Topic: Please Discuss Your Concert Shooting Experiences

[stirinthesauce]

shit, 100000 clicks is alot!

I shoot like mad and have probably shot 40-50k in clicks in the past 2 years.  That has been on 3 different bodies.

Of course, there are times when one may shoot more.  That is when it is a good paying job.  Bought my 5d used from a wedding photog.  He ran up about 20k in clicks in 3 weddings.  Traded it in and bought another. 


I am most likely going to sell my 5d in the next 2-4 months.  At that time I will estimate about 30-35k in clicks.  Still just 1/3rd of the estimated shutter life used.  I find it better to trade up rather than wearing it out.

I am also thinking about buying a heavily used 20d as a backup.  Or maybe a 350d.

[stevetoney]

While I too have a tinge of concern about the 100,000 rating, I think I've reconciled my own thinking on that subject without really going out to ask others too much.  First, with technology advancing the way it is, I'm fairly confident that my own need/desire to upgrade camera bodies will come along way before I get to 100,000 clicks.  Second, this is a rating.  I have every confidence that even for a camera with 100,000 clicks there is likely to be plenty of life left on many of the shutters with this rating.  Say I reach 100,000 and my shutter suddenly locks up.  So, I go out on the web, find another 40D that's (by this time) 6 or 7 years old, pay someone a couple hundred for an ancient DSLR...or pay a couple hundred for a new shutter mechanism.  Whichever. 

Bottom line is, I'm looking at digital SLRs pretty much the same as my computer.  It's an electronic component with a limited life...probably 5 years or so.  To stay in the game, I'm gonna have to replace it every so often.

My take anyway.

[Sanjay]

Everything is limited life, your DAT recorder can only do so many hours, your HD can only write so many times, your mics will eventually die due to moisture or loose their charge.  No point and shoot which lacks a shutter will last even close to what a DSLR will.

On my D50 back in the day it cost me $200 to replace the shutter.  I'd say that's not that much money.  All SLRs be it Digital or Film will have a shutter break over time, as will rangefinders and TLR's. 

Don't worry about it, go shoot, and shoot often!!!

I racked up 20,000 shots last year on my D300.  At this rate the camera will be obsolete before I kill it. 

[stevetoney]

20,000 / 365 =  55 shots daily

Yup, that's not a ridiculously huge amount, especially if you lean on 'motor drive' function at all.  OTOH, $200 for a shutter replacement after 5 years of shooting 50 shots daily would not be a big deal to me...especially if I owned one of the full frame pro grade camera bodies and shot that often.

[rastasean]

These are all good points. 
If I were to get a DSLR and it die after 30,000, I think I would get my money's worth. Its not like I take 55, or even 5 pictures, a day so just for NOT using it, it would last that much longer. haha.

So whose got a DSLR to sell me? 

[Sanjay]

These are all good points. 
If I were to get a DSLR and it die after 30,000, I think I would get my money's worth. Its not like I take 55, or even 5 pictures, a day so just for NOT using it, it would last that much longer. haha.

So whose got a DSLR to sell me? 

Keep in mind the ratings are the mean, not the expected life.  D300 is rated to 200k.

If you want to buy my D300 I'll sell it to you since I'm buying a D700. 

PS. I didn't forget about your website, it's coming.

[sunjan]

My whole thing with DSLRs is that the shutters have a limited life and eventually fail. Yes, its 100,000 to 200,000 but I would be counting down from there from every photo I take and it would probably be very expensive to replace the shutter. Does anyone have experience with shutter replacement?

That would be the least of my worries. I had to replace the shutter on my Nikon FM2 back in 1994, but that was from poking a finger thru it, not from wear.
So I coughed up maybe $400 and had it replaced. The camera has been working perfectly ever since.

Let's say you spend $1000 on a DSLR. Divide the cost on 100,000 shots. Each shot will then cost you 1 cent in the lifespan of that shutter!

With the current development, any digital camera (DSLR or P&S) will become obsolete long before the technical end-of-life of the moving parts.
So whatever digital camera gear you buy, upgrading every 5 years makes sense, because the improvement in the technology will give you so much better pictures, even if your old gear still works.

[ol' dirty taper]

Sanjay

Just checked out your site, very nice. Simple and sleek looking, good use of simpleviewer, I couldn't figure out how to make it look nice on my site so I went with autoviewer. Still trying to work out some kinks on mine, but its pretty much where I want it to be, just have to update the concert port and fix a few lines of code for the galleries. I went with more of a photo-blog look.

You notice any image quality loss with simpleviewer? I noticed that if it has to size the image down itself the quality goes down as well on autoviewer. 

[Sanjay]

Sanjay

Just checked out your site, very nice. Simple and sleek looking, good use of simpleviewer, I couldn't figure out how to make it look nice on my site so I went with autoviewer. Still trying to work out some kinks on mine, but its pretty much where I want it to be, just have to update the concert port and fix a few lines of code for the galleries. I went with more of a photo-blog look.

You notice any image quality loss with simpleviewer? I noticed that if it has to size the image down itself the quality goes down as well on autoviewer. 

I used Simpleviewer Pro, pm me or email me if you'd like a copy I think I have that and autoviewer pro.  I also used a plugin called flickrviewer which pulls directly from my flickr sets.  So now to update all I do is edit my photoset, seemless website update as well.

I do notice a bit of a quality loss, but that's probably from Flickr and not other things.  Mostly it's in the color scheme and I suspect flickr might have their own colorspace and not use RGB.  I haven't worried enough to test it.

What did you use for the rotating image on the front of your site?  I love it, would work perfect for photo stories if I can set it to sequence in a certain order.

Great stuff yourself!

[ol' dirty taper]

I am going to take you up on that offer and PM you in a minute, but I thought others might want to know what I used for the slideshow. Its a port of SmoothGallery 2.0 for Wordpress. I think you can find plugins that are similar on the wordpress site. You set what you want it to show and how (I have mine pulling from a set Custom Field in Wordpress), there are a lot of ways to display content with it. I am using versions of it on both my sites.

I found that if you save in Photoshop either Save For Web or the Image Processor Script, that if you select to save with "ICC Profile" selected as an option, that Flickr maintains the original color scheme. On Image Processor you can also include with the ICC, to save the sRGB profile as well, which works for newer browsers, although Firefox still wants to wash things out a little bit. I've had great luck with Camino maintaining vivid colors... too bad its a shitty browser.

[stevetoney]

I had to replace the shutter on my Nikon FM2 back in 1994, but that was from poking a finger thru it, not from wear.

Sunjan:  Whats this thing here? 

Someone standing nearby:  That's the shutter and you probably shouldn't poke your fing...
Sunjan and 'someone' in unison:  OOOPS!     

 

[rastasean]

So after everyone's reassurances of not worrying about the shutter, I am in the market for a DSLR. I'm considering the D90 at the moment but that is always subject to change. Anyone have/used one of these badboys?

nikon d90

[stevetoney]

So after everyone's reassurances of not worrying about the shutter, I am not in the market for a DSLR. I'm considering the D90 at the moment but that is always subject to change. Anyone have/used one of these badboys?

nikon d90

Rasta:

I don't have a D90, but I have a Canon 40D.  The 50D is the current competition with the D90, but I think the 40D is close enough to both that I can comment.  First of all, this is my first DSLR and I've had it for 2 - 3 months and I simply love it.  I can't imagine that you wouldn't completely love owning the D90, especially with it being your first DSLR.

Having said this, I'm not inclined to nit-pick the features like...say...the article in DPReview would when it comes to reviewing the D90 against say the D80 or the D300. 

Major features I like are that the camera goes to ISO 6400, has Live View, and or course access to all the great nikor lenses.  I'm less inclined to be impressed that it has in camera video capability since right now I'm more into having a separate camera that's designed specifically for that option than using my still camera as a jack-of-all-trades device.  IOW, I don't want my still camera compromised for purposes of having video features...whether it's weight or design features, or just additional clunkiness in controls...albeit all things being equal, I suppose it's a convenient feature to have.

What I do love alot is Live View.  I like shooting at odd angles and perspectives.  Live view really helps composition when you can't peer through the viewfinder.  It's awesome.  I still prefer composing a normal shot using the viewfinder, but when holding the camera above my head or at my ankles, live view is simply awesome.

My only other comment is that, for the price you're looking $1000 or so new, I might give some consideration to adding another $200 and going for Sanjay's D300.  All metal construction and 14bit image depth are nice features. 

Regardless, if you were to go for the D90, I know that you'd love it to death.

Good luck.

Steve

[rastasean]

Steve,

Thanks very much for your opinions!

I considered Sanjay's D300 but like everything I want to buy, I have to save money and make payments. Sanjay is looking for the cash up front and I don't blame him since that is quite a bit of money to make payments on. He should be able to sell it real well at the price, though.

I didn't think the video feature would be anything great either since almost all digital cameras have that now but take a look at some of these videos: http://vimeo.com/D90/
I have video cameras and understand still cameras are for photography and video cameras/camcorders are for motion picture but I am completely blown away with the videos I've seen.

The live view does seem real, real nice but most people at the DP forums report it has a slight lag unlike a Sony something or other that uses two sensors...something like that. That's completely fine with me since it would be used to set a shot up, not the main method to photograph. I imagine it would be very useful in the odd angles you can't get to but it would be nice to see how it would compose.

I don't think I would be upset with a D90 and it would be a great experience.

Who made me come to this forum and talked me into a DSLR???   

happy new year guys!

edit:

check this video out: Kata bags testimonial video-Kevin Augello

[stevetoney]

I didn't think the video feature would be anything great either since almost all digital cameras have that now but take a look at some of these videos: http://vimeo.com/D90/
I have video cameras and understand still cameras are for photography and video cameras/camcorders are for motion picture but I am completely blown away with the videos I've seen.

Sweet.  I also saw the video that was accompanying the new Canon 5DMarkII camera body and it's also spectacular!

The live view does seem real, real nice but most people at the DP forums report it has a slight lag unlike a Sony something or other that uses two sensors...something like that. That's completely fine with me since it would be used to set a shot up, not the main method to photograph. I imagine it would be very useful in the odd angles you can't get to but it would be nice to see how it would compose.

I can see this comment.  Live View isn't for situations where you want to 'capture the moment'.  For example, I can see where a wedding photographer would have absolutely no use for Live View.  What I love it for though is composing stills in situations where it's difficult to put your eye on the viewfinder.  In my case, that can be often, so I find it to be a VERY useful feature and the delay is not an issue. 

OTOH, contrary to the mentaility of the vast majority of the point-and-shooters out there, I don't use Live View in the manner that most point-and-shoot photographers use it.  Whenever I have the chance to put my eye to the viewfinder for composition, I do so.

I don't think I would be upset with a D90 and it would be a great experience.

For sure.  Damn lotta fun, it is!

Who made me come to this forum and talked me into a DSLR???   

Didn't someone once tell me, read TS.com at your own risk...and leave the wallet at the door.