Dr Flash wrote:
> While I very much like my 5D it was bought to satisfy some very
> specific criteria related to wedding and other event photography.
> It provides acceptable image quality at very high ISO for venues
> where flash can't be used. But flash is used as the main light
> probably 80% of the time and at ISO 400 where the 5D provides
> nearly noiseless performance.
I'm in 100% agreement with Chuck on this one. The 5D has been king of
the ambient light wedding/event photography thing. My E-1 sucks
pondwater at 1600. Usable, yes, but pretty much like pushing
Fuji-800 to 1600. We all did it in the film days out of necessity,
not out of preference. However, in reality, ISO 1600 on my E-1
(processed RAW in RSE) yields similar images to ISO 400 print film.
So, it is all relative.
However, at ISO 400 with flash, the CCD in the E-1 is not only VERY
clean, but holds the colors extremely well. The Canon CMOS tends to
start muting the colors at the higher ISOs. I don't know if this is
something inherent to CMOS or if it is just the image-processing
engine kicking in to keep apparant noise down. I mistakenly did a
portrait shoot the other day with the camera set at ISO 400. I meant
to use 200. Oh, well. Absolutely no problems and the images are
perfect for 11x14s. So, my point is that at ISO 400, any decent pro
camera should yield perfectly acceptable images.
> It's also used with (very heavy) constant aperture 2.8 lenses which
> allow the 5D to focus very fast and very reliably and the constant
> aperture assures no change in aperture as the lens is zoomed.
> That's important when all exposure is set manually. It's also
> important for daylight fill flash (most of the remaining 20% of
> shots) that the 5D's sync speed goes to 1/200th which can be
> augmented in bright sun by dropping the ISO down to 50.
Constant Aperture lenses are definitely worth it. I'll probably go
that way with my next general-purpose zoom. I wish I could afford
that new 17-35/2. Ouch! That said, I almost always shoot with the
lens stopped down to F4 even in the darkest of situations. This way,
I bypass the zoom variance AND I get a touch more DoF which covers up
my focusing errors. My E-1 syncs at 1/180 and the new E-3 does
something like 1/250. This is SO much easier for outdoor fill than
the stupid 1/60 limitation we have with the OM bodies. To me, 1/180
is heavenly.
> But it doesn't have built-in IS (unnecessary with flash), live
> view, an articulating view screen, weather seals and probably many
> other things I can't think of at the moment.
Actually, IS is still important with flash. Some of us like to "drag
the shutter" during flash photography and the IS really helps with
framing. (as opposed to shooting while in drag). Live View? Oh,
man. I'm going to be in hog heaven. I love live view. This is reason
#2 (behind increased pixel count) for me to get the E-3. The
articulating screen is also way cool since I have become accustomed
to shooting my A1 like a Hassleblad with a waist-level screen. This
works fine with horizontals, but to shoot verticals (stock and trade
for portrait photographers), you need the screen to flip out
sideways.
Weather sealing is a strange thing. I don't NEED weather sealing.
Just like I don't NEED a 4WD SUV vehicle. But when the weather turns
scuzzy, it's one less thing I have to worry about. And you never
know...
Recently, I shot a funeral. Unfortunately, it was raining that day.
My E-1 was getting wet enough that I would have been a worry-wart if
the camera wasn't weather-sealed. Now, do I shoot funerals very
often? No. And even if I did, would weather sealing been a factor
in camera selection? Probably not. But the situation came up where
the extra capability of the camera/lens became a major advantage and
I was able to shoot the entire graveside service to a level of detail
which would not have been possible otherwise. (it was a full-blown
honor-guard military style funeral).
> I don't think we know what the E-3 image quality is or will be but
> it's pretty certain that the E-3 will not match the 5D in the
> extremes.
That is probably true, however, we don't know yet. The 5D replacement
will, I'm positive, raise the threshold again.
> On the other hand, how many 20x30's do you intend to make? I'm
> sure the quality of an 8x10 or 11x14 E-3 image shot at ISO 100,
> 200 or maybe even 400 will probably be indistinguishable from a
> similar 5D shot.
Exactly! Of those 20x30s, how many are pixel-limited or
lens-limited? I'd put the best 4/3 lens/sensor package up against
the best 35mm lens/sensor package when effective pixel-count is the
same.
> There are probably near competitors to the DZ 7-14
I personally put the 7-14 lens in one of those "cool to have"
categories. I'd LOVE to have one, but do I NEED one? Hardly. The
11-22 would be a much more practical lens for me. The
Ultra-Wide-Angle is now the measuring-stick for geekism like the
Ultra-telephotos were a few years ago. I've personally never owned a
lens wider than 24mm (in 35mm format). Could I occasionally use
something wider? Sure, but these extreme wide-angles are very
impracticle.
> (such as Moose's
> recommended $300 Tamron 17-35 which I may buy myself) and you can
> save a lot of money by buying non-Canon glass.
Tokina had an awesome wide-zoom that I really fell in love with.
Personally, I'd take Tokina over Tamron any day of the week.
> You also have to consider that the 5D is getting rather long in the
> tooth in Canon digital years. The replacement can't be far away
> and I suspect that it will look a lot like a 40D with a bigger
> sensor and, of course, a bigger price.
Which is rather interesting because the 40D is the first Canon
digital that I've found to be seriously compelling. But what I'll
probably do is keep an eye out for a used 5D or 1DsMii in a couple of
years. By that time, they'll be had for a few hundred bucks. I really
don't need FF 35mm otherwise. Just like the 7-14, I put it in the
"nice to have" category which is a hard sell to my CDFO.
AG
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|