night club photos (NWS)

turbodude wrote in post #8868086
yes

Hmmm I think thats deffo getting me thinking more then, as im trying to get away with the flash but the way our lighting is at times, the AF beam is needed, plus chucking a sneaky flash somewhere else is allways a giggle.

itsafastworld85 wrote in post #8868094
Hmmm I think thats deffo getting me thinking more then, as im trying to get away with the flash but the way our lighting is at times, the AF beam is needed, plus chucking a sneaky flash somewhere else is allways a giggle.

The only problem is the ST-E2 is still old and slow, especially compared to taking a 580EXII and just turning the flash function off. However the ST-E2 is definately good if price is an issue, since it's half the cost of a new flash (but the ST-E2 batteries are expensive).

Just remember they will help with basic low-light general focusing, but they are too slow/not accurate for super low light spot metering if you use AV, so make sure to get a good manual reading.

turbodude wrote in post #8868027
new stuff from the 1dmkiv. high iso samples. I am impressed but not as much as i am impressed by the d3s.

1dmkiv samples
http://dpinterface.com …-mark-iv-preview-gallery/

D3s samples
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D3S​/D3SA7.HTM

Still who would really go that high with either? I'll just be happy if the 3200 is equal or better than 1600!

Rukes,

It's why Canon is sick of me asking for an "ST-E3". There's a few things I want improved/added.

- Tilt-swivel

- Common rechargeable battery type. If Nikon can power their Commander with 3V, Canon can too, and not need a 2CR5 battery, but 2 AAAs.

- LCD display

I also like it since it's a bit less bulky, sticking with my ethos of keeping my gear as minimal as possible. When I shot with the flash mounted, it was always thwacking into me when not in use.
Funniest thing is, here in Miami, I "started" the whole off-camera flash thing in clubs. No one did it. Now, they all do unless they work for a run 'n gun that doesn't let them do it.

If someone told me how to shoot like that, the next place my 580 would go off is inside their lower intestine. With the lamp detached so they feel the electrodes.

itsafastworld,

I have an excellent copyright attorney, but I'm US-based so I don't think I can help.

Ah yes I forgot that the 580 you can disable the flash.

Time to go and RTFM.

Podcanon - Here look on a site called dont stay in, 90% is off camera, flicky camera stuff, almost all are the same.

I just want to have some diversity from time to time to keep me enetertained in the same venue 2x a week

You can keep it off camera and still be diverse. Just think fourth-dimensionally.

Rukes wrote in post #8868270
The only problem is the ST-E2 is still old and slow, especially compared to taking a 580EXII and just turning the flash function off. However the ST-E2 is definately good if price is an issue, since it's half the cost of a new flash (but the ST-E2 batteries are expensive).

Just remember they will help with basic low-light general focusing, but they are too slow/not accurate for super low light spot metering if you use AV, so make sure to get a good manual reading.



Still who would really go that high with either? I'll just be happy if the 3200 is equal or better than 1600!

thats what people thought of iso1600 and iso3200 back in the day too. With new technology comes new creative outlooks and possibilities. Im sure if you had it, you would find a way to use it when you need it.

turbodude wrote in post #8868933
thats what people thought of iso1600 and iso3200 back in the day too. With new technology comes new creative outlooks and possibilities. Im sure if you had it, you would find a way to use it when you need it.

+1

i would love higher iso ... especially wedding stuff when the ceremony lighting is dim and sucky

turbodude wrote in post #8868933
thats what people thought of iso1600 and iso3200 back in the day too. With new technology comes new creative outlooks and possibilities. Im sure if you had it, you would find a way to use it when you need it.

Yeah, but that was with WORKABLE photos. All these high ISO are just a marketing tool, much like the megapixel race. "hey, they have high ISO, let's do it too".

I will never use any ultra high-ISO like that, i'm just sticking with the noise limit. I don't see how anyone could be happy with something that noisy. All ISO helps is giving you a quicker shutter speed, and considering I can get very good results already at 1600, i'm not in a rush to use expanded ISO settings. Right now i'm just looking forward to a workable 3200.

Don't forget I don't post-process/crop my photos at all (aside from slight tweaks to get rid of the evil smoke monster), so having to de-noise photos would be part of that. I never liked the "smoothed over" look of de-noising.

Rukes wrote in post #8869868
Yeah, but that was with WORKABLE photos. All these high ISO are just a marketing tool, much like the megapixel race. "hey, they have high ISO, let's do it too".

I will never use any ultra high-ISO like that, i'm just sticking with the noise limit. I don't see how anyone could be happy with something that noisy. All ISO helps is giving you a quicker shutter speed, and considering I can get very good results already at 1600, i'm not in a rush to use expanded ISO settings. Right now i'm just looking forward to a workable 3200.

Don't forget I don't post-process/crop my photos at all (aside from slight tweaks to get rid of the evil smoke monster), so having to de-noise photos would be part of that. I never liked the "smoothed over" look of de-noising.

yeah i can understand your stand point. But for me, shooting everything under the sun from weddings to concerts to sports to whatever the hell else, its a nice tool, because i will post process when i need.

I don't use NR either.

Now bear in mind, I grew up in a film world. ISO 400 film would make some of you kids puke with the amount of noise. Now, we called it grain, but still. You kids would puke at the grain/noise that film had at anything over 200. We got "acceptable" noise at 400 with Kodak 400 UC, but by then the DSLR revolution was in full swing and it didn't matter.

Heh, I shot ISO 25 Kodachrome at a festival once. Very, very, very challenging. Maybe got 2 frames out of 3 rolls. Then again I was 19 and sucked. I suck now, but not as bad.

So, it's a difference of perspective. For me, a 40D at 3200 generates acceptable images. The 1D MKIV at 102400? Well, I will have to see. I am not going to poo-poo it as marketing hype just yet.

Now, from a "ideal" perspective, sure, I'd love to have 400 noise at 3200 or above. Will it happen? Sure it will.

But then again, you guys have to look at the engineering perspective of things. I grew up around engineers and physicists, so I kinda see how it works. Think about it. In the sensor of the 1D MKIV, there are sixteen million individual transistors crammed into the the space of a wide postage stamp. That's a lot of electrical activity across a small space.

Now, all those electrons flitting about generate a lot of heat. Ever crack open your Mac Pro and feel the heatsink? You can cook eggs on that! And that chip has hundreds of millions of transistors.
Heat generates noise. It skews the resultant signal. Upper IR bleeds into the red frequencies and causes that "blotch".

And, when you change your ISO, you're essentially turning up an amplifier. Next time you get into a club early, go into the DJ booth and ask the sound tech to turn the sound system up to "10" without a signal. Hear that hiss? That's your noise floor right there. That hiss (noise) will be present in your signal no matter what. So, you turn up your ISO (amp) and you are amplifying the natural noise of the electronic system in your hands. That system has a noise floor, and also (like the FCC regs say) has to accept noise from the outside world. You're in a venue with hundreds of very powerful magnets. That will skew your noise characteristics. You might spend $5K or more on a body, but it's not shielded, so you're just gonna have to deal with it. Unless you spend more. And more. Those big honkin' astronomy sensor setups can handle interference, but not on the cheap.

Noise in an electronic system is a fact of life. We deal with it, produce our art, embrace it, and move on. I could strap a Peltier cooler to my sensor, but it's too much trouble.

Now, we all want that ideal, but I hope my little rant has shed some light as to why it cannot happen right away. If anyone wants to really talk physics, I'm always around.


TD: Yes, we all post process when we need. I shot an album cover over the summer that netted me quite a bit. The client wanted an unreal look, so I did it in post. Monochrome people against a slate blue sky does not happen on this rock.

^---Great post. Well-said.

turbodude wrote in post #8866026
dude... where have you been! how do you like the d700

turbodude wrote in post #8866124
lol, you know all to well huh buddy... lol i still remember the day you decided to switch to the darkside. 2 sessions with me changed your life and drained your wallet. lol

I've been good. Just out getting used to the new setup. Not to start up a debate but the D700 is amazing there aren't enough words to describe the AF system.

My wallet wasn't drained to bad in totalled I lost about $1300 switching, and that's only because of the shutter breaking on the 5D which cost $650 to replace. I would say the money lost was well worth the improvements gained in switching.

We need to hit the streets again Al. I'll email you later today.

Alright, I'm caving in. You guys have single-handedly convinced me to shoot for a 1 series body. Completely and 100% out of my reach financially, but I guess it gives me something to look forward to. I hate you all for changing my mind :P

mosesport wrote in post #8872851
Alright, I'm caving in. You guys have single-handedly convinced me to shoot for a 1 series body. Completely and 100% out of my reach financially, but I guess it gives me something to look forward to. I hate you all for changing my mind :P

for the money, i would save up and get the 7d.

some sports buddies of mine say that the 7d is rivaling the mkiii. And totally blowing the mkii out of the water.

^---wow really? hmmm... Thanks for the tip. That would save quite a bit of money.

Edit: I guess the only thing I'd be wary about is the APS-C sensor. Is it worth it?