Hey Leo..!!!

[Absolute Basements]

How about some tips for choosing a good DSLR camera?
Christmas is right around the corner, and I KNOW my Mrs. would love a tax deductible gift...

[Leo G]

Get a good one? It all depends on what you want to do with it, who will be holding it and how much you are willing to dole out.

Some of the DSLRs are kind of on the small size. Good for a person with small hands. I hate them.

Give me some specs and budgets and I will see what I can lead you to.

[orson]

Pentax makes great pro model cameras, arguably achieving picture quality as high as anything on the market at a significantly lower cost.

They tend to be a bit more difficult to use however.

http://www.pentaximaging.com/slr/

Cannon is the most popular with pros and amateurs alike.

If you want bragging rights and your cheese can't possibly be too stinky then Hasselblad medium formats are still the way to go, you could always trade your car in for one :grin:

[ChrWright]

I'm looking to upgrade my camera as well. Seriously looking at the Canon 5D mark ii.

I like that it shoots very good quality HD video (it was used to shoot the finale episode of House) in addition to having a very powerful feature set.

Way more camera than I really need but I'm thinking of splurging for the holidays... :grin:

CdaybWRRDWI

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikeblackphotos/3102574149/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikeblackphotos/3103225297/in/photostream/

[Leo G]

So yer gonna spend $2500 on a camera body? You need to buy lenses, flash, bags etc.

You will end up $5K in the hole. Plus 21 MP shots will eat up your hard drive. I was thinking about going into the Nikon D7000. Sports a movie mode too. Half the price, comes with a good lens been getting good reviews.

The camera you are looking at is a Pro camera for someone shooting for their living.

But, if you've got money to burn...that's a good way to do it.

[ChrWright]

How about the 7D?

[Leo G]

Go here (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Canon/) to see the reviews of the Canon cameras. That camera is more in line with a semi pro/amateur person. But it still has a pretty big price tag. Not sure how you will be shooting with this camera but most of the newer amateur (consumer grade DLSR) cameras will give just about the same results as the pro cameras without the expense. A lot of the expense comes with a magnesium body, sealed camera, fast rapid shooting and a lot of focus points that the pros just have to have. You get one shot at a picture, it better come out. I figure you are going to be shooting a lot of work with it, family and such. (I could be wrong). But unless you plan on shooting a lot of fast action (sports, racing) you will probably be spending a lot of money that you don't really need to be spending.

I know very little about the Canon family of cameras. I do know that it is one of the top two that you will likely see a pro shooting with, the other is Nikon. If you want to learn a lot about cameras you can visit DPReview.com. It is a UK based camera forum. Great place.

[ChrWright]

What lenses do you find yourself using the most for interior shots of your work?

[Leo G]

18-70mm Nikon and 10-20mm Sigma/Nikon. The newer 18-105mm VR has a better range

[ChrWright]

You're using Photoshop Elements right?

Have you used Lightroom, or DxO?

Did you splurge on very high quality glass with huge apertures or do you find you can get by with mid-range lenses?

Still getting my head around the options. Looking at kits, which mostly seem to include lower quality lenses.

[Leo G]

Pro glass is pricey. I have no pro glass. The 10-20mm is a constant f/stop the rest of my lenses are variable f/stop. The more you zoom, the smaller the aperture becomes, letting in less light. The newer CMOS sensors are much better with noise than the previous generation of sensors which means you can boost the ISO value to make the sensor more sensitive to light so you can use a higher f/stop or faster shutter speed. If you are shooting projects you can use a tripod and do a longer exposure. Natural light is considered better than a flash. Sometimes it is, and sometimes it isn't.

I have a range of lenses
50mm f/1.8
10-20mm
18-70mm
70-300mm VR

The camera, because of it DX sensor will multiply the mm value by 1.5x. So my 18-70mm is really a 27-105mm when you speak in 35mm (full frame [FX])terms

Head spinning yet?

[ChrWright]

Has been spinning all day as I've tried to research, lol.

Still leaning toward the 5D mark ii. I have a client who owns the 5d and loves it.

Might be an early Christmas present. :grin:

[ChrWright]

One of our projects my client photographed with his 5D:

http://wrightworks.net/web2.jpg

[Leo G]

It is an excellent camera and is way more than you need. I'm not sure if Canon even has it but Nikon's flashes can be used off camera and controlled by the camera. I have found this to be a very useful function. Placing the flash in an area that will produce better lighting while taking the picture from a different spot. If you have 3 flash units you can set them all up in different spots for a better overall lighting of the subject.

For years now Canon has produced an image with much lower noise then Nikon. That changed 2 years ago with the intro of a new sensor. Now they are on par to each other. Just remember that you are buying into a system. The lenses you will buy will last a lifetime while the bodies will come and go every few years or so. So once you buy into a system you will usually have to stick with it because of your investment into lenses and flashes. If you have a few bodies you can use your existing lenses on all of them. Or when you upgrade, same thing.

So, you need to look at the whole picture. Bodies, lenses, flashes and other accessories. One of the more important things to do is pick the camera up. Pick a lot of them up. It needs to feel comfortable in your hand when you use it.

[Leo G]

One of our projects my client photographed with his 5D:

http://wrightworks.net/web2.jpg

Any competent photographer with any quality camera can produce those results. Even some good point and shoot cameras are capable of that level of sharpness.

I use Paint Shop Pro for my editing. I have a version by JASC, before Corel bought them out and ruined the program.

You've seen some of the pic I have shown here. I have a very outdated camera and I use consumer lenses. Most of my photographs go through some sort of processing. At the very least you should do a bit of sharpening (USM) because the sensor has a AA filter over it that reduces sharpness a bit.

[ChrWright]

Let me ask you this:

With a better camera (and a lot of practice using it) won't I be able to generate better pics that don't require as much PP?

[ChrWright]

Sorry for hijacking your thread Darren. Did you end up getting a new camera?

[Leo G]

believe it or not, the better the camera the more PP (post processing) you will need. The P&S cameras are all set up for out of the box pictures. Always expect to have to do some sort of PP.

A more expensive camera will give you better guts. Usually pro features like being able to fine tune each one of your lenses to be tack sharp. Sealed bodies and magnesium bodies. But on average they all do the same thing. More expensive cameras will usually generate less noise (grain) within the picture, but that is not always the case.

Taking good pics depends on the user, the lighting and then the camera.

Usually you will set the camera up so it gives you a flat picture. Then you can PP it to look the way you want it to. Of course, there are internal settings that you can adjust so you can get an out of the camera picture. But because you are editing the picture in camera, you may be stuck with a pic that is over sharpened, has too much contrast or something else. With a flat pic you can usually do anything you want with it.

[Leo G]

So that's it? Yer done with me?

[ChrWright]

Naa, still surfing/looking.

Interesting tool for selecting the right camera based on needs: http://www.toptenreviews.com/configurator/digital-cameras/professional-dslr/

[ChrWright]

Would be interested to hear your Good, Better, Best recommendations on equipment a contractor can use to photograph their work Leo.

[Leo G]

I used your little test program and this is what it spit out

Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Nikon D300S
Sony Alpha a850

[Absolute Basements]

Sorry for hijacking your thread Darren. Did you end up getting a new camera?

Still looking.

[Leo G]

go with the Hasseblad medium format. Just sell your car to get it.

[bconley]

Has been spinning all day as I've tried to research, lol.

Still leaning toward the 5D mark ii. I have a client who owns the 5d and loves it.

Might be an early Christmas present. :grin:

Nice camera, I have been looking as well and leaning toward the new 60D or the Nikon D7000. $2500+ for the 5D is just too much right now, going to buy Festools or ipad with the savings

[Leo G]

I would say that if this is your first DSLR then you take it easy and get something that doesn't have so many options. This is not your P&S camera. There are many differences. One of them is cleaning. When you change lenses you open up the cavity that houses the sensor. This will allow dust to get on the sensor. On occasion a small bit of grease will fling off the mirror and onto the sensor. This needs to be cleaned. It can be a sort of scary thing to do. I know I was when it came time to clean my sensor for the first time. It took me over an hour to get the job done properly. When you clean it you take the chance of smearing the dirt, pushing it around or just adding more. It really takes a bit of time to get it done properly. Some cameras have self cleaning sensors. But with static and the particle sizes sometimes the only way to get it clean is to do it manually. This is something you never have to worry with a P&S camera.

Even if you never take the lens off, the action of most zoom lenses will create a vacuum inside the sensor chamber and draw dust in.

It took me a long time to get use to all the different things that you have to make sure are set to get a good picture out of the camera. There really is a lot to remember and to know how to setup.

You usually get a DSLR so you can have more control over your picture taking experience. If you plan on getting a DSLR and keeping it on auto, you might as well get a P&S also.

I usually keep my camera on Aperture Priority. This is where the size of the aperture is the constant and everything else changes around that constant. The aperture controls two things. It controls how much light gets into the camera and it controls the depth of field (DOF) The depth of field is how much of the scene is actually in focus. If you are taking portraits you want a low depth of field. You want the face in focus and everything behind that blurred. To do this you use a large aperture. Large apertures are designated by lower numners ie: f/1.8, f/3.2. This also lets in a lot of light and you will usually use a faster shutter speed to compensate for the larger amounts of light coming onto the sensor.

If you are shooting fast action, you will likely use a Shutter Priority. This means that the shutter speed will stay the same and everything else will be variable. This is usually used in sports. Where getting the stop action motion of the particular play is of utmost importance.

There is a "P" setting on most cameras which is for programmed. This is setup in the camera and uses a lot of variable to make the picture come out well depending on the situation. It will vary the ISO, Shutter speed and aperture depending on the available light.

[ChrWright]

Hovering around the Canon 60D or 7D...

lQ2rgGG1IuU

XGswQlt89MQ

LEO, you're a NIKON guy right?

[Leo G]

That's what I own, Nikon.

[ChrWright]

I realize there are brand loyal folks for reasons that go beyond quality--but any reason you went with them or did you end up with them early on and just stick with them because of the family of lenses you bought?

[Leo G]

Heard lots of good things about them when I was first switching out of the Olympus brand. I didn't want to stick with the 3:4 picture that Olympus was using. The D70 was a rave camera and had a great price. I have been pretty pleased with the operation of the camera. Another thing about Canon is the cheap lenses are just that, cheap. They have no middle ground. Then the next choice is the "L" glass which is expensive. At least Nikon has a middle ground where you can get a lens that is of good quality/build and not cost an arm and a leg.

The prime lenses in Nikon aren't as good as the Canon lenses. But, I don't use prime lenses that often and currently only own one, the 50mm f/1.8

The flashes with the Nikon brand are of the same quality and have more features than the Canon does.

One of the things that Canon had led in was noise. They switched over to a CMOS sensor long before Nikon did. And Canon had that advantage for a decade. Now Nikon is using CMOS sensors and the advantage is gone.

Nikon uses a better NR for their sensors. It removes noise better and leaves the picture more intact. All the cameras have their problems with faulty AF. The newer cameras with newer AFs seem to have more problems, then they are fixed with software upgrades. Always wait for a camera to be out for a year or so before purchasing it. Let someone else find the bugs in it for you and when you get your camera, the price has come down and the bugs have been fixed.

[ChrWright]

Went ahead and ordered the 7D. I have a client/friend who I can swap lenses with (he owns a 5D) and I really like the video options--which kinda put me over the edge against Nikon:

http://gizmodo.com/5400595/canon-7d-review

I'm going to be doing a lot more video for the website in the coming year and I like the versatility of being able to do both with one camera.

I also bought a 24-70mm f/2.8L USM Standard Zoom Lens and a 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM ultra wide angle. Both were well reviewed for 1.6 crop factor sensors.

Looking forward to playing with it.

[Leo G]

That's a nice $3700 bill. Now you need a tripod, flash, bag and monopod.

[Absolute Basements]

Went ahead and ordered the 7D. I have a client/friend who I can swap lenses with (he owns a 5D) and I really like the video options--which kinda put me over the edge against Nikon:

http://gizmodo.com/5400595/canon-7d-review

I'm going to be doing a lot more video for the website in the coming year and I like the versatility of being able to do both with one camera.

I also bought a 24-70mm f/2.8L USM Standard Zoom Lens and a 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM ultra wide angle. Both were well reviewed for 1.6 crop factor sensors.

Looking forward to playing with it.

I'm searching around for the "SWEET:2thumbsup:" button

[ChrWright]

That's a nice $3700 bill. Now you need a tripod, flash, bag and monopod.


Indeed. Will probably buy those local.

Early C-mas present. :grin:

[Leo G]

Ohhh. Add another $500 for a local buy. I was looking up pricing on www.bhphotovideo which is a brick and mortar store in NYC. Most of my camera stuff comes from them.

[ChrWright]

Ohhh. Add another $500 for a local buy. I was looking up pricing on www.bhphotovideo which is a brick and mortar store in NYC. Most of my camera stuff comes from them.

I bought the camera and lenses online, for right at that.

I meant I'd be buying bag, tripod, etc. local.

[Leo G]

Cool. Who did you get them from?

[ChrWright]

Amazon.

.....

[Leo G]

So when is it coming in.

Just remember when you have questions I won't be able to answer them because you bought a Canon http://fototime.com/40DD8CE4A9DB464/orig.gif

[ChrWright]

Supposed to be here tomorrow. Planning on some test photos against my old camera.

Oh, and I'll still be asking those questions btw. :grin:

[Leo G]

I wonder who will be answering them..http://fototime.com/40DD8CE4A9DB464/orig.gif



:laugh3:

[naptownCr]

My vote goes with the Hasselblad or Mamaya RB67 medium format.
Yes they are film camera's but I am old school trained.
For really important stuff a 5x7 or 8x10 view is the only way to go. Preferrably with the zeiss lenses.

[orson]

At the risk of running against the grain of Leo's godlike wisdom Pentax should be on anyone's short list of top quality camera's, particularly if you are budget conscious.

The camera costs less, the lenses cost less, the picture quality is on par with much more expensive cameras.

My wife took a course in professional photography and her digital SLR is a Pentax K10 and it's a great camera.

[Leo G]

You have smited me......:laugh3:

[ChrWright]

My vote goes with the Hasselblad or Mamaya RB67 medium format.
Yes they are film camera's but I am old school trained.
For really important stuff a 5x7 or 8x10 view is the only way to go. Preferrably with the zeiss lenses.

Are those considered "box" cameras?

[naptownCr]

Are those considered "box" cameras?

I would consider the Hasselblad and Mamiya a box camera. they use 120 film like an old kodak brownie
The View camera is an even older technology and was actually the first camera that was available. They are the ones that you see in the old time movies with the photographer with his head under an cloth behind the camera. The advantages are you get a huge negative therefore very high resolution prints that can be blown up to billboard size without losing definition. The down sides are they are huge. take forever to set up, can only be used on a tripod you can maybe take one frame a minute if you are really fast at changing film carriers.

[orson]

Not sure if this is still the case but a few years ago when my wife was studying photography we were able to pick up a used Hasselblad medium format film camera for next to nothing.

A lot of people were unloading their film cameras and going digital and their was a relative glut on the market.

[Leo G]

Where the hell are all the pictures?

[ChrWright]

Haven't had much time to play with it yet. Here's a shot of my girl:

http://wrightworks.net/images/Girlie1.jpg

[Leo G]

You haven't been playing with your new toy???

For shame.

[ChrWright]

Darren, did you end up getting a DSLR?

[Absolute Basements]

I haven't....still on the short list though.

[ChrWright]

Still getting the feel for the new camera. Here's a shot I took recently:

http://wrightworks.net/images/TubLarge.JPG

[Leo G]

Next time use a fill flash so the window is more inline with the brightness of the entire picture, bump the aperture up from 3.5 to about 5.6-8. You may have to bump your ISO up to 200 (from 100) to compensate for less light coming in from the shot. You are not using the flash to brighten the scene, just to fill it in.


I didn't see what mode you were shooting in, Aperature, Shutter, Manual or Program.

[ChrWright]

I believe it was Aperture mode.

I was playing with a lot of settings that day...and have a lot of photos that look like crap.

Do you typically use a tripod, I'm assuming?

[Leo G]

I almost never use a tripod.

[Absolute Basements]

Next time use a fill flash so the window is more inline with the brightness of the entire picture, bump the aperture up from 3.5 to about 5.6-8. You may have to bump your ISO up to 200 (from 100) to compensate for less light coming in from the shot. You are not using the flash to brighten the scene, just to fill it in.


I didn't see what mode you were shooting in, Aperature, Shutter, Manual or Program.

This is why I don't have one yet...

[Leo G]

It's not that hard, turn this know, push that button click the shutter. After a couple of hundred pics you get how everything works. And believe me, when you buy the camera, it is the new toy and you will snap off the couple of hundred pics in the first couple of days.

[ChrWright]

Took some pics of a whole house we finished a bit ago. Still trying to figure things out:

[ChrWright]

Too much noise.

[Leo G]

More contrast
http://fototime.com/0DBE3A5874F99D7/standard.jpg

The other one seems soft, how was the focus in the full sized image?

[ChrWright]

RC janked it I think. Hang on I'll upload the original and link it.

[ChrWright]

http://www.wrightworks.net/images/Todd1.jpg

http://www.wrightworks.net/images/Todd2.jpg

[J F]

Dam Chris, what size image was on the last page?...I got to watch it fill in line by line...neat curved wall at the foot of the tub though.

[Leo G]

Anything above ISO 400 will start showing noise. Keep it to 200 or lower, more flash or get a tripod and take longer exposures.

Or go spent $800 on mono lights and have ubber lighting.

[Leo G]

You stripped the EXIF data from the large picture. I can't tell what the shot parameters are. The EXIF data is in the close up.

[ChrWright]

It was about the same ISO 500, or so.

[ChrWright]

Trying to get the feel for settings using natural light.

Flashes and ubber lights are a little difficult to make work in a tiny bath filled with reflective surfaces. :smash:

[Leo G]

Put the camera in manual mode. Use an f/stop of 8 or larger. Keep the ISO as low as possible, bump the saturation a bit in the camera, keep the contrast at zero or maybe a little negative, you can boost it in post processing.

What do you have for a photo editor? You do have an editor, right? It is very hard to get great out of the camera pics, especially contrast.

[ChrWright]

Using Corel Paint Shop Pro X2 at the moment.

Definitely need a tripod I can see.

[Leo G]

The Corel version sucks (so I've heard), I have the JASC version. Do you use it?Most of the time I use the auto temperature correction, then the levels adjust (usually gamma) and then the unsharp mask.

[ChrWright]

It's so-so. I need to upgrade to a better program but haven't had the time to look yet.

The closer shots from today turned out mjuch sharper, even with the higher ISO. Anything far back is noisy as hell.

Played around with some bracketed exposures to deal with the hot spots and highlights but with the noise they still look like hell.

[ChrWright]

So in general I'm finding, for architectural shots:

Higher F stop to increase depth of field and lower ISO for sharpness. With better sharpness I think the bracketed exposures would have helped with the hot spots from the sconces.

I hate using a flash in tight spaces like that because the ceiling invariable look like hell. The mirrors and glass throw odd reflections as well.

I'll take a tripod back tomorrow and test some different settings.

Leo, have you ever used a Tilt-Shift Lens?

[bconley]

Trying to get the feel for settings using natural light.

Flashes and ubber lights are a little difficult to make work in a tiny bath filled with reflective surfaces. :smash:
Hey guys, any ideas on how to take photos of glass showers?
All I get is reflections or it not showing at all, thinking I may have to photoshop them

[J F]

Don't lose the tripod. http://i677.photobucket.com/albums/vv135/Jay123_bucket/Smileys/ac9ca517.gif

When you want to get some nice low light shots it's invaluable. I don't quite remember, but I'm sure Leo does, it's due to the shutter speed in low-light conditions...you don't want a hand-held shot.

[Leo G]

Lower ISO for less noise. Higher f/stop will give you better sharpness and longer depth of field.

Had to look that up. Never heard of it let alone use one. Looks expensive.

[J F]

Just out of curiosity, is photoshop (full version), not all it's cracked up to be? I've got PS CS4, but have never really used it. Are these other photo editing programs better/just as good/much cheaper/free?

[J F]

Being invisible is SWEET.... http://i677.photobucket.com/albums/vv135/Jay123_bucket/Smileys/c691f738.gifhttp://i677.photobucket.com/albums/vv135/Jay123_bucket/Smileys/c691f738.gifhttp://i677.photobucket.com/albums/vv135/Jay123_bucket/Smileys/c691f738.gif

[Leo G]

Quiet in the peanut gallery!!!:laugh3:

Photoshop or CS3/4 is a very powerful program that is capable of doing almost anything. The one limiting factor with my program is I am forced to work in RGB space, whereas in Photoshop you can work in RGB or CMYK.

[J F]

Quiet in the peanut gallery!!!:laugh3:

Photoshop or CS3 is a very powerful program that is capable of doing almost anything. The one limiting factor with my program is I am forced to work in RGB space, whereas in Photoshop you can work in RGB or CMYK.

I hear something...I think...not quite sure what it is though. It sounds like it is dropping from waaaaaay up above me.... (someone must have wings :idea:)

Thanks for the clarification Leo. http://i677.photobucket.com/albums/vv135/Jay123_bucket/Smileys/b54f75aa.gif

[ChrWright]

2nd trip to the same project this morning:

http://wrightworks.net/images/Todd3.jpg

http://wrightworks.net/images/Todd4.jpg


Better clarity... still some lighting issues. In this case it would have helped to have some supplemental lighting. The front of the vanity doesn't have enough definition, and jacking with it in post made it grainy.

The shower shot is nice and bright, but the area just outside looks way dark.

What kind of lighting came with your kit Leo? Is the temperature and intensity fixed? Are they strobes?

Even with dimmers.... Sconces are a PITA to make look decent in a photo. The shades on those are throwing a weird color cast on the walls.

[Leo G]

Yes, they are strobes and they also have what is called a modeling light. This is a temperature corrected halogen that you use to see how the flash will affect your subject. At first I didn't see how to use them but after about 100 pics of that kitchen I started to see how the modeling lamps would show how the flash would reflect.

The kit that I got has two Monolight flashes rated at 500W/s each. Each one has a 250W modeling lamp in it. You can set it up so the modeling lamp adjusts its brightness to how bright you have the flash set. The flash has a 5 stop range and can be varied in 1/10 stop increments.

The kit comes with two white reflecting umbrellas and a softbox. Two stands, a remote control for the lamps (very handy) and a nice case to drag the 40 lbs worth of crap around.

A lot of the shots I did I used the umbrella pointing straight up at the ceiling and the softbox pointing towards the subject. I want to try my hand at doing some portraits with it eventually.

[Leo G]

The first picture is a bit on the warm side. When I temperature color corrected it the lights got whiter.

The lighting is blown out so there is little you can do with it in that picture. If you had a tripod you could have taken a second shot of them with the lights exposed correctly and then superimposed them and used a mask to let the sconce shot with the correct exposure show through.

[Leo G]

If you want a program to help reduce noise I use Neat Image (http://www.neatimage.com/).

Some other photo buffs use Noise Ninja (http://www.picturecode.com/)

Seeing as you didn't listen to me and went and bought a Canon camera instead of Nikon you might as well try Noise Ninja :laugh3:

[Absolute Basements]

I wanna see more pics......

[ChrWright]

Did the Mrs. ever get that DSLR for Christmas?

[Absolute Basements]

Nope. She hasn't been naughty enough...
Still looking.

[ChrWright]

http://wrightworks.net/images/BasementSitting.jpg