Topic: Let's talk Canon digital SLRs... Part 2

[Fatah Ruark (aka MIKE B)]

I got my 50D in the mail this week. Actually it's my second. I decided to chance it and go the referb route first. That was a miserable failure. Shot about 25 test pictures with that and then it died (made a nasty clicking sound and would not take any pics). The referb was the 50D w/ 28-135 kit. I didn't really want that lens, but I got it for $1100 shipped. I figured a body alone cost about that and it would get me going. I wasn't happy with the test shots. I really wanted the 17-40 f/4L lens...so once the referb died, i decided it was a sign from above to get the lens I wanted!

So I ended up getting the camera and body from NewEgg of all places. They had the best price by far. Ended up being about $1800 shipped.

Unfortunately it's been nasty weather here this week so I haven't had a chance to make a real photo trip, but I'll probably head up to Rocky Mountain National Park on Saturday.

Next on the agenda is the 70-200 f/2.8L lens. After that I hope to add the 50mm f/1.4. I plan to use those for concert photos and the long lens for some nature photography (might at the doubler if 200mm isn't enough for me).

Here is one test pic that turned out really nice:

[eric.B]

awakening the beast..



HDR image taken 9/17/2010 on the outskirts of Cape May, NJ..

[eric.B]

[Fatah Ruark (aka MIKE B)]

Nice pics.

HDR is pretty cool.

I've been slacking on the photo trips. I need to get out there and try some HDR fun.

[sparkey]

Hello,

I posted yesterday before I found the Canon thread.  If some of you guys could weigh in on these Canon packages, that would be great.

http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=142215.0

Thanks!

Josh

[eric.B]

[johnw]

nice shots! What HDR software are you using?

[sparkey]

nice shots! What HDR software are you using?

HDR is essentially taking multiple shots of the same scene at differing ISO settings?

[Brian Skalinder]

HDR is essentially taking multiple shots of the same scene at differing ISO settings?

Not necessarily different ISO, but different exposures.  Typically, one combines a brighter exposures to bring out detail in dark/shadow areas (sometimes at the expense of blown highlights) with a darker exposure to capture highlights at the expense of dark/shadow detail.  While not reserved strictly for such scenarios, it's often used to capture scenes in which the dynamic range is greater than the camera sensor's capability.

[johnw]

To clarify:

I am assuming these are HDR images (they sure look like it). I am assuming these were taken with a Canon dSLR, none of which have settings to automatically create HDR images (unlike some cheaper cameras - i.e. the iphone) and require multiple images taken with different aperature settings or speeds to be compiled with software afterward. I was asking what software is being used to align and then merge the different layers (i.e. Photoshop, Gimp, Photomatix, etc). Sorry for any confusion.

[Sockan]

To clarify:

I am assuming these are HDR images (they sure look like it). I am assuming these were taken with a Canon dSLR, none of which have settings to automatically create HDR images (unlike some cheaper cameras - i.e. the iphone) and require multiple images taken with different aperature settings or speeds to be compiled with software afterward. I was asking what software is being used to align and then merge the different layers (i.e. Photoshop, Gimp, Photomatix, etc). Sorry for any confusion.

I can recommend Photomatix. I don't like Photoshop's HDR workflow/result.
Don't change aperture or ISO when shooting different exposures for HDR. Use the shutter speed instead. Use raw format if you can and at least 3 images and a tripod.
If you use jpg make sure you use an image preset with neutral contrast and color.

You can use any camera that have manual, semi-automatic, exposure compensation or exposure lock to create real HDR images, grunge or more "real" looking.
You can also do "false" HDR by using only one image, at least if you're shooting raw (jpg will work but the quality will suffer). Just make two copies of the image and make one dark, one bright and keep one neutral and then export the 3 images and put them together in Photomatix or a similar app.
Another "false" method is using two images and you put them together in photoshop in the same image but different layers and then using a layer mask to reveal the parts you want from one image on top of the parts you want to hide in the other image. This last method can't get the "grunge" effect you can see in the images in previous posts.

[sparkey]

Thanks for the info on the HDR...that is an interesting effect.

I pulled the trigger on a 60D with the EF-S 18-200 lens.  The pictures I took last night turned out great, considering it was so dimly lit up on stage, but were still blurred.  I do think that if there had been better stage lighting I would've pulled the shots off to my liking.

The review of this lens can be found here:

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/canon_18-200_3p5-5p6_is_c16/

Any opinions on the specs?

This shot was taken with the no flash mode, fully automatic, from a good 30' away.  The lighting in the picture probably looks brighter than what it was in the club.



Josh

[Sockan]

When photographing in dim light, it's harder to see if the camera has got the focus locked in the right spot. It's also harder for the camera/lens to find the focus in dim light. It looks like it's a bit sharper in the background on the wall lamp and mic stand, but i'm not sure. With a shutter time that long, it can also be blur when the artist moves. I like the image anyway. Just take a lot of images and then keep the ones you like the best. Have a big memory card and use the continues shooting mode on the camera..
I can see that you used ISO 3200, still the shutter speed was very slow (1/5). Even if you have image stabilization, the image can be a bit blurry. It's often useful to have a tripod or at least a monopod, but you can get sharp images without support. Putting the left hand under the camera and the left elbow in against the body to your hip usually do the trick. Getting a faster lens is also a solution, but an expensive one...
I think you will be happy with your choice of camera and lens. 60D seems to be a great camera. I have never tried that lens, but it's nice to have a lens that covers that zoom range.
It will always be a compromise with that kind of a lens and the sharpness will often be better with a lens with a shorter focal length or a prime lens. If you need a lens that is much faster and if you can get pretty close to the stage and doesn't cost a fortune, you should consider canon 50mm/1.8. It's not rugged, made in plastic, but it's sharp and it will let you take pictures in low light. It's small so you can probably have both lenses with you. It's also a nice portrait lens. Just remember that the depth of field will be really shallow when you use it wide open at 1.8 or close to that.
Good luck.

[johnw]

That's a pretty good lens, but might be tough to work with in low light. Since the f-stop is limited to 5.6 at 200mm, I'd keep it at whatever length will allow you to keep the f-stop at 3.5 and then get in as close as possible. The IS will help, so definitely keep that on. I generally try to use 2.8 with a speed of 50, but the narrow depth of field can make it hard to get a well focused image especially when I'm at a good distance.

[phanophish]

One other thing worth mentioning is the white balance is very warm.  It's not unusual at all for low light shots to skew that way.  It is also pretty easy to fix. 

One final point.  The IS function is usually best turned off when using a tripod as it can actually cause a loss of sharpness when the camera is on a tripod.  I know that was not the case for your image, but keep it in mind for the future.