition and money will follow if it is meant to be. > Another way of saying all of the above is that a true professional has > enough confidence in his work, esp. as evidenced by repeat business, > that he need not shake in his boots for any reason at all. Well said, but sometimes the true professional has to find someone to blame for the "lean times" should they occur. Rita >> Another way of saying all of the above is that a true professional has >> enough confidence in his work, esp. as evidenced by repeat business, >> that he need not shake in his boots for any reason at all. > > Well said, but sometimes the true professional has to find someone to blame > for the "lean times" should they occur. Gee Rita, we're agreeing on things... what's the matter? Merry Christmas, Alan Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. >> Amateur "Manual" mavens are the ones who seem to obsess the most over >> operating non-automatically. Professionals worry more about [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > your "keeper to sh.t" ratio is poor. You're only wasting your time and > resources while doing a great disservice to your potential customers. This is scaring me, Rita. More and more, we agree. It must be the 5D... The only time I bitch about my keeper to sh.t (as you put it) ratio is when I'm feeling dissatisfied with myself, not my gear. SignatureSkip Middleton www.shadowcatcherimagery.com www.pbase.com/skipm > This is scaring me, Rita. More and more, we agree. It must be the > 5D... The only time I bitch about my keeper to sh.t (as you put it) > ratio is when I'm feeling dissatisfied with myself, not my gear. LOL! Rita > The only time I bitch about my keeper to sh.t (as you put it) ratio is when > I'm feeling dissatisfied with myself, not my gear. You put that a bit harshly, should be "...feeling dissatisfied with my photographs." If you're dissatisfied with yourself, that's another matter! Merry Christmas, Alan. Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. >> The only time I bitch about my keeper to sh.t (as you put it) ratio is >> when I'm feeling dissatisfied with myself, not my gear. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Merry Christmas, > Alan. But, but, I AM my photographs! <G> SignatureSkip Middleton www.shadowcatcherimagery.com www.pbase.com/skipm >"Rita Ä Berkowitz" <ritaberk2O04 @aol.com> wrote in message >> The bottom line is shoot whatever mode you like, but don't bitch because [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >The only time I bitch about my keeper to sh.t (as you put it) ratio is when >I'm feeling dissatisfied with myself, not my gear. Ditto. I consider from 1:3 to 1:6, (dependent on the difficulty of lighting, subject & situation) to be good, & I haven't yet owned a camera where I can't achieve those sorts of ratios on a good day. When I'm having a bad day, all bets are off - no matter how good the gear is that I'm using. >>>I liked the guy who said people shoot in ""P"(rofessional) = wide open, >>>instead of choosing the DOF themselves." That sort tells me where he's [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > Cheers, > Alan. Don't get me wrong, I shoot in Program a lot, but it was just the usage that got me! (Exposure Comp is our friend...) SignatureSkip Middleton www.shadowcatcherimagery.com www.pbase.com/skipm > Don't get me wrong, I shoot in Program a lot, but it was just the usage that > got me! I remember during the Gulf War where some jackass from CNN was talking about the aircraft being used and he said to the camera, "...behind me are the F-15E, 'E' for 'Eagle', fighters of the 213th Fighter Wing..." The F-15 (and F-15A ... F-15E) was always the "Eagle". The "E" model is the all-weather/day-night/air-to-mud version. Made me cringe. > (Exposure Comp is our friend...) There was never anything wrong with "P" that program-shift and Exp-comp couldn't fix ... my plodding ways allow me to sit in "M" mode most of the time. Cheers, Alan Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. >> I liked the guy who said people shoot in ""P"(rofessional) = wide open, >> instead of choosing the DOF themselves." That sort tells me where he's [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > and > that the 'P' setting elevated my work to that of a professional. Wow, maybe it's me who's been missing something! <equally big grin!> SignatureSkip Middleton www.shadowcatcherimagery.com www.pbase.com/skipm Rita ? Berkowitz wrote: > > Here's the actual argument: > > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > away full auto. So, what was your point again, Rich? I find absolutely > nothing wrong with the 5D with the proper glass attached. I don't know anything about what that guy does (Wedding photography) but I can see instances where extreme DOF might be needed. In this case, where I shooting with a 5D I would determine beforehand how much DOF I'd need and if the camera-lenses I was using couldn't provide it, I'd get one that could. -Rich > > > I thought about this after a wedding photography complained that his 5D > > > was causing problems and that a smaller sensored camera offering better [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1022&thread=21384083 For wedding photography I have found the fuji V10 excellent because of low light capability and ASA 1600 rating. I just purchased the newer Fuji F30 which is rated 3200 ASA and takes incredible stills at night withourt a flash, also very nice movies in dark indoor settings. ignore line:(delta epsilon beta sigma drdach jeffrey dach dask dalk jeff dach quark quirk) jeffrey dach >> I thought about this after a wedding photography complained that his 5D >> was causing problems and that a smaller sensored camera offering better [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Scott Yeah, this is a classic case of a person blaming his tools for his own mistakes. >I thought about this after a wedding photography complained that his 5D > was causing problems and that a smaller sensored camera offering better > DOF for a given lens setting got him more usable shots more often. That wedding photographer needs to learn more, or at least think more, about what he's doing, if nothing else, to know the limitations of his equipment and what's the fault of the camera and what's the fault of the photographer. The difference in DOF is so minimal that it shouldn't be a problem. Look at the difference between f2.8 and f3.5 or f4 sometime, and tell me otherwise. Too many people buy a camera, expecting it to solve all of their photographic problems, and are disappointed when it doesn't. I've never heard an owner of a 1Ds or 1Ds mkII complain in a similar fashion, nor have I heard experienced photographers who own 5Ds do it, either. Far too often, it's the photographer, not the equipment, as we've all heard ad nauseum. SignatureSkip Middleton www.shadowcatcherimagery.com www.pbase.com/skipm >I thought Good! Keep it up. Practice makes perfect, and all that. If you stick with it long enough one day you may be capable of coherent thought. >about this after a wedding photography complained that his 5D >was causing problems and that a smaller sensored camera offering better >DOF for a given lens setting got him more usable shots more often. You're worried about a wedding photography [sic] who doesn't know how to control DOF? Bringing us back to coherent thought.... TR > I thought about this after a wedding photography complained that his > 5D was causing problems and that a smaller sensored camera offering > better DOF for a given lens setting got him more usable shots more > often. He does not know about the tools of his profession. Not all that unusual among wedding photographers. SignatureJoseph Meehan Dia 's Muire duit >> I thought about this after a wedding photography complained that his >> 5D was causing problems and that a smaller sensored camera offering [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > He does not know about the tools of his profession. Not all that > unusual among wedding photographers. Actually, that's very unusual among wedding photographers. Anybody who depends on their equipment for their livelihood will know their tools well. Not at all unusual among pretenders. SignatureSkip Middleton www.shadowcatcherimagery.com www.pbase.com/skipm >>> I thought about this after a wedding photography complained that his >>> 5D was causing problems and that a smaller sensored camera offering [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > who depends on their equipment for their livelihood will know their > tools well. Not at all unusual among pretenders. I almost agree. If you mean real professional wedding photographers, you are right, but there are many "professional" wedding photographers (at least around here) who don't. They are professional in that they make some money. They are not professional as in a level of ability. SignatureJoseph Meehan Dia 's Muire duit >>>> I thought about this after a wedding photography complained that his >>>> 5D was causing problems and that a smaller sensored camera offering [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > least around here) who don't. They are professional in that they make > some money. They are not professional as in a level of ability. There's a story here in SoCal about a pair of "wedding photographers" who got business by showing sample albums containing photos taken by another, much more expensive, and experienced, photographer. Quite the brouhaha. They seem to have actually photographed a couple of weddings, but didn't deliver images or albums as promised, then no showed at the rest. We booked one bride who was a refugee from them, and then got a request from another who had booked that couple for the same date as the one we rescued! So, in that context, you are the one who is correct. I guess I'm a little sensitive about comments disparaging wedding photographers, since that's the way our photography has had to evolve. SignatureSkip Middleton www.shadowcatcherimagery.com www.pbase.com/skipm > I thought about this after a wedding photography complained that his > 5D was causing problems and that a smaller sensored camera offering > better DOF for a given lens setting got him more usable shots more > often. I would strongly suggest that you avoid doing business with this particular wedding "photographer." He clearly hasn't got a clue. SignatureImages (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at: www.pbase.com/markuson > I thought about this after a wedding photography complained that his > 5D was causing problems and that a smaller sensored camera offering > better DOF for a given lens setting got him more usable shots more > often. Total and utter nonsense! If this were really the case I would have to say this "photographer" is an imbecile. Using the 5D with the proper lenses makes your images come to life. You don't fully appreciate your lenses till they are on the old 5D. If I were to guess I would say that he is using the wrong lenses and is also lacking the skills to get the most from his equipment. There's absolutely no excuse to get a bad image from the totally awesome 5D. Rita >> I thought about this after a wedding photography complained that his >> 5D was causing problems and that a smaller sensored camera offering [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > totally > awesome 5D. He could be using the right lenses, but his skill set prevents him from properly utilizing them... SignatureSkip Middleton www.shadowcatcherimagery.com www.pbase.com/skipm >I thought about this after a wedding photography complained that his 5D > was causing problems and that a smaller sensored camera offering better > DOF for a given lens setting got him more usable shots more often. Of course. Everyone knows that point and shoot cameras, with their tiny sensors, have an enormous depth of field. The 5D must be stopped down to increase the depth of field. So what's the story here? An imbecile who calls himself/herself a wedding photographer? Or, are you just making s**t up, as usual? > >I thought about this after a wedding photography complained that his 5D > > was causing problems and that a smaller sensored camera offering better [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > calls himself/herself a wedding photographer? Or, are you just making s**t > up, as usual? Try reading harder, or get new glasses. >> >I thought about this after a wedding photography complained that his 5D >> > was causing problems and that a smaller sensored camera offering better [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Try reading harder, or get new glasses. "Does shallow DOF ever hamper what you do?" OK, I read it and reread it. And .... Does shallow understanding ever hamper what YOU do? Me thinks it's Plonk time. >>> >I thought about this after a wedding photography complained that his 5D >>> > was causing problems and that a smaller sensored camera offering [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Me thinks it's Plonk time. Oh, where's the fun in that?! SignatureSkip Middleton www.shadowcatcherimagery.com www.pbase.com/skipm > >> >I thought about this after a wedding photography complained that his 5D > >> > was causing problems and that a smaller sensored camera offering better [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Me thinks it's Plonk time. One thing always makes me curious. How is it America can stand as the bastion of free speech in the World when so many of its citizens clearly do not agree with the idea? >> >> >I thought about this after a wedding photography complained that his 5D >> >> > was causing problems and that a smaller sensored camera offering better [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >bastion of free speech in the World when so many of its citizens >clearly do not agree with the idea? The 1st Amendment would give you the right to express yourself - it would NOT give you the right to force someone to listen to your idiotic ranting. YADATROT - a shallow DOF rarely hampers my shooting. Rarely, because I know how to control it by stopping down. Here's hoping your mommy got you a camera for Christmas. TR > >> >> >I thought about this after a wedding photography complained that his 5D > >> >> > was causing problems and that a smaller sensored camera offering better [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > would NOT give you the right to force someone to listen to your > idiotic ranting. Who is bending your arm to force you? P.S. The 5D argument wasn't mine, which you'd know if you weren't just another imbecile jumping into a thread you didn't bother reading. > Who is bending your arm to force you? > P.S. The 5D argument wasn't mine, which you'd know if you weren't just > another imbecile jumping into a thread you didn't bother reading. Why do you post other peoples arguments? I surmise you do it because you are trolling. Your bait does seem to haul in the fish. SignatureCharles > > Who is bending your arm to force you? > > P.S. The 5D argument wasn't mine, which you'd know if you weren't just [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > -- > Charles Because the argument was made, and was refuted by those here. It's not trolling to be interested in people's opinions. Since this group is about DSLRs, it seems to fit the mandate. >>>>>>> I thought about this after a wedding photography complained that his 5D >>>>>>> was causing problems and that a smaller sensored camera offering better [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > P.S. The 5D argument wasn't mine, which you'd know if you weren't just > another imbecile jumping into a thread you didn't bother reading. So why did you start this thread when it is COMPLETELY MEANINGLESS? Greg Signature"All my time I spent in heaven Revelries of dance and wine Waking to the sound of laughter Up I'd rise and kiss the sky" - The Mekons >> Who is bending your arm to force you? >> P.S. The 5D argument wasn't mine, which you'd know if you weren't just [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Greg Far be it for me to leap to RichA's defense, but this thread, tho' presented in a way that, in my opinion, is calculated to get the more virulent responses, isn't completely meaningless. Too often, I see people blaming the 5D for poor image production, mainly because of its narrower depth of field compared to crop sensor cameras with the same focal length/aperture lenses. Of course, the complainer rarely notes this difference, preferring to refer to the 5D as a "POS camera," that fails to produce as expected. It's odd that owners of 1Ds and 1Ds mII bodies don't seem to have this same issue... SignatureSkip Middleton www.shadowcatcherimagery.com www.pbase.com/skipm >>> Who is bending your arm to force you? >>> P.S. The 5D argument wasn't mine, which you'd know if you weren't just [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > It's odd that owners of 1Ds and 1Ds mII bodies don't seem to have this same > issue... Because the 5D owners that are complaining are clueless users who upgraded from a digital p&s and who never used 35mm? And the 1Ds and 1Ds mII owners know what they're doing? Greg Signature"All my time I spent in heaven Revelries of dance and wine Waking to the sound of laughter Up I'd rise and kiss the sky" - The Mekons >>>> Who is bending your arm to force you? >>>> P.S. The 5D argument wasn't mine, which you'd know if you weren't [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > upgraded from a digital p&s and who never used 35mm? And the 1Ds and > 1Ds mII owners know what they're doing? Exactly, Greg. See my response to Skip...below yours... Mark² SignatureImages (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at: www.pbase.com/markuson > >>> Who is bending your arm to force you? > >>> P.S. The 5D argument wasn't mine, which you'd know if you weren't just [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > upgraded from a digital p&s and who never used 35mm? And the 1Ds and > 1Ds mII owners know what they're doing? You think the average 5D owner upgraded from a P&S? >>>>> Who is bending your arm to force you? >>>>> P.S. The 5D argument wasn't mine, which you'd know if you [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > You think the average 5D owner upgraded from a P&S? Read, Rich. He said, "the ones who are complaining..." which is likely the same group that has little/no experience with SLRs/DSLRs. SignatureImages (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at: www.pbase.com/markuson > >>>>> Who is bending your arm to force you? > >>>>> P.S. The 5D argument wasn't mine, which you'd know if you [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > Read, Rich. He said, "the ones who are complaining..." which is likely the > same group that has little/no experience with SLRs/DSLRs. I find it hard to believe that the owner of a G6 is going to next invest in a 5D. 27% of the DSLR market own Rebels and I'd wager 99% of the people who formerly owned P&S camera bought those, not 5Ds. Too bad we don't have the data to verify any of it. >>>>>>> Who is bending your arm to force you? >>>>>>> P.S. The 5D argument wasn't mine, which you'd know if you [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > formerly owned P&S camera bought those, not 5Ds. > Too bad we don't have the data to verify any of it. That's not the point you pathetic f.cking loser of a troll. If people are complaining about shallow DOF it's because THEY DON'T KNOW HOW TO OPERATE THEIR CAMERAS, it's not because of a defect of the camera. I would guess that these users have more money than brains because it sure doesn't sound like they've operated 35mm SLRs and probably not even APS-C DSLRs. Greg Signature"All my time I spent in heaven Revelries of dance and wine Waking to the sound of laughter Up I'd rise and kiss the sky" - The Mekons >> I find it hard to believe that the owner of a G6 is going to next >> invest in a 5D. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > sure doesn't sound like they've operated 35mm SLRs and probably not > even APS-C DSLRs. Geez! Lighten up! Rich does bring up some very good points on both sides of the coin. He's getting you to think about the big picture and some overlooked details while stroking the hell out of you. We have already established that the "pro" with the 5D doesn't know how to get the most from it. Old news! Move on! What Rich is pointing out is there are posers in every walk of life. Look at some of the people claiming to work IT and can't get several thousand Dells to work properly. They conveniently blame Microsoft for their lack of skills. The similarities abound. Rita >>> I find it hard to believe that the owner of a G6 is going to next >>> invest in a 5D. [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > every walk of life. Look at some of the people claiming to work IT and > can't get several thousand Dells to work properly. Yeah, and we got Dell to take all 1453 POS GX620s back. Hopefully we'll dump Dell completely like we did their servers. Greg Signature"All my time I spent in heaven Revelries of dance and wine Waking to the sound of laughter Up I'd rise and kiss the sky" - The Mekons >> Geez! Lighten up! Rich does bring up some very good points on both >> sides of the coin. He's getting you to think about the big picture [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Yeah, and we got Dell to take all 1453 POS GX620s back. Hopefully > we'll dump Dell completely like we did their servers. LOL! End of lease time, I take it? You'll be back to Dells again since there is nothing better on the market. This time buy/lease the Dell Precision line and you won't have any problems. These units are so robust that they are "dumb-assed IT tech" proofed. But, at the end of the day it doesn't matter what brand or platform you get since I'm confident you'll have problems with it. You should have told me about the GX620s since I would have paid your company $15 each for every last one of them. Rita >>> Geez! Lighten up! Rich does bring up some very good points on both >>> sides of the coin. He's getting you to think about the big picture [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > the day it doesn't matter what brand or platform you get since I'm > confident you'll have problems with it. We don't have any problems with our HP DL385s (especially when they're running Linux) nor with any of our Macs so I'd say you're wrong there. > You should have told me about the GX620s since I would have paid your > company $15 each for every last one of them. Yep, that's about what they were worth new. Greg Signature"All my time I spent in heaven Revelries of dance and wine Waking to the sound of laughter Up I'd rise and kiss the sky" - The Mekons >>> Yeah, and we got Dell to take all 1453 POS GX620s back. Hopefully >>> we'll dump Dell completely like we did their servers. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > We don't have any problems with our HP DL385s (especially when they're > running Linux) nor with any of our Macs so I'd say you're wrong there. LOL! Nor should you have any problems with the 385s unless you were stupid enough to buy the ones with the Opterons instead of Xeon. And I'm also sure you don't have any 385s sitting at the desktops where the 620s were. And I'll take it a step further and say you won't be having many Macs filling that 1453 space void either. You'll be back to Dell. And no, HP/Compaq doesn't make or has made an acceptable workstation since the PIII. >> You should have told me about the GX620s since I would have paid your >> company $15 each for every last one of them. > > Yep, that's about what they were worth new. They're great boxes with the proper mods. You(r) IT department were to stupid and bought the NSX chassis instead of the tower. Rita > >>> I find it hard to believe that the owner of a G6 is going to next > >>> invest in a 5D. [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Greg Dell and Intel are for Satan. >>>>> I find it hard to believe that the owner of a G6 is going to next >>>>> invest in a 5D. [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > Dell and Intel are for Satan. Then I guess 90+% of the computer world will see you in Hell?? ;) SignatureImages (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at: www.pbase.com/markuson > >>>>> I find it hard to believe that the owner of a G6 is going to next > >>>>> invest in a 5D. [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > Then I guess 90+% of the computer world will see you in Hell?? > ;) Probably. All the clueless consumers who buy computers and know nothing about what they are buying, all the stodgy corporate IT buyers too. But, things are looking up. Dell hasn't done well this year and the server market has shifted to Opterons in a big way. > Geez! Lighten up! Rich does bring up some very good points on both sides > of the coin. He's getting you to think about the big picture and some [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > it. Old news! Move on! What Rich is pointing out is there are posers in > every walk of life. Yup, and Rita now joins the Plonked. Rita and Rich are one in the same. >> Geez! Lighten up! Rich does bring up some very good points on both >> sides of the coin. He's getting you to think about the big picture [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Yup, and Rita now joins the Plonked. Rita and Rich are one in the > same. I plonked Rita months ago. ...He'll now likely write once again of his obsession with my hawk photos now... [Cue: Rita!] But unless one of you blokes responds, I won't have to see more of his tripe. SignatureImages (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at: www.pbase.com/markuson >>> Geez! Lighten up! Rich does bring up some very good points on both >>> sides of the coin. He's getting you to think about the big picture [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > But unless one of you blokes responds, I won't have to see more of his > tripe. Tripe it is and tripe no more. Plonking is good! > Tripe it is and tripe no more. Plonking is good! Charles, If you can read this then you haven't plonked me. Plonk me please. >> Tripe it is and tripe no more. Plonking is good! > > Charles, If you can read this then you haven't plonked me. > > Plonk me please. Since you asked so politely, done! > >> Tripe it is and tripe no more. Plonking is good! > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Since you asked so politely, done! Is that one of those fake plonks? Greg Mark² (lowest even number here) wrote: > RichA wrote: > > G.T. wrote: [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > the > same group that has little/no experience with SLRs/DSLRs. I find it hard to believe that the owner of a G6 is going to next invest in a 5D. 27% of the DSLR market own Rebels and I'd wager 99% of the people who formerly owned P&S camera bought those, not 5Ds. Too bad we don't have the data to verify any of it. Then you'd be surprised, Rich. A lot of the guys posting with complaints on the DPReview forum are just that, guys who moved from advanced point and shoots to the 5D, because of full frame. They must think it's cool or something. I'd put it at more like 80% bought Rebels, 15% bought 20D/30Ds and 5% bought 5Ds. And then there's the guys who moved from a point and shoot to a 20D to a 5D without ever having shot any film, and have precious little experience with the 20D, even. SignatureSkip Middleton www.shadowcatcherimagery.com www.pbase.com/skipm > Mark² (lowest even number here) wrote: >> RichA wrote: [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > shoot to a 20D to a 5D without ever having shot any film, and have > precious little experience with the 20D, even. This is ABSOLUTELY TRUE, Skip. You're dead on. I've seen it with my own eyes. In fact, the MAJORITY of people I have personal contact with...who recently bought DSLRs are clueless. There shots are mostly crap, and absolutely waste the capabilities of their gear. SignatureImages (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at: www.pbase.com/markuson > In fact, the MAJORITY of people I have personal contact with...who > recently bought DSLRs are clueless. This really isn't surprising coming from you. > There shots are mostly crap, and absolutely waste the capabilities of > their gear. LOL! So now you are saying you never look at your own work? I figured as much. Rita > This is ABSOLUTELY TRUE, Skip. You're dead on. I've seen it with my own > eyes. > In fact, the MAJORITY of people I have personal contact with...who recently > bought DSLRs are clueless. > There shots are mostly crap, and absolutely waste the capabilities of their > gear. And we should *thank* those people. When the idle rich take a liking to something in limited supply, waterfront property or such, it drives up the price and those of us who work for a living are out. Manufactured goods are different; the tremendous cost of design and tooling-up gets amortized over the number of units sold. The more they sell, the lower the price. If DSLR's sold only to the people who knew how to use their capabilities, very few of us could afford one. Also, many buyers who don't really know how to use their camera remain happy with their purchase of a DSLR. They may be kind of bulky, and as this thread points out depth of field can be tricky, but a DSLR is still a great point-and-shoot. Signature--Bryan > Mark² (lowest even number here) wrote: > > RichA wrote: [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] > a 5D without ever having shot any film, and have precious little experience > with the 20D, even. My 27% figure was for the entire DSLR market. I think that is the Rebel share. But the % you say are buying 5Ds is still surprisingly high. You are basically saying that for every 16 Rebels sold worth $700-$800, 1 person buys a $2700 5D. I think that a report stating the sales numbers for each camera from each mfg. is available somewhere, but it would likely cost as much as a 39 meg Hasselblad to obtain. >>>>>>> Who is bending your arm to force you? >>>>>>> P.S. The 5D argument wasn't mine, which you'd know if you [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > formerly owned P&S camera bought those, not 5Ds. > Too bad we don't have the data to verify any of it. Believe it, Rich. I've seen it first hand...even at the Digital Rebel level. There are TONS of people who just don't know what to do with their neato-cool DSLR thing they just bought so they could "get a camera that takes better pictures." Actually, just two nights ago (while finishing some Christmas shopping), I was in Best Buy...where amazingly, they were carrying both the 30D and (to my surprise) the 5D. There was a man there with his teen-age son...looking at DSLRs with the "help" of an idiot sales-guy who obviously knew NOTHING about cameras, but was offering "advice" anyway. :( It appeared that the teen was looking for his own nice Christmas gift that his well-to-do father would buy him. Anyway... After the sales guy rattled off a few specs that any idiot could read from the box, the dad said, "It seems like with all this new digital stuff, the photographer is being removed from hotography." --It was one of the FEW times I decided NOT to make a friendly comment, but what I SHOULD have said was, "If you buy that 5D...or even the 30D, you discover just how wrong you are about that. The 5D expects and demands that you tell the camera what to do and how to do it." But alas...I can't save everyone. My point: This is a real-world example of the kind of person who very well may fork over for a top-notch DSLR...even though they haven't a CLUE how to produce anything with it. They often do it with good intentions...perhaps thinking that's the best way to get their son into photography...not realizing that it may actually discourage them amidst the unprepared confusion and poor results that will likely follow. It DOES happen...just as some of the crappiest drivers on Earth (Think Paris Hilton here) still drive around in Ferraris and the like. She literally can't even park by a curb or make it out of a driveway, yet she's driving $250,000 sports cars. Some folks with money will buy a 5D...or even a 1DsMII...without the foggiest notion of how to utilize it's capabilities. -Mark² SignatureImages (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at: www.pbase.com/markuson > My point: > This is a real-world example of the kind of person who very well may [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > money will buy a 5D...or even a 1DsMII...without the foggiest notion > of how to utilize it's capabilities. What's with the autobiography? You ever master them fill flash techniques you've been struggling with? Rita > >>>>>>> Who is bending your arm to force you? > >>>>>>> P.S. The 5D argument wasn't mine, which you'd know if you [quoted text clipped - 67 lines] > > -Mark² I don't doubt that it happens, I just don't think it's that common compared to seasoned amateurs or pros buying such a camera. But then I don't go into big-box electronics stores either so maybe I'm missing these scenes? There will always be a class of people who buy devices with leaarning curves who simply refuse (or can't) learn to use them. The first check on that is when they have a stupid question and you ask them if they bothered to read the manual. They get that glazed, scared look like they used to get in school when asked about homework. But they are in for a shock. No matter what the mfgs do to the camera, have only one mode, "A" and "face detection" technology, such users will screw up their pictures just like when they were using their old P&S film cams. Rude awakening if you've actually spend $3000+. What you've described I've seen countless times with expensive telescopes bought by baby boomers who figured it would be a fun hobby. They'll buy a fully electronicized instrument, complete with GPS, autopointing, and they still won't figure it out that it takes time to learn how to properly use such a thing, as well as learning what makes a good photo. The difference is, with photography, will the clueless ever figure out that they aren't using the camera properly or not? Will their pictures of relatives brilliantly lit by flashes, ugly black shadows plastered against the wall someone positioned them in front of, the heads of their victims smackdab in the centre of the frame, ever be criticized by the audience they might have for them? Or, will their relatives look at the 4x6 prints of what they've produced and say "thats nice...?" >> >>> Who is bending your arm to force you? >> >>> P.S. The 5D argument wasn't mine, which you'd know if you weren't [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > You think the average 5D owner upgraded from a P&S? He didn't say "average," he said the "5D owners that are complaining." Different class of 5D owner, entirely. SignatureSkip Middleton www.shadowcatcherimagery.com www.pbase.com/skipm |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message