Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 8   Go Down

Author Topic: Not worth it ?  (Read 30728 times)

Martin Ranger

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 192
    • My Website.
Re: Not worth it ?
« Reply #60 on: November 20, 2013, 02:59:13 pm »

Just glue a red dot on it ...

Nooooo! If I do that, I'll get mistaken for a dentist or lawyer  ;D
Logged
Martin Ranger
Seattle, WA

www.martinrangerimages.com

Christoph C. Feldhaim

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2509
  • There is no rule! No - wait ...
Re: Not worth it ?
« Reply #61 on: November 20, 2013, 03:00:29 pm »

Nooooo! If I do that, I'll get mistaken for a dentist or lawyer  ;D

Just think of the ladies ...  :-*

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: Not worth it ?
« Reply #62 on: November 20, 2013, 03:17:05 pm »

Depends on who you are.

Best regards
Erik
Breast enhancement might have the same effect :)

Edmund
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Re: Not worth it ?
« Reply #63 on: November 20, 2013, 03:21:46 pm »

Every time I use my Fuji X-E1, people comment about my camera, too.
Yes, I would say that right now Fujifilm X and Olympus OM-D are the most cost-effective cameras for getting attention, even from non photo nerds. Almost as hip as wearing a tiny fedora.

Obligatory automotive analogy: forget the Lamborghini; get an Indian.
Logged

Craig Lamson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3264
    • Craig Lamson Photo Homepage
Re: Not worth it ?
« Reply #64 on: November 20, 2013, 05:18:41 pm »

A friend who used to do AV and sound installations said there were many people in Sheffield who got such cars on the never never. Not only that there are several large families who regularly start up new businesses, rack up huge debts to various suppliers [he was one] and then walk away stiffing everyone. The various family members take turns to front these enterprises. Not really sure what the scam is.

Had to look up that never never thing just to be be sure :)
Logged
Craig Lamson Photo

jjj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4728
    • http://www.futtfuttfuttphotography.com
Re: Not worth it ?
« Reply #65 on: November 21, 2013, 07:49:04 am »

Not a phrase I normally use. It's a bit old fashioned now I think, probably came across it in a period drama or book.
Logged
Tradition is the Backbone of the Spinele

KevinA

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 979
    • Tree Without a Bird
Re: Not worth it ?
« Reply #66 on: November 21, 2013, 01:27:17 pm »

If you are asking about "the bottom line", the right question is whether your customers are ready to pay for the difference, isn't it? On one hand, a modern SLRs will produce prints good enough for many commercial applications. On the other hand, some customers will simply require that you use a MF, and one with multishot as well (think museum reproduction, for example).

We can't really answer your question without knowing what your particular line of business is, can we?

Well there is the thing.
 If my existing customers were happy to pay more because of the gear that's used, well then they probably would be someone else's customers. I can't see me being able to increase my bill because I've invested in new equipment, I'm not a power company!
It would need to generate more money somehow to justify the buying.I'm not sure what exactly that would be.
Now if there is a wow factor every time an image is opened that is clear to see by my clients. If the designer finds it much easier to work with the image, then yes maybe I get more work over the next guy.
I've always valued the variety of ways to shoot a subject with DSLR, super wide, long tele, tilt shift, day or night etc.

My work 90% aerial work. http://kevinallen.photodeck.com/-/galleries/london-aerial-views
Logged
Kevin.

jjj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4728
    • http://www.futtfuttfuttphotography.com
Re: Not worth it ?
« Reply #67 on: November 21, 2013, 01:42:20 pm »

My work 90% aerial work. http://kevinallen.photodeck.com/-/galleries/london-aerial-views
Night shots are very impressive.
And technically impressive too as they are sharp and clean despite the tricky shooting conditions. What sort of ISOs/shutter speeds do you use for them? Do you use a stabiliser?
Logged
Tradition is the Backbone of the Spinele

KevinA

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 979
    • Tree Without a Bird
Re: Not worth it ?
« Reply #68 on: November 21, 2013, 03:10:16 pm »

Thank you.
I have various configurations of stabiliser mounts I've built. I used a KS8 and a KS6 for these. I also have a rig with a KS12 but it's not as easy to use.
Despite the fact high iso is very good, unfortunately none of my Canon f1.4 lenses are any good until stopped down a few clicks. These are shot with the 24mm f1.4 mm mkII.
 I still like stabilisers so I can shoot stopped down at a decent shutter speed. I don't like less than 1/30th.
The success rate slower than 1/100th falls off very quickly.
I would be interested to try the Movi, I'm just not sure how you point the camera when changing height and in an orbit.
Logged
Kevin.

Chris Barrett

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 730
    • www.christopherbarrett.net
Re: Not worth it ?
« Reply #69 on: November 21, 2013, 03:28:26 pm »


I would be interested to try the Movi, I'm just not sure how you point the camera when changing height and in an orbit.

You can point the camera either via a wireless (RC Helicopter style) controller or via user input to the gimbal itself.  It can sense your input and distinguish that from instability.  You can also program the sensitivity of that and the input "windows".  Once you get your hands on one, they're pretty addictive... I've never thought of trying it for stills tho... hmm.

KevinA

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 979
    • Tree Without a Bird
Re: Not worth it ?
« Reply #70 on: November 21, 2013, 03:52:24 pm »

You can point the camera either via a wireless (RC Helicopter style) controller or via user input to the gimbal itself.  It can sense your input and distinguish that from instability.  You can also program the sensitivity of that and the input "windows".  Once you get your hands on one, they're pretty addictive... I've never thought of trying it for stills tho... hmm.
So I could pan the camera and it would know it's me panning and not a movement to be stabilised?
I was not convinced on the aerials I've seen with it, I thought there was a lot of selective editing and post stab.
Logged
Kevin.

Chris Barrett

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 730
    • www.christopherbarrett.net
Re: Not worth it ?
« Reply #71 on: November 21, 2013, 04:17:37 pm »

Yes, in single operator "Majestic" mode it will follow your pans. You can set it to follow your tilts as well, or lock it out to hold a given tilt. In the software you can program how far you move before it responds (the window) and how aggressively it follows your input... From "right on your ass" to "I'll get there when I get there.  Slow and smooth"

jjj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4728
    • http://www.futtfuttfuttphotography.com
Re: Not worth it ?
« Reply #72 on: November 21, 2013, 06:33:46 pm »

Thank you.
I have various configurations of stabiliser mounts I've built. I used a KS8 and a KS6 for these. I also have a rig with a KS12 but it's not as easy to use.
Despite the fact high iso is very good, unfortunately none of my Canon f1.4 lenses are any good until stopped down a few clicks. These are shot with the 24mm f1.4 mm mkII.
 I still like stabilisers so I can shoot stopped down at a decent shutter speed. I don't like less than 1/30th.
The success rate slower than 1/100th falls off very quickly.
I would be interested to try the Movi, I'm just not sure how you point the camera when changing height and in an orbit.
Didn't think you'd be able to shoot as low a shutter speed as that. Stabilisers must be quite effective. What ISOs/body do you use then as it doesn't look like an extreme ISO.
I wonder how good the new Olympus sensor with its 5 point stabilisation would be for your work and if you used a metabones speed booster with your Canon lenses that would also give you some extra light. I wonder if that would outweigh the small sensor Vs your Canon sensor.
Logged
Tradition is the Backbone of the Spinele

KevinA

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 979
    • Tree Without a Bird
Re: Not worth it ?
« Reply #73 on: November 22, 2013, 04:15:12 am »

Didn't think you'd be able to shoot as low a shutter speed as that. Stabilisers must be quite effective. What ISOs/body do you use then as it doesn't look like an extreme ISO.
I wonder how good the new Olympus sensor with its 5 point stabilisation would be for your work and if you used a metabones speed booster with your Canon lenses that would also give you some extra light. I wonder if that would outweigh the small sensor Vs your Canon sensor.
1DX, it's very usable at 12800iso if you want. I've found it works well just to use multi pattern metering, it then is probably over exposing. The raws are as flat as a flat thing. It was also a windy night which didn't help.
I use to think I wanted the raw to look close to the final image, so I often knocked a stop or two off the metered.
Over exposing I have lots of control over the shadows, the highlights hold as well. They are all processed in Aperture, no noise reduction added. I have Ninja, but honestly I prefer grain and detail to smooth with the edge off.
I think I got up to either 6k or 8k. It's a lot darker than it looks, well after Sunset for most of them.
The weather even at night makes a big difference, cloudy nights act like a reflector, reflecting all the city lights back. I actually prefer clear nights and a good Moon, if I get the choice.
Night aerials it depends on how much fill you want to record, the city lights are a constant, your exposure is just for the fill really without blowing to many highlights.
Film days I was limited to 800iso, so I shot at 1/30th at f2.8, no choice.
I know this goes against the herd, but I shot the Nikon 800, D4 and 1DX against each other at high iso in my kitchen, the 1DX won. All those pixels offered less resolution at high iso, the D4 and 1DX were neck and neck, the 1DX had a few more pixels which gave it a edge, small but there.
I've shot the 1DX on an air to air shoot in bad weather, it was still capable of being quick enough to give me a 4 image stitch of the target aircraft and extended City background.
Logged
Kevin.

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Not worth it ?
« Reply #74 on: November 22, 2013, 09:46:51 am »

Not a phrase I normally use. It's a bit old fashioned now I think, probably came across it in a period drama or book.


Yep, today's hipsters confuse it with a bottle of brown sauce, rather than with Peter Pan.

Rob C

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Not worth it ?
« Reply #75 on: November 22, 2013, 09:55:21 am »

I know this goes against the herd, but I shot the Nikon 800, D4 and 1DX against each other at high iso in my kitchen, the 1DX won. All those pixels offered less resolution at high iso, the D4 and 1DX were neck and neck, the 1DX had a few more pixels which gave it a edge, small but there.

I am not surprised at all, it is well documented that the D800 and D4 are very close at 3200 and that the D4 pulls ahead from then on.

It is also well known that the D4 and 1Dx are close at those high ISOs.

Cheers,
Bernard

jjj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4728
    • http://www.futtfuttfuttphotography.com
Re: Not worth it ?
« Reply #76 on: November 22, 2013, 09:57:50 am »

Yep, today's hipsters confuse it with a bottle of brown sauce, rather than with Peter Pan.
It's not a Peter Pan thang actually. Never Never Land was a part of Australia which JM Barrie may have referenced for Never Land and the phraseI used in relation to debt may have simply had more to do with the chance of paying off such a loan.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2013, 10:05:58 am by jjj »
Logged
Tradition is the Backbone of the Spinele

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Not worth it ?
« Reply #77 on: November 22, 2013, 03:19:37 pm »

It's not a Peter Pan thang actually. Never Never Land was a part of Australia which JM Barrie may have referenced for Never Land and the phraseI used in relation to debt may have simply had more to do with the chance of paying off such a loan.


Well, I always had a thang for Tinker Bell rather than for Wendy, who was way too problematic - raging hormones, I guess. But anyway, if they were all high on stardust, it isn't really surprising there were domestic problems. Imagine if they'd been alcoholics too!

There were no Aboriginal persons in Peter Pan, AFAIR, so maybe that's straying perilously close to being off topic... Wow - never thought I could write that!

;-)

Rob C

bcooter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1520
Re: Not worth it ?
« Reply #78 on: November 22, 2013, 04:00:12 pm »

I am not surprised at all, it is well documented that the D800 and D4 are very close at 3200 and that the D4 pulls ahead from then on.

It is also well known that the D4 and 1Dx are close at those high ISOs.

Cheers,
Bernard


I've shot the 1dx regularly next to the omd em-5 (what a silly name) and the results are virtually identical up to 1000 iso, depending on the post processing.

Then again for the same dof, 1.8 on a m43 camera is around 3.5 on a full frame camera, so you gain a stop on the smaller sensors.

I believe every digital camera starts it's magic softening techniques above 800 iso, regardless of format.   You either get detail and noise, or smoothness and less detail but you can't have both.

The 5d3 which is the king of the glass smooth look, has an overwhelming look of softness at any speed, so I guess it's what your looking for.  

Viewing on computer no noise images when enlarged to 100% or something that looks a little more organic.

The never go to print, never shot film crowd seems to like the smooth look, the know what film use to do photographer doesn't seem to care.

I've found lately commercial clients are all about the look, not the pixel count.


IMO

BC

Logged

douglasboyd

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 32
    • http://dboyd.com
Re: Not worth it ?
« Reply #79 on: November 22, 2013, 08:42:06 pm »

When I bought my Sony A900 I compared it to my Hasselblad H1 with P30 back and decided to upgrade to Hasselblad H3DII-39 to stay ahead.

When I bought my Nikon D800E I compared it to the H3DII-39 and sold the H3DII-39 because I couldn't see the difference in test shots.

Now after using the D800E for a year I find myself missing the Hasselblad.  When I review my best pictures over the past 5 years most of the best were taken with the Hasselblad system.   Its hard to pin down the reason for this, but nevertheless it seems to be true.

So I'm hoping the cost of a 50-60mp H3/4 will come down enough in the next year so I can jump back to Hassy before the Sony/Nikon 48mp DSLRs appear.

==Douglas Boyd
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 8   Go Up