« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3]

Author Topic: Gig photography  (Read 6660 times)

Re: Gig photography
Reply #30 on: February 20, 2011, 11:03:41 AM
nice photos, and there's a definite improvement as you go on... and I don't know a thing about photography, so if I can see the difference it must be real?
Logged
Re: Gig photography
Reply #31 on: February 20, 2011, 12:04:12 PM
Really good work mate, it's definitely getting better, and the images are really clear, it's making it a little more tempting for me to upgrade my 500 to the 7D, as it's processor is much better.

It's likely I'm going to be doing my mates gig soon, but there is a lot less light that's my only concern, so will be using the 50mm prime, what lens was the 300mm that you used was it L glass? Just wondering how my 70-200 L will do really :)
Logged

  • Offline zpyder

  • Posts: 6,946
  • Hero Member
Re: Gig photography
Reply #32 on: February 20, 2011, 14:34:04 PM
Cheers guys.

An interesting side note is noise and facebook. Those shots I think were either ISO 3200 or 6400 (I probably could have gotten away with 2000-3200 but didn't want to risk it). I de-noised some, but left the rest. When I uploaded as standard to facebook, the photos were the noisiest images I've ever seen. Something to do with FB's compression creating noise-like artifacts I think. I deleted the album and uploaded in HQ at uni yesterday though and the noise is now (mostly) gone :D

I think the 70-200L will be my next lens...actually, thinking about it, if I can get rid of this unwanted second Tamron 17-50mm, and my EF-S Canon 17-85mm, I might just be able to afford one...

As to the pro's lens, I didn't catch what it was exactly, just sigma 70-300mm, will have a look at their range and see whether anything looks/sounds right. I was surprised when he commented it was near a grand, would have thought at that money he would have been better off with an L...

EDIT:

Maybe I was mistaken, as I can't see anything "good" by sigma that is in the 70-300mm range, pretty sure it was 300 and not 200mm too, strange. I'll be seeing him again no doubt either at the results party next month or before...
Last Edit: February 20, 2011, 14:36:39 PM by zpyder #187;
Logged
Re: Gig photography
Reply #33 on: February 21, 2011, 13:58:52 PM
Sigma do a 70-200 f/2.8 which would be a good choice for gig photography, they also do a 100-300 f/4 which I would argue is on the long and slow side although it is supposed to be a fantastic lens.

If you get yourself a 70-200 f/2.8 L you'll never want to take it off the camera if what I've heard is true, they don't come cheap though. Sigma and Tamron both make equivalents which would be well worth looking at.
Logged
Re: Gig photography
Reply #34 on: February 21, 2011, 14:32:29 PM
I have the 70-200 F4 L, which I don't thinks really going to be quick enough, although apature isn't everything, as it's much quicker than some of the other lenses I have used at F4, but it's fatter and better glass so obviously lets in more light
Logged
Re: Gig photography
Reply #35 on: February 21, 2011, 14:47:45 PM
the coatings do make a difference, my old SMC Pentax-M 50mm f/2 measures about half a stop faster than a cheap Chinon 50mm f/1.9. Canon L series glass is going to have pretty darned good coatings and they're going to be on every interface. The other thing is that the f stops are often approximate, as actually are the focal lengths, so the marketing department will make it sound as good as they can get away with. I'd expect less liberties to be taken with the specs on a top flight lens like an L than might be to try and make the new Canon kit zoom sound somehow better than its Nikon counterpart.

up to a point the weight helps too, obviously too heavy and you can't lift the thing but the lens/camera combo having some heft to it helps you hold it steady.
Last Edit: February 21, 2011, 14:49:33 PM by Mongoose #187;
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3]
« previous next »

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.