Dunno... Not sure it's sharp enough. Send it over to me, and I'll check it out vs. the 24-70mm 2.8L .. I'll let you know if it's good enough. Also, send the 24-105mm over here too and I'll check both of them for you against my 24-70mm!
Alright, here's my first human photo with the 17-55 f2.8 IS USM. (yes I used my 580EXII)
And on the subject of the 580EXII... You need a Lightsphere (well, the cheap-o chinese ebay knockoffs of them (They're just a blob of plastic ). It makes a HUGE difference!
And on the subject of the 580EXII... You need a Lightsphere (well, the cheap-o chinese ebay knockoffs of them (They're just a blob of plastic ). It makes a HUGE difference!
David
Oh? Link and some more info on this would be appreciated.
Dunno... Not sure it's sharp enough. Send it over to me, and I'll check it out vs. the 24-70mm 2.8L .. I'll let you know if it's good enough. Also, send the 24-105mm over here too and I'll check both of them for you against my 24-70mm!
David
I let my husband take a shot of me with the camera:
They call them Lambency 580ex flash diffusers. They're knock-off lightspheres. I paid $12.95 for mine; including shipping to the USA. Got it in about 5 days.
They call them Lambency 580ex flash diffusers. They're knock-off lightspheres. I paid $12.95 for mine; including shipping to the USA. Got it in about 5 days.
David
Those look pretty cool - the inclusion of the colored lids really adds to the value. No, I'm not trying to be funny. You get to gel your flash without having to slow down and actually pull out a thin piece of plastic - just slap one of these lids in place and off you go.
The next question is, "What kind of color are you actually getting off these colored lids, and OBTW, how good is the clear part for not imparting a color cast?"
Now to see how she likes it on a job. Will the focal range be enough to keep her happy? Tune in next week for ....
Seriously, I'm happy you seem to like the lens. Really looking forward to seeing what you do with your new toy .... err umm .... tool!
Since my next wedding isn't until May 24th, I think that the testing my martial arts school is holding on this Saturday will be the first "big test" for this lens. Thankfully, being a black belt, I'm not promoting so I can take pictures Plus martial arts was one of the "non wedding" reasons I also wanted a faster close range lens... last time I had to use the 70-200 to get the shots I wanted but that was wayyyyyyyy to close.
On the subject of the LightShere, while it can be useful in some instances, I greatly prefer the following two devices which are easy constructed and work really well:
That is one sharp lens.....I might have to get me one of them......
They also have the cheapo whale tails on there as well with gels and what not. I ordered one we will see if they are any good and if we get wierd colors ....It was only like 22 bucks shipped.....The "name brand" sells for 80 I think.....
if you search on universal flash diffuser you will see them.....
On the subject of the LightShere, while it can be useful in some instances, I greatly prefer the following two devices which are easy constructed and work really well:
My biggest complaint with my 24-70L glass is the external zooming which can introduce dust into the glass. However it is a pretty handy piece of equipment. If I had a wishlist though, I'd also add in IS. (Rumor mill has it we could see a 24-70 f2.8L IS sometime soon fwiw)
Honestly though in terms of IQ, I've found myself using my 16-35 glass in wide apps far more than the 24-70. Of course that range between 35-70 is a tough gap to miss, but I also stick with the 35mm and 50mm prime.
Professional Ancient Smugmug Shutter Geek
Master Of Sushi Noms
Amateur CSS Dork
I have the clear one. it comes with a 'cloudy' dome, that works well as a diffuser in a pinch. Shot with clear lightsphere (and done in a pinch, not posed)
From what I've read, it really doesn't matter. I have the clear one and it worked as designed (when I used it). I've since moved on to the BBC as a more efficient light modifier. The LS works well/best in small rooms and I don't often have the chance to work with it that way.
From what I've read, it really doesn't matter. I have the clear one and it worked as designed (when I used it). I've since moved on to the BBC as a more efficient light modifier. The LS works well/best in small rooms and I don't often have the chance to work with it that way.
I don't have a LightSphere. This was a single flash with the equivalent to a large bounce card:
These are all single flash with a homemade scoop:
The LightSphere would not have been as good a choice in each of these instances because of the room and/or ceilings.
The LightSphere would not have been as good a choice in each of these instances because of the room and/or ceilings.
I see this often, and I don't think that entirely true. I have found using the included 'dome' provides simple bounce, and if you leave the dome on with the flash facing your subject, it works very nicely as a modifier. I think sometimes that ceiling bounce gives "racoon eyes" that the Lightsphere helps eliminate.
That being said, it is hard to beat a simple piece of white "Foamies" to bounce light well.
I see this often, and I don't think that entirely true. I have found using the included 'dome' provides simple bounce, and if you leave the dome on with the flash facing your subject, it works very nicely as a modifier. I think sometimes that ceiling bounce gives "racoon eyes" that the Lightsphere helps eliminate.
That being said, it is hard to beat a simple piece of white "Foamies" to bounce light well.
Allow me to elaborate:
In this shot:
The ceiling was slanted with respect to the camera high-left to low-right. As such I had to swivel and tilt the flash to the right to get the correct angle for bounce. The improvised "bounce card" I used (for fill) is so light that it did not affect the ability of the flash head to maintain the head angle. A problem with the LightSphere (LS) is its weight and the flash head would not have held position without my assistance. Other than that, the LS would have worked fine as far as the type of fill it provides.
In the remainder of the above shots (using the "scoop" reflector), the ceiling would not have provided the best light for either a "bounce card" or a LS.
In those cases the scoop both lifts and diffuses the light over a relatively large area. The bulk of the light emits from a distance of almost 24" above the center of the lens. (Canon 1D MKII, Stroboframe Pro-T flash bracket). If I used the LS with the diffusion dome in place the light would emit around 13" above the center of the lens with the flash pointed forward or around 17 1/2" with the flash pointed up.
The LS pointed forward would be around 11" less above the lens than the scoop, and when the flash is pointed up it is wasting considerable power in that it emits in all directions when only a broad forward light is needed.
I am not trying to say that the LS does not work, it does and under the right circumstances it is extremely nice light.
I do believe that the scoop modifier works better and more efficiently for most of the shooting that I do.
I am not getting as good of results with my bbc....I decided it was time to try something else.
out of the camera using a bbc. Do I need to make a bigger one?
A "bounce card" is simply a fill light device that works in conjunction with ceiling bounce. If you are not using the ceiling, the bounce card becomes a primary light, but not a very good one IMO. Using a larger card will provide a larger surface and more forward light, but it doesn't necessarily solve all your problems.
In a "studio" situation, where the subject is positioned in front of a background and the shot is planned, I greatly prefer to use carefully placed off-camera lights.
If you are limited to a single light source, a lighting setup like Scott describes here works pretty darned well, and yes you can use a dark background but I think the light background works better:
BTW, a little PS work (I think) improves the image. I used "Shadow-Highlight" and then "Levels" along with some USM. I will remove if you wish.
Before:
BTW, a little PS work (I think) improves the image. I used "Shadow-Highlight" and then "Levels" along with some USM. I will remove if you wish.
Before:
After:
I guess my point was exactly that. That yes the post processing will fix them but that takes time. If I can get it closer by spending 20 buck on a cheapo whaletail or lightsphere on ebay and it gets it to where it is suppose to be the first time. all the better and less work. if i dont like the results I can always sell it on craigslist ....
I think the other reason I decided to get a whaletail was because my wife found my paypal stash and started buying baby stuff...Had to act quickly...
Maybe I need to make a bbc with the scoop as well. bbc works good but sometimes I get sorta dark results as seen above and the scoop would throw more light forward and also my current bbc doesnt seem to have any range.
Maybe I need to make a bbc with the scoop as well. bbc works good but sometimes I get sorta dark results as seen above and the scoop would throw more light forward and also my current bbc doesnt seem to have any range.
Understand that the "scoop" modifier I use is not a bounce card. It actually works by lifting and spreading the light, similar to what you could do with a much taller flash bracket and perhaps a very small softbox. The scoop is so lightweight that it has little effect on the handling of the flash. Rather than fill, a scoop is the primary light source.
You still need to apply good judgement regarding FEC and basic exposure settings as well as proper placement of the light, but that is also true for any flash modifier. The camera alone doesn't always work best in default settings.
I tend to think of image processing software and post-processing as just part of the process of making good images.
A "bounce card" is simply a fill light device that works in conjunction with ceiling bounce. If you are not using the ceiling, the bounce card becomes a primary light, but not a very good one IMO. Using a larger card will provide a larger surface and more forward light, but it doesn't necessarily solve all your problems.
In a "studio" situation, where the subject is positioned in front of a background and the shot is planned, I greatly prefer to use carefully placed off-camera lights.
If you are limited to a single light source, a lighting setup like Scott describes here works pretty darned well, and yes you can use a dark background but I think the light background works better:
Didnt see this one....Yea I am working on trying to get my 580 ex off camera. I bought a vivitar 283 for cheap 2 weeks ago (as the strobist says light is light) so that makes 2 and I am decideing if I should go the ebay trigger way or try to scrape together for some skyports .....Cant afford pocketwizards at this time ..Think i do want wireless though...Also would like to maybe get some umbrellas (at least one--lol). Is the strobist set up good at mpex or should I go a different route?
Comments
David
Twitter: @WolfSnap
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/WolfSnapDesigns
SmugMug & Wordpress Customization - WolfSnap.com | Custom Domains
David
Twitter: @WolfSnap
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/WolfSnapDesigns
SmugMug & Wordpress Customization - WolfSnap.com | Custom Domains
Oh? Link and some more info on this would be appreciated.
Facebook: Friend / Fan || Twitter: @shimamizu || Google Plus
I let my husband take a shot of me with the camera:
and a crop from that:
Facebook: Friend / Fan || Twitter: @shimamizu || Google Plus
Looks good
Oh, cheap-o lightsphere... they're all over ebay.. Check out this link: http://search.ebay.com/search/search.dll?sofocus=bs&sbrftog=1&dfsp=32&catref=C6&from=R40&satitle=Lambency+580ex&sacat=-1%26catref%3DC6&sargn=-1%26saslc%3D2&sadis=200&fpos=ZIP%2FPostal&sabfmts=1&saobfmts=insif&ftrt=1&ftrv=1&saprclo=&saprchi=&fsop=32%26fsoo%3D2&fgtp=
They call them Lambency 580ex flash diffusers. They're knock-off lightspheres. I paid $12.95 for mine; including shipping to the USA. Got it in about 5 days.
David
Twitter: @WolfSnap
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/WolfSnapDesigns
SmugMug & Wordpress Customization - WolfSnap.com | Custom Domains
Haha good luck getting it out of my hands!
EDIT: another "sharpness" photo-
and the crop:
Facebook: Friend / Fan || Twitter: @shimamizu || Google Plus
The next question is, "What kind of color are you actually getting off these colored lids, and OBTW, how good is the clear part for not imparting a color cast?"
My Photos
Thoughts on photographing a wedding, How to post a picture, AF Microadjustments?, Light Scoop
Equipment List - Check my profile
Now to see how she likes it on a job. Will the focal range be enough to keep her happy? Tune in next week for ....
Seriously, I'm happy you seem to like the lens. Really looking forward to seeing what you do with your new toy .... err umm .... tool!
My Photos
Thoughts on photographing a wedding, How to post a picture, AF Microadjustments?, Light Scoop
Equipment List - Check my profile
Since my next wedding isn't until May 24th, I think that the testing my martial arts school is holding on this Saturday will be the first "big test" for this lens. Thankfully, being a black belt, I'm not promoting so I can take pictures
Facebook: Friend / Fan || Twitter: @shimamizu || Google Plus
I really like the results you are getting with that 17-55... :wow
www.tednghiem.com
On the subject of the LightShere, while it can be useful in some instances, I greatly prefer the following two devices which are easy constructed and work really well:
http://www.fototime.com/inv/908195739C4C0D3
http://abetterbouncecard.com/
Joe Demb also makes an interesting device for sale (reasonable):
http://www.dembflashproducts.com/flipit/
I own a FlipIt product and it works well and is very well made.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
They also have the cheapo whale tails on there as well with gels and what not. I ordered one we will see if they are any good and if we get wierd colors ....It was only like 22 bucks shipped.....The "name brand" sells for 80 I think.....
if you search on universal flash diffuser you will see them.....
http://search.ebay.com/search/search.dll?from=R40&_trksid=m37&satitle=universal+flash+diffuser+for+canon+580+ex&category0=
www.jonbakerphotography.com
Hmm, much to consider. I'm going to sit on these and think it over. They seem to produce very nice results...
PS- smugmugger's get 12% off Gary Fong products such as lightsphere.
Does anyone have experience w/ the cheaper Lambency?
Facebook: Friend / Fan || Twitter: @shimamizu || Google Plus
David
Twitter: @WolfSnap
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/WolfSnapDesigns
SmugMug & Wordpress Customization - WolfSnap.com | Custom Domains
Cloud or clear one?
Facebook: Friend / Fan || Twitter: @shimamizu || Google Plus
More here: http://photos.cathoffman.com/gallery/4944634_k9Eth
Facebook: Friend / Fan || Twitter: @shimamizu || Google Plus
Honestly though in terms of IQ, I've found myself using my 16-35 glass in wide apps far more than the 24-70. Of course that range between 35-70 is a tough gap to miss, but I also stick with the 35mm and 50mm prime.
Master Of Sushi Noms
Amateur CSS Dork
I have the clear one. it comes with a 'cloudy' dome, that works well as a diffuser in a pinch. Shot with clear lightsphere (and done in a pinch, not posed)
Not bad, IMHO, for a single, on-camera flash
My Photos
Thoughts on photographing a wedding, How to post a picture, AF Microadjustments?, Light Scoop
Equipment List - Check my profile
These are all single flash with a homemade scoop:
The LightSphere would not have been as good a choice in each of these instances because of the room and/or ceilings.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
I see this often, and I don't think that entirely true. I have found using the included 'dome' provides simple bounce, and if you leave the dome on with the flash facing your subject, it works very nicely as a modifier. I think sometimes that ceiling bounce gives "racoon eyes" that the Lightsphere helps eliminate.
That being said, it is hard to beat a simple piece of white "Foamies" to bounce light well.
www.tednghiem.com
out of the camera using a bbc. Do I need to make a bigger one?
www.jonbakerphotography.com
Allow me to elaborate:
In this shot:
The ceiling was slanted with respect to the camera high-left to low-right. As such I had to swivel and tilt the flash to the right to get the correct angle for bounce. The improvised "bounce card" I used (for fill) is so light that it did not affect the ability of the flash head to maintain the head angle. A problem with the LightSphere (LS) is its weight and the flash head would not have held position without my assistance. Other than that, the LS would have worked fine as far as the type of fill it provides.
In the remainder of the above shots (using the "scoop" reflector), the ceiling would not have provided the best light for either a "bounce card" or a LS.
In those cases the scoop both lifts and diffuses the light over a relatively large area. The bulk of the light emits from a distance of almost 24" above the center of the lens. (Canon 1D MKII, Stroboframe Pro-T flash bracket). If I used the LS with the diffusion dome in place the light would emit around 13" above the center of the lens with the flash pointed forward or around 17 1/2" with the flash pointed up.
The LS pointed forward would be around 11" less above the lens than the scoop, and when the flash is pointed up it is wasting considerable power in that it emits in all directions when only a broad forward light is needed.
I am not trying to say that the LS does not work, it does and under the right circumstances it is extremely nice light.
I do believe that the scoop modifier works better and more efficiently for most of the shooting that I do.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
A "bounce card" is simply a fill light device that works in conjunction with ceiling bounce. If you are not using the ceiling, the bounce card becomes a primary light, but not a very good one IMO. Using a larger card will provide a larger surface and more forward light, but it doesn't necessarily solve all your problems.
In a "studio" situation, where the subject is positioned in front of a background and the shot is planned, I greatly prefer to use carefully placed off-camera lights.
If you are limited to a single light source, a lighting setup like Scott describes here works pretty darned well, and yes you can use a dark background but I think the light background works better:
http://dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=818132&postcount=1
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
Before:
After:
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
I guess my point was exactly that. That yes the post processing will fix them but that takes time. If I can get it closer by spending 20 buck on a cheapo whaletail or lightsphere on ebay and it gets it to where it is suppose to be the first time. all the better and less work. if i dont like the results I can always sell it on craigslist ....
I think the other reason I decided to get a whaletail was because my wife found my paypal stash and started buying baby stuff...Had to act quickly...
Maybe I need to make a bbc with the scoop as well. bbc works good but sometimes I get sorta dark results as seen above and the scoop would throw more light forward and also my current bbc doesnt seem to have any range.
www.jonbakerphotography.com
Understand that the "scoop" modifier I use is not a bounce card. It actually works by lifting and spreading the light, similar to what you could do with a much taller flash bracket and perhaps a very small softbox. The scoop is so lightweight that it has little effect on the handling of the flash. Rather than fill, a scoop is the primary light source.
You still need to apply good judgement regarding FEC and basic exposure settings as well as proper placement of the light, but that is also true for any flash modifier. The camera alone doesn't always work best in default settings.
I tend to think of image processing software and post-processing as just part of the process of making good images.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
Didnt see this one....Yea I am working on trying to get my 580 ex off camera. I bought a vivitar 283 for cheap 2 weeks ago (as the strobist says light is light) so that makes 2 and I am decideing if I should go the ebay trigger way or try to scrape together for some skyports .....Cant afford pocketwizards at this time ..Think i do want wireless though...Also would like to maybe get some umbrellas (at least one--lol). Is the strobist set up good at mpex or should I go a different route?
www.jonbakerphotography.com