DM

This is my travel kit:

Camera - Canon 20D: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=348299&is=REG

Glass:
Canon 24mm f1.4L USM: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=143169&is=USA
Canon 50mm f1.4 USM: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?A=search&Q=&b=8&a=700_6179&shs=&ci=8454&ac=&Submit.x=8&Submit.y=8

Lowepro Nova 3 AW Shoulder Bag: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=279077&is=REG

Both flashes, camera (with 50mm mounted), assorted memory cards, cleaning kits, polarized filter (58mm and 77mm) and spare batteries round out this bag.

2 Manfrotto 3330 6' Basic Light Stands: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=128624&is=REG

2 General Brand umbrella/flash mounts: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=188807&is=REG

2 silver Westcott Soft Silver 32" umbrellas: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=63311&is=REG

1 Photoflex White Satin 30" umbrella: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=42501&is=REG

1 Manfrotto 31.5" Padded Tripod Bag: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=307365&is=REG (holds both stands w/ mounts, along with the 3 umbrellas)

Advantage to using the speedlites is EVERYTHING is still controlled by the camera. E-TTL does not work as well - the umbrellas tend to cause a certain amount of loss. However the loss is predictable and so problems are reduced significantly by adjusting exposure in camera via flash exposure compensation.

E

no tripod for the camera?

I dig that Manfrotto bag-- nice!

Glass--

I assume the 24mm was a relic from your SLR days or you got a hell of a deal. I wouldn't think it that useful with digital (= 39mm lense)-- especially for the price. The 50mm old prime works out well for portraits tho-- 80mm. Why not lose 'em both and get the nice EF-S 17-85mm USM and lighten the load?

keep up the great work!

DM

no tripod for the camera?

Not required. Even though most cameras will set shutter speed at 1/60th for flash photographs, flashes fire at 1/500th. Since I'm not using anything past a 50mm (85mm with dig modifier), and I hold steady for my shots, there's no need for a tripod. Now were I using long glass, this would be an issue. However, using anything up through an 85mm (even with Canon 1.6x modifier) inside with flash would not cause any problems. Furthermore, dodging ANOTHER tripod in my room (two is almost too much!!) just sounds like madness...

I dig that Manfrotto bag-- nice!

I went to Samy's camera to browse... an hour later (after going through EVERY bag) I walked out all smiles. This was the first trip I used it on and it was perfect.

Funny story about this bag - walking through LAX I prepared to run the x-ray gauntlet. As I set the bag down the lady working there said "Sorry, you'll need to check your golf clubs." I told her "tripods used for photography." "No problem sir." Unless they see a LOT of midgets trying to bring golf clubs as carryon this lady was high. That bag is only 32"!! Oddly enough, no one, in ANY OTHER AIRPORT looked twice at it.

As for glass -

The 24mm and 50mm I picked up for a few reasons:

1. FAST glass. This allows me to shoot MUCH faster then with my old 16-35mm f2.8L. I have the option of shooting two stops faster (1/60th instead of 1/15th) or shooting at a lower ISO (ISO 200 instead of ISO 800). I was/am shooting a LOT of natural light pics and having this flexibility allows me to shoot faster and/or with less grain in the pics.

2. With fewer elements in motion ( elements changing aspect with zoom) my pics are VERY clear. Since the lens only has ONE job, it does that job perfectly.

Now, to be honest, I've found the 24mm a bit heavy - however with the Canon digital modifier it equals a 38mm. This gives me CLEAN shots at incredibly fast speeds without all the distortion apparent in wide angle lenses. Now not ALL lines will be straight, and you can still see some distortion on things that are VERY close to the lens, but by and large it's working very close to what a natural 40mm would generate in a film camera.

As for the 50mm - it was one of the cheapest lenses I've bought and it's brought me so much joy. This lens is CLEAN!! Every photo I sent you in the last 3 months has been shot with this lens. With the Canon modifier it's acting like an 85mm. I get no distortion and lines are straight. The only REAL problem I'm having is I get backed into the corner of my room before I can get a torso shot!!

Now, would the EF-S lens save me weight along with allowing me to pack fewer lenses? Yes. However, it's some slooooOOOOOOoooow glass. Wide open, at 28mm, I would have 1/8th the light to work with. My 1.4 is three to four full stops faster. I have a Canon 28-135mm f3.5-5.6 IS USM lens. This will not get as close, but has the same basic flexibility.

Do I need closeup glass? I suppose so. Would I USE it? Not really. As nice as it is to get a pic of someone's torso from 2' away, the distortion from shooting wide turns me off. I'd rather move the feet a bit more and get the shot I want. I can't ALWAYS get the shot I want, but space can normally be made...

Now, I've made decisions about glass that suit the way I shoot. Bahtman travels with a 16-35mm f2.8L USM and a 24-70mm f2.8L USM lens. Hell, I think he STILL brings his 70-200mm f2.8L IS USM lens for walking around. These lenses are a perfect fit for him.

Frankly, now that I'm using flashes off the camera (and using flash more in general) I'd consider going BACK to the 16-35mm as it's very versatile in rooms. Another option is the 17-40 f4L lens. Now, the EF-S lens is priced better AND more flexible then the L series lenses, and that may be just what I need for inside pics. I also have that same 70-200mm, but find few uses for it. Hell, if I buy that EF-S lens that's just MORE crap for me to lug around!! See what you've done?!?!

Hope this answered your questions about my choices in glass. Let me know if you have any more - happy to answer them.

E

no tripod for the camera?

Not required.

comment: au contraire-- I'm thinking wireless shutter release while your plugging away

It sure would beat the end table


Glass...

You logic although with merit, is founded in film. We're not using kodachrome or velvia, so we have a lot of leeway as far as glass.


I assume your going to get very clean images using higher ISOs. I would pass on the far more expensive lenses and give up a stop for versatility, smaller, lighter, but still quality 3.5-4.5 lenses. I usually wouldn't miss use the extra stop. IMHO, 1 stop means nothing with your camera, since you can just increase the ISO with little to no penalty in image quality if you run out of light. On the other hand, the 7mm is a HUGE difference in how wide it goes-- the difference between a 27mm lens and a 38mm lense on film camera.

Of course if you plan on doing 99.99% portraits, those aperatures makes good sense as you want tight reigns on the DOF.

Yes-- quality of primes such as your 50 can't be beat, they are cheap, and are nearly perfect for portraits. Agreed. I'm just thinking of what makes sense for various types of shooting with budget and conv. in mind for myself.

I totally agree tho-- to each their own. My film lenses were:

Nikon Nikkor 20mm f/4 AI -- Incredible, rare, old -- used 20%-- won't sell

Nikon 28-105 AF-D 3.5-4.5 -- not bad, specially with macro capability-- didn't use all that much tho -- used 5% -- SOLD

Nikon 60mm F2.8 Macro -- nice glass! - used this lense a lot! used 30%-- SOLD

Nikon AF 80-200mm f/2.8D ED -- professional glass and the best I've ever laid my hands on. I used this lense the most by far -- around 50%. Never sell.

That was film tho, as I prepare for the digital journey, I'm reconsidering my logic.

I'm thinking 18-70 3.5-4.5 (good quality and light), and use my 80-200 f2.8 for beating up trike drivers. I would love to get a 12-24, but I've got to be consious of the wallet as well and couldn't justify it.

I'm thinking wireless shutter release while your plugging away

Dude - the LAST thing I wanna see in a picture is MORE of my fat!! I'm certain pics of your boomboom would come out looking much better.

As for wireless shutter release - I was VERY surprised when Canon did NOT release a wireless option for this camera. However, I DO own the shutter release that has sooooOOOOOooooo many functions... I think one of them is making coffee in the morning...

You logic although with merit, is founded in film. We're not using kodachrome or velvia, so we have a lot of leeway as far as glass.

Not sure about this one. What you're shooting THROUGH is as important as what you're shooting IMHO). The reason we're all not wandering the streets with point-and-shoot cameras is the quality - both the CCDs and the glass. Quality of the electronics inside are as important as the quality of the lenses used. The picture actually starts with light reflected from the subject, through the glass, and onto the CMOS/CCD sensor. So far, the only point I've been less then 100% on are the subjects!!

Now, my knowledge on this subject is DEFINITELY not 100%, but I've seen significant differences between my pics taken with my kit lens, my cheaper Tamron and my nicer Canon glass. I'm wondering why you're now discounting the importance of higher quality glass?

I assume your going to get very clean images using higher ISOs.

It's true that Canon's noise reduction at higher ISOs is impressive, but there's still a lot of noise even shooting at ISO800. I'd rather shoot at a lower ISO, increase my aperture and keep the quality. Of course, this is my preference, not everyones.

IMHO, 1 stop means nothing with your camera, since you can just increase the ISO with little to no penalty in image quality if you run out of light.

This is true, going from 100 to 200 will not affect a picture much. However, shooting at 4.0 is three stops - difference between 100-800 is significant.

On the other hand, the 7mm is a HUGE difference in how wide it goes-- the difference between a 27mm lens and a 38mm lense on film camera.

Oh man, don't I know it!! I've used my 24mm for action shots in bed and that can be a bit extreme holding that camera as far above your head to get the WHOLE BJ in!! Still, for the way I shoot, that extra 7mm isn't terribly important (now using SD-20 for action pics). I'll consider adding such a lens to the lineup, but my thinking right now is I'm better off using my 28-135 which gives me less distortion (but smaller angle of view).

Still, I'm now shooting with flash a lot more which doesn't care about really wide apertures. Flexibility is important. All things to consider...

E

Epi, I LOVE my 50 1.4. What a great lense. Beautiful bokeh too. I've also been very happy with the 17-40L, if you choose to go that route.

The reason we're all not wandering the streets with point-and-shoot cameras is the quality - both the CCDs and the glass.

yup - agreed-- quality and control.

but I've seen significant differences between my pics taken with my kit lens, my cheaper Tamron and my nicer Canon glass. I'm wondering why you're now discounting the importance of higher quality glass?

I'm not discounting glass quality at all. Your lenses, for your type of photography, perfect! As I noted to Rakitts in the photo thread, I highly recommend sticking to primary lense manu (e.g, nikon and canon depending on your body). Every lense I've owned is nikon-- the pennies saved by going to tamron or sigma ain't worth it when considering build quality and resale. My point was more along the lines of maintaining quality, lose a stop or two, and gain flexibily.

This is true, going from 100 to 200 will not affect a picture much. However, shooting at 4.0 is three stops - difference between 100-800 is significant.

f3.5 would be 2 2/3 stops, but point made ;) The point I made is kinda along the lines Nikon's DSLR philosophy and I'm wrestlin with it in my decision making process of the 70s vs. the 20d. I think Nikon even omitted 100ISO on the d70, which shows how much they think of shooting DSLRs at slower ISOs. I would need to get my hands on some lenses, a DSLR, and a loupe before I could speak with authority tho on the grain generated going from ISO200 to ISO800.

Tis' been an stimulating conversation-- thanks.

-DM

PS seems you fellows know a thing or two about DSLR i had my eos 650 and now have a small 5 mpix pocket camera, been thinking of getting teh canon 20d, specially since i have a4 eos lenses... any advice on pro.s con.s of canon 20d?

what about the new digital rebel xt vs. the 20d? It would be great to hear from some of you experienced and knowledgeable guys on the issue. the new rebel xt has received some favorable reviews.

As for me, I rely much more on my sd500 cause it is pretty difficult to get a 20d into your robe pocket in a terma. also, i am always paranoid about expensive stuff (i.e. 9k of camera equipment) being stolen.

btw, I think DG's girl is amazingly hot. I am not really that into asian women but I can still somewhat appreciate somewhat the skills that go into Epi's photos. It looks like the ratings are going through the roof also!

Murasaki

Epi, I LOVE my 50 1.4.

I remember you reviewing my pics in Gullivers one fine afternoon after I returned from Batam. You seemed impressed by the camera, lens AND girls. One in particular - kept staring at her boobies... drooling...

Glad you love that lens. I've been a fan from the day I bought it. Funny - I never take out my 50mm f1.8 Macro now - imagine that?

DM

f3.5 would be 2 2/3 stops, but point made

I was using the original lens we were discussing as the reference for 3 stops (17-85mm f4.0-5.6).

I'll work on a project for you over the next few days. Since Nikon uses a base of ISO200, I'll give you a chance to see the difference... and the difference between most of the ISOs. I'll take a series of photos at 100, 200, 400, 800 and 1600 for you. I'll forward you the originals (resized), along with cropped excerpts of the originals so you can compare side-by-side. I'd run out and do this for you right now, but I am profoundly lazy and have not had enough coffee yet

Motown

Personally, I LOVE the Canon 20d, but I've not used any of the Nikon digitals. I can say that when I went from 6mp to 8mp this gave me FAR more freedom when it came to cropping. Yes, you should be using your viewfinder for most of your cropping, but more then once I've looked at my images and though "WTF was I THINKIN'!!", then cropped the shit out of it with no loss of clarity even under EXTREME pruning.

When I used the 300d it had a wireless remote. Nice feature, but I never bothered with it - not needed for the subjects I was capturing. Now I DO have the wired shutter release for my Canon and I've used that a few times - handy lil' bugger.

Go check out the 20d at a local store. Take your lenses and have a little fun with it in the store. It suits MY needs, but you need to make sure it suits YOURS.

Gr8tr

I've known people that have hefted both cameras. The 20d feels more "substantial" and less plastic. Now, the XT is packed with a SHITLOAD of features and is light to boot, but I actually USE weight to help me steady my camera. I've added the Canon BG-E2 Vertical Grip Battery Holder to my camera. Personally, I could care less about the vertical controls - I like the extra heft the additional battery gives my camera. The heavier my camera, the steadier my shots (within reason). With a substantial lens thrown on top it really adds a lot of stability to my shots.

The size and weight of the camera can be a major issue for you. I also recommend that you hit the local store, check out the cameras side-by-side and get some idea of what the differences are PHYSICALLY.

Motown/Gr8tr - good luck with your next purchases.

E

Epi-

I'll take a series of photos at 100, 200, 400, 800 and 1600


AWESOME-- I got me a new toy now, I'll do some ISO experimental as well


Now I DO have the wired shutter release for my Canon and I've used that a few times - handy lil' bugger.


It is critical for macro or when using big glass unless your into abstract art. If you not, then it's a nice to have.




Ep/Motown--



I LOVE the Canon 20d, but I've not used any of the Nikon digitals. I can say that when I went from 6mp to 8mp this gave me FAR more freedom when it came to cropping. Yes, you should be using your viewfinder for most of your cropping, but more then once I've looked at my images and though "WTF was I THINKIN'!!", then cropped the shit out of it with no loss


I decided on nikon after some serious deliberation and research. However, Epi is absolutely correct in that the couple extra MP does allow for a little more cropping flexibility when scaling to larger prints.



Go check out the 20d at a local store. Take your lenses and have a little fun with it in the store. It suits MY needs, but you need to make sure it suits YOURS.


Absolutely-- it's the only way to decide. In fact, I've been going to and revolving 4 area stores several times a week playing with the xt, 20d, d70, and d70s.



Ep/Gr8tr--

The 20d feels more "substantial" and less plastic. Now, the XT is packed with a SHITLOAD of features and is light to boot, but I actually USE weight to help me steady my camera.

I was excited about the xt when I read it's spec sheet, but I dismissed it in 5 seconds as soon as I picked it up. "Feel" is critical and the xt has none and is too much of a lightweight for lack of a better term. The Nikon D70 (nikons SLRs always feel great in the hand) and the Canon 20D felt great to me. I must admit, despite my bias towards Nikon, the 20d felt slightly better in my hand.





The heavier my camera, the steadier my shots (within reason). With a substantial lens thrown on top it really adds a lot of stability to my shots.


I agree 199%.


I'll go back to my photo thread rather than continue hijacking ep's latina-thai report

>The heavier my camera, the steadier my shots

Was chatting with my boss today about digital SLR's and he mentioned that he uses a monopod (filming little league baseball and such). Says it makes a huge difference in the steadiness of the shot.

Was chatting with my boss today about digital SLR's and he mentioned that he uses a monopod

All dependent on what your shooting and what you're shooting with.

As mentioned earlier, the longer and slower the glass, the steadier the camera needs to be. The lenses I'm using (all fast, wide glass), combined with stationary subjects, allow me to avoid the problems your boss is coming across (blurring of motion through camera shake). The monopod suits his needs, but have certain limitations - one being only allowing you to shoot photos in landscape format. More often then not, I'm taking a picture in portrait mode with a fast 24mm or 50mm lens.

Last year I purchased a monopod in Singapore thinking "this could come in handy". I've yet to use it for any purpose other then poking my girlfriend in the back from across the room.

Murasaki

I must go on record here to remind him that he BEGGED me to send him a set of photos of a certain Thai legend that I posted some years back. And he said something to the effect of "man, she just DOES it for me!"

Could DeeG secretly be hiding a case of "yellow fever"...? Sounds like Lucy has some 'splaining to do...

E

If you ever make it to Rio, Epimeteus, visit me.

You equipment looks similar to mine, except I don't lug this around on world trips. I have a nice big photo studio here in Rio, you would love it.

With your wide open lenses at f= 1.4 the ears will be out of focus if you focus on the mouth. I think you have a hard time getting photos that are sharp all over.

BS

Oftentimes I'm going for that "look". I want the part in focus to be the center of attention. Yes, not so good for glamour photography, but it gets me some interesting portraits with natural light.

The first pic, while something that would NOT score well on this board, is an interesting portrait shot. I shot this close up at f2 - I wanted her eye to be the focal point. Most of the hair and features are not within the plane of focus, but I wasn't trying to take a garden variety pic of her face. I took an average (at best!!) looking girl and made her photo a bit more compelling (IMHO).

Photo: Portrait 1

This second pic, even when taken at f2.5, allowed me to grab the shot and put the points of interest in focus (well, pretty much). So, her face and nipples pressed through the shirt are where I want people looking (if you'll notice, the nips are a LOT sharper then the face) - not at the foliage outside. So, I tailored this to give me what I wanted.

Photo: Portrait 2

Even shooting with my lights I like a fast lens. I took this next portrait with a single strobe in my room. At f2.8, her features are clear (along with the right arm and left hand) but the room features are blown out. Because the hotel rooms I'm shooting in are pretty darn small, I do my best to hide the background by taking it out of focus.

Photo: Portrait 3

Been talking to Wombat and he's given me some great pointers for future work (crank up the flash, speed up the exposure and stop down the aperture to darken the background). I'm certain this will give me some other interesting results from my next trip.

I would LOVE to shoot in your studio!! If I remember, you're using Alien Bees strobes, correct? I could never gather up the initiative to actually drag around strobes THAT big, but they're the ones I'd go to when setting up a studio (as you've done). When I get down there we'll take some time and talk shop - sound like a plan?

If you don't mind, send me your email address.

E

Hey Epi,

I love the bokeh on portrait #2.

I just ordered the 35mm f2 to go with my D70 for shooting girls in hotel rooms. (sounds funny I know) I think the Canon 20D is a slightly better camera than the D70, but as everyone in photography knows, the most important tool is the photographer behind the camera. That's why your pictures come out so great.

Av8tr

You'll be amazed at how clean your new prime will be. Kit lenses are meant to get people off the ground, but not really in the air. Once you start buying glass it's addicting (and expensive too!!)...

Glad you like that pic. You actually met that girl once or twice. Cute...

BTW, the CD you sent me showed up on Friday, but my roommate didn't pull the mail outta his car until Monday. So, gonna try it out tomorrow. Wish me luck!!

E

Ep-- actually the Nikon 18-70 nikon lens is a quality piece of glass-- unlike the "kit lens" canon tosses in. One of the reasons that makes Nikon d70 such a great value.

Av8, the 35mm is a decent lens, however u may want to consider the 50mm 1.8, which is by far a better choice in terms of image quality and what u want to use it for.

There's a LOT of great Nikon lens sites out there, I like:

http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_surv.html

DM,

Thanks for that link. Very informative.
I have the 50mm and really like it, but I need something a little wider. I really like my 18-70 that came with the D70, but of course you need flash indoors with it.

heya BrazilSpecialist--

I wouldn't mind checking out that photo studio when im in town. How are girls attitudes in general towards erotic modeling? Meaning-- are they dropping their minis in a flash or are you having to bullshit with them a bit?

I just got back from Brazil, and stayed with Brazil Specialist. He does have a studio in the apartment, and an even better one a block away. I found the girls there much more willing to take there clothes off.

Since I was new to Brazil, I think I didn't have as much luck with quality as I do in my usual stomping grounds in LOS. Still had a great time though.

Just booked my next trip to Pattaya, and BKK in mid September. Could use a wingman again Ep..hint hint

I'm sure if you sent him tickets, he would take you up on the offer...

Av8tr

Headed to Pattaya Friday afternoon - perhaps you could sneak out here a bit early and we could have a little party this weekend...?

E

bastid!

hey if you ever do find a papasan job, don't forget-- I make an excellent VP of Pooying Training (papas need to be hands off you know, which x's u out).

Ok Epi,

Please excuse the stupid question. I know jack about photography. I would imagine the major problem with many photos (especially mine) is lighting. I want to correct that on future trips. So I am honestly thinking about this. I don't want to drag around a nice camera like yours though. I just want some inexpensive soft lights to increase lighting in the room. If I bought two of these:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=308804&is=REG&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation

for my next trip and then got a little camera, say something like this:

http://reviews.cnet.com/Casio_Exilim_EX_Z750/4505-6501_7-31319589.html?tag=pop

Would it be worth it as far as drastically increasing my picture quality? Would you recommend something different? Don't want to spend a lot of money, but want some better lighting in the rooms. A small camera that is compact and portable is still a requirement for me.

What would you suggest for a small camera and somewhat portable lighting?

Xen

Great question!! You are starting down a path that will be very frustrating at times but also VERY fulfilling when you hit that "sweet spot"...

Personally, I tend to travel with portable, battery-powered flashes and use that with my umbrellas but others like Murasaki shoot with tungsten bulbs and could better answer your questions. However, I'll take a shot at it here...

To answer your question you need to understand a little bit about light. Warning, this is the long answer:

If you take an iron bar and heat it to 1000 kelvin (K) it would send out radiation in a wide range of wavelengths, but the majority would be infrared. While not visible, the radiation is detectable as heat.

Heating that bar up to 3000K it is still sending out radiation of all types, but enough of it is in the visible spectrum making the bar appear to glow. Even though the bar is putting out light, the majority of its output is infrared (heat).

Continue heating to 6000K, roughly the temperature of the sun's surface, most of the radiation will be visible leaning a bit toward blue-green. To your eyes the bar appears to be glowing white.

Color temperature, rather then referring to an actual temperature defines its spectral emissions.

Here's a Color Temp Scale:

1000K...Candles and oil lamps
2000K...Tungsten lamps up to 1000w
3000K...Studio lamps, "warm-white" fluorescent lamps
4000K...Clear flashbulbs, "cool-white" fluorescent lamps
5000K...Blue flashbulbs, electronic flash, average daylight
6000K...Bright sunshine with blue sky
7000K...Lightly overcast sky
8000K...Hazy sky
9000K...Moderately overcast sky
10000K..Heavily overcast sky
11000K..Sunless blue sky

Most digital cameras emulate daylight film. One of the difficulties with using these lamps is they use a "500 watt 3200° Kelvin bulb." Your pictures will look "warm" making people appear like they have bad livers.

Something that comes to mind when I think tungsten lighting is heat. If you're operating two 500w bulbs in a room it's gonna get HOT FAST!! Let me put it another way – the average person puts out the heat equivalent of a 100w bulb. When you're using these lamps you'll be adding the heat of 10 people to the room. I know that doesn't SOUND like a lot, but you'd be surprised how fast it gets hot in a room that's got tungsten bulbs going full speed.

I've never tried traveling with tungsten bulbs, but I'm sure there's a way to transport them safely.

Short answer: may not work as you planned. People may look a bit jaundiced or orange. Also, it's gonna get hot...

I am not sure of the features in the camera you mentioned and so cannot comment of them. If you REALLY want to start down this path you might consider checking out the advanced digital cameras. Many have external flash connections making it easier to use flash directly from the camera or via wired/wireless remote. I've looked at the Canon Powershot Pro1 and has advanced white-balance modes. I'm certain other cameras do the same, but keep in mind you'll need something like that if you're planning on using those lamps.

I know this is not the best answer but it's what I could come up with on short notice. Hope this helps and let me know if you've got any more questions.

E

Epi,

Thanks for the response. After some consideration and a talk with another friend of mine who knows something about photography, I have decided against doing anything differently for now.

But maybe I will take some baby steps in the future. BTW, what flashes do you have in the stands?

While I carry two Canon 580EX Speedlights, I only shoot with one about half the time:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=348457&is=USA&addedTroughType=search

They run on AA batteries so I travel with a recharger. Make sure your recharger can work overseas!! Bahtman plugged his in and it melted. I've considered getting a Quantum Instruments battery pack. This would allow me to shoot with both flashes at the same time, have a recharge time of roughly 1-1.9 seconds and grab LOTS of shots w/o fishing for new batteries:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=268860&is=REG&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation

As you can see, this stuff gets to be like crack cocaine...

E

Yes, the B&H website is a VERY dangerous place for the photographer to visit. Money seems to fly out of one's hands.

Time to rekindle this informativive thread....


First off-- If you live near a CompUSA-- go NOW and load up on 2GB CF or SD cards 39.95!!! I bought all they had today and am thinking of going to the next closest store and cleaning them out also.

Some updates:

Last year/earlier this winter, I added the following:

D200-- absolutely love it! Haven't looked at the D70 since.

Alien Bee strobes (800s). Doing a lot of studio work (not whore related unfort) the last several months. Very nice and affordable. Contrary to Epi's previous comment, they are RELATIVELY light and compact, for strobes that is.


18-200VR-- my XMAS gift to myself while in bkk with epi last year. It's a very very conv. lens-- little slow tho.


50mm 1.4, and a 17-35mm 28 added my grab bag. Two awesome pieces. I LUG the 17-35 around on folliage hikes a lot lately and it is worth the effort (it's professional glass) when I go to the lab (i dusted off my old f100 recently).

Hope everyone is getting in plenty of shutter releases of late!

How long does the sale last? I just got a 4 GB Lexar 133x.

U can order line as well:

http://www.compusa.com/products/product_info.asp?pfp=BROWSE&N=200132+502395&Ne=502389&product_code=334914&Pn=2GB_Secure_Digital_Flash_Memory


and

http://www.compusa.com/products/product_info.asp?pfp=BROWSE&N=200132+502395+4294966818+401898&Ne=400000&product_code=335144&Pn=2GB_CompactFlash_Flash_Memory


unless your using a new hi speed interface for downloads, your spending much more than need be on cards. In camera, my buffer is more than handling writes and for downloads, I usually do direct camera--> comp usb, for which there is no appreciable speed differences.

if you are using hi speed interfaces and got to have images ASAP, the extreme IV cards do crank!

Thats the price every day at Fry's and the prices seem to be going down every month...look for the 2gb to be 29.95 within two months.

Blazers, yes electronics go down in price until they are replaced by a faster/larger version back at the higher margin/price range-- that's called the product cycle.

I have never been in a Fry's, so I cannot attest to satisfaction of their generic brands at that price, but I can with PNY, which I've used for 7 years without err. I'm sure they are fine tho.

The point to keep in mind -- it will not be profitable for manufacturers to produce them and retailers to sell them, thus they will be slowly phased out, moving to maintain profit margins. The deals at compusa, fry's, etc are largely based on manufacturers incentives, who are trying to burn current inventory.

On today's Fry's Electronics ad. 2GB SD card for $22.99...guess it happens faster than I thought.

I noticed they have PNY on clearance, but still $34.99. I'm comfy with PNY, but hesisitant to buy unknown generics and save an additional 10 bucks-- all it takes is one I/O error and you've got a days' work going into the shitter.

If anyone else has some experiences with any of these brands on fire sale, feel free to chime in.

Blazers - the cost of producing flash memory is relative to the cost of producing X number of transistors on a given surface area. And the number of transistors you can squeeze into a square cm keeps doubling about every 2 years. So expect flash memory to keep getting larger, and cheaper, pretty quickly. Within a few (5-10?) years, we'll probably all be replacing our mechanical hard drives with solid state flash drives.

LOW PRICE ALERT: Canon DSLRs

I've noticed Canon prices have been falling dramatically. I've seen USA 30Ds (or should I say the 20D II) for under 1200 (yawn), but better yet, the 5D for 2700-2800. Kick in Canon's 2* rebate and your looking at almost 2k for the 5D now!! Despite my great affinity with Nikon, getting a full frame DSLR for 2k is damn temping.

You guys are some serious perverts, I love it. I just can't picture myself with a camera around my neck in Luomos.

DM:

Have to agree on the D200. Only problem I have had is that I can't source the 18-200VR glass anywhere. Damn lens is so popular that no one seems to have it in stock. Been shooting an 18-24 lately, loving the wide angle close ups you can get.

Will have to go to Compusa ASAP.

Penejo, I've used the 18-200 VR for around 10 months now. It isn't the sharpest or quickest lens I have, but it is darn handy as a walk around and performs exactly as expected. My last trip to China, I used it roughly 90% of the time! For Nikon (dig), it's the best walk around you can get. Lots of guys (purists) have some negative stuff to spew about the 18-200... don't listen to em-- no it isn't as sharp as a 85/1.4 DOH! It does exactly what it's designed to do tho.

For Canon, I think I would would prefer the 24-105L/f4 IS for a couple hundred more tho.

I actually have two 18-200s. I picked up one a couple months ago at Best Buy when it was in stock for a friend and he ran into money trouble. Rather than get whacked with a 15% restocking fee, I was going to ebay it, but have been too lazy.

"You guys are some serious perverts, I love it. I just can't picture myself with a camera around my neck in Luomos."

trw-- that's what my canon sd800 tucked in my robe is for... well in theory, I've yet to make it to a terma!

I have been drooling for the 5D, but the Canon board rumors have a successor to it coming out about February (18 month product cycle), so I'm biding my time. Definitely full-frame or bust for this kid.

As for a walk-around for Canon, it's the 24-70 2.8L for me all the way. I will take that lense to the grave.

just got a Canon EF-S lens, 17-55 IS f2.8

Awesome

Of course, if you don't need zoom, you can get by very well with a 50mm f1.8 and a 100 mm f2.0. Very nice lenses.

Getting a Canon Rebel XTi 400D in a few days. Seems a pretty amazing camera for fairly low money

None of you guys is coming to Rio to exchange experieneces and check my studio???

BS-- I would love to take a trip and spend some serious time in your studio. How much better does it get if the two of us lined up some models for a week, shot them to our heart's content, then fucked them silly afterward!

How hard is it to line up some models? They don't need to be pros, but willing to take direction and have some experience in front of the lens. Let me know it's only a plane ticket away ;) The hornier the better.

re the XTi-- don't you already have the 20d? sure the new XT has a few more pixels, but the 20d is still a much better camera imho. A shooting buddy of mine uses the 17-55 and LOVES it.



Murasaki-- yes, it would make sense as the big canon rebate lasts until January '07. I imagine they may be refreshing the 5d to do 5fpm, which would kick ass. However, what I'm thinking is this-- a 5D for 2.1k (buy two prods and get 2*rebate), or a 5d II with slight improvements for 3300 or so and wait 5 months. I would rather get the 5d and pick up the 24-70 or 24-105 for the same price. I think the 24-70 is the PERFECT lens for the 20d-30d, but on a full frame sensor, I like a little more range on a zoom, assuming there is no falloff with optical quality. By all accounts, the 24-70 and 24-105 are two kick ass lens in their line.


Canon (and Nikon) have a real tough job of refreshing products/price competitiveness while protecting current and legacy product lines. They can't do that much to the 5d or it trumps their pro line, they cant do much for the price or no one will buy their current inventory.

BS:

I second DM's comments. Would love to come down and shoot with you! Just say the word!

I also love Canon's 50 1.4 and the 17-40L 4.0. My next lens will be the 70-200 2.8L IS to round out the main lineup.

DM, where are you seeing this big rebate for the 5D? I've seen it down to 2.8k, certainly not 2.1k.

BS, what's your studio setup? Hotlights or strobes? I'm also interested in the answers to DM's questions about model availability. What are hourly rates for nude glamour/erotic/fine art? After all, I am planning on visiting Rio one of these years...

I need some advice here. I'm doing a semi-Murasaki style tour of SEA and have my Canon 20D, along with my 24-105L/4.0, 50/1.4, and EPS 10-22 with me. For some reason I am thinking about purchasing the EPS 17-55/2.8 on this trip to help in low light situations and to be able to get wider using an image-stabilized zoom (I hate carrying a tripod around). Although this may seem an unnecessary extravagence (sp?), I was set to do it until this thread raised the issue of full-frame prices coming down, at which point I suppose the EPS lenses become relatively worthless.

Maybe I have answered my own question with the last sentence, but any advice out there about whether there still is a good argument for buying the EPS 17-55 would be useful. I should add my photography skills still need to catch up with my equipment (although I know some things), one of the reasons I am asking for advice on this. (Incidentally, advice along the lines of a calculation of how many sessions I could get with the money spent on the lens would not be helpful. I already have that one figured out, but that argument alone has not persuaded me to abandon the idea of purchasing the lens, LOL).

Personally I wouldn't touch EFS lenses, but that's because I have every intention of moving to a full frame body. If you're ready to spend the $ to buy the 17-55, you might as well go ahead and get one of the best lenses in the Canon universe, the 24-70L 2.8, as it will only be an extra $100 or so. The 2.8 is what the doctor ordered for low light (also the 20D is great with higher ISOs). Plus you can use it on the full frame whenever you get it. You'd just be putting the 17-55 on E-Bay whenever that happens, unless you planned on keeping the 20D as well.

OTOH, you already have that range covered with your 24-105, albeit giving up one stop with the 4.0 on that sucker. So another possibility is to get the 16-35 2.8L. That will still give you the 2.8, plus you'll have wide angle coverage when you go to the full-frame, as you can't take the EFS 10-22 with you.

Murasaki: Your suggestion is an interesting one, but the 16-35 2.8L doesn't have image stabilization whereas the 24-105 4.0L does. Assuming I'm not using a tripod, doesn't this really mean at best (from the perspective of the 16-35) the two lenses will do equally well in low light? I mean I don't have Parkinson's or anything, but there is going to be at least some camera shake that will be reduced by the image stablization.

This stuff is too damn difficult. Unlike the political discussions that were recently on the board where there clearly is only one correct answer. LOL.

"DM, where are you seeing this big rebate for the 5D? I've seen it down to 2.8k, certainly not 2.1k"


Mura- canon has a large rebate program going on. If you buy any two products that have rebates, you get double the rebate back. The rebate on the 5d is 300, so if u pick up a lens, etc the rebate on the 5d is 600 + 2* the rebate on the other product as well. As you noticed, 5d's can be had for 2700-2800 online (USA), thus 2700/2800 -600= the 2100/22. here is a list of the rebate products and amounts:

http://www.usa.canon.com/app/pdf/Promotions/CIWC_Form_Oct06.pdf


LAG--

I've tried out all the lens you mentioned and wouldn't spent the money on the 17-55 at this point.

From the quality perspective:
Your 24-105 kicks ass and your spending a lot of money for a lesser quality lens (imho). Stick with L series.

Range: you've got the range covered between your two lenses already. When you go to the FFS, you need to pick up a new wide-angle assuming you shoot in the 10mm range now. If on your 10-22 your more in the 14-22 range, then you already have that pretty much covered with the 24-105 on a FFS. Personally, I shoot just about all my shots in one of the three ranges: 17-27 range, 90-105, and at 200. I'll pick up the nikon F- canon adapter for the wide angle as Nikon's 17-35 2.8 is the finest ever made (+ I already own it). Thus, I'll stick with the 24-105L IS and 70-200L IS.



Compatibility: Like mura said, personally I wouldn't buy and EP-S lenses. I really like the 10-22, but just for that reason, wouldn't consider it. Then again, I highly doubt Canon will toss away the consumer market and their existing product lines, so as long as you personally do not care about FFS, then I'm sure the 20/30d lineage will live on in some form. For me, its Canon FFS or I'm using my Nikon. When are you thinking of going to the 5d line?

X factor: It is tough to get good shots in jkt with a DSLR-- your probably not going to want to carry around anything more than your compact, lighting is very dark, and sessions are very much to the point ST (no extended chit chat, modeling sessions). Thus, more than likely your going to get off a few snapshots at best with girls. I personally wouldn't get too worked up with quality gear for this purpose, but more for your general photography endevours. That is one + to LoS/PI, where things are LT based, in my room, and I control the lighting.


That's my 2 cents anyhow. Have fun!

DM: Thanks for the feedback. Looks like I'm better off using the money for other things.

Well got the 5d, 24-70, 70-200, and 580ex in. Initial thoughts:

Dust: Hrmm what the hell does canon do produce this shit in the sahara in dust storms? I haven't seen this much dust in 25 years of new nikon stuff.

granted, I'm a tad anal about dust when it comes to optics, but in reality a few internal specs in the lens aren't going to affect anything, and the sensor seams ok after a blow job or two, but still...

5d and bundle: I snapped off a few pics with the 5d and 24-70 and they were SHARP-- beautiful! Also, I LOVE DPP-- it kicks ass. It makes Nikon software (capture) look like 1 week old vomit ... and nikon has the balls to charge for it.

flash: great quality. Nikon may have better flash technology, but this flash is better designed. Fits the camera like a glove and thus far exposures are dead on. thumbs up.

picture styles in dpp: Faithful seems to offer the best skin tones thus far. Portrait pushes wayyyy too much red.

Wow, you dropped some major coin. Welcome to my favorite lens, the 24-70. Like I said, I will take it to the grave. Sharp as a tack. Also love the 580EX, my only flash, though it rarely gets used as I am a natural light fanatic.

Ironically, you got my next camera body, and my next lens, the 70-200. Did you get the 2.8 IS, 2.8, or the 4.0?

Uh, what is DPP?

By the way, my new SD800 IS came early last week. The price dropped on B&H so I pulled the trigger. Haven't had time to play with it much beyond a few test pics. I expect to put it through a thorough field test in Jakarta. Hehehehehe

mura: I sold off some nikon equip (28-70 f2.8, 70-200 2.8, 105 micro, 2 SB800s) so it was pretty much a wash. Got nearly every cent back with nikon stuff!

Many of the folks are indeed opting for the 24-105 now and I must admit, it's a same sharpness. You gain a 50% more coverage, it's got a couple stops advantage (newest IS is 3 stops), much lighter, but it's wont give the same bokeh and of course you lose a bit of DOF. I may still opt for the 24-105 as a walkaround to give my neck a break. Until then, given I had the 28-70 2.8 from Nikon (one of my favs), I won't gripe about the weight and focal coverage as the canon is about the same in all regards.

DPP -- Digital Photo Professional. Kicks some ass and makes working in raw a breeze including switching back and forth with photoshop.

70-200 2.8 IS. The new f4 IS was temping but I don't care about weight (heavier the better) and the f4 prices are jacked. With 2*rebates the 70-200 is a steal (vs the f4). I was at photo expo and have a discount code if your wanting to buy gear asap-- PM me.

The only other item I added was the vertical grip, which kicks ass. IMHO Canon has some very lame placement of controls for manual mode and the vertical grip rocks in that regard. Best 220 Ive spent yet.


For christmas, I'll get myself the 135L f2 and 300 f2.8 to round out my supply of toys.

Wow, you do like to mix things up DM. I'm still getting used to my D200. I use the 17-55 with it and am very happy with the results.

I also have the SD450 Canon that I keep in my pocket. Do you think the SD800 is worth switching to?

I've heard lots of good things about the 24-105, and I may get one eventually when I go to the 5D (or successor). But I certainly would never give up the 24-70. It gives beautiful bokeh and I'm big on DOF. I'm also a natural light fanatic and prefer glass with as many stops as I can get. That 2.8 has been handy on many occasions. I simply love that lens. It is my walkaround. The weight doesn't bother me at all - having an Optech USA strap helps a lot.

No new toys for me until the spring, when I get the 70-200 2.8 IS. Then I'm getting the 65 macro to start a couple of new projects in that genre. If the consulting gods are kind to me next year, the 5D whatever comes in the summer.

Av--- The d200 has a much better build quality compared to anything the prosumer canon line has to offer-- it's not even close. Lens are a wash imho in terms of quality unless you start getting into the mega telephoto fast glass. Fact is tho, I just have been itching to go full frame and have been wanting to give canon a fair shake for some time. Also, the current rebates made trying them a no brainer for me-- it didnt cost me a cent. I had the 17-35 2.8 and 28-70 2.8 to cover that range. I have the 17-35 living on my f100 and d200 for now. Your 17-55 kicks some ass with the only potential downside is some flaring.

I would stick with the sd450 if it were I probably-- i upgraded cuz I awoke to a shattered lcd screen on my little sd. With that said, I love the sd800 and the IS.


Mura--
Yes, I will actually have both the 24-70 and 24-105 in my possession on monday and I'll decide that evening in the studio. I would love to keep both, but in reality, I highly doubt anyone is going to lug around both + there are other L lens I could add to my collection with the 1.1k! On a side note, don't underestimate the difference shooting wide open on a cropped sensor vs. the 5d--you dont really want to be shooting the 24-70 wide open unless your doing a lot of photoshop'in. The vignetting and loss of sharpness in the corners is dramatic @ 2.8. As for availabile light, your not going to convince me that 1 f stop faster beats out 3 stops of stabilization in terms of getting a shot off ;). Bokeh, yes.



I love the 70-200-- I wish I could shoot everything with this lens! I got the veritical grip just to allow for more handholding comfort with the lens.

I would give serious consideration to the 100mm macro over the 65... I had a 60 micro from nikon for many years, which was tack sharp, however, 60mm at 1:1 offers too little room to work imho. The canon 100mm is a super value and one of the guys at the studio actually uses it for portraits-- it is that good.


Enjoy!

The 65 is what I need. I will be doing some ultra-macro work, and the 65 is the only lens available that delivers what I'm looking for (5x magnification). The 100 is a great lens, and many people use it for portraiture as well (according to all the posters on dpreview), but it can't go to where the 65 goes.

Regarding the future 5d, I'll still have the 20d as a second body, so the 2.8 on the 24-70 is still quite relevant, were I to also own the 24-105.

If anyone is interested, www.dpreview.com just posted their review of the Canon EOS 5D Mark II, drool, drool.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos5Dmarkii/

(Message edited by LAguy on February 14, 2009)

I read the review yesterday. I've been drooling for it since it was announced last year. I understand they are very hard to get right now - not that it matters for me, since I don't have the cash to make that kind of purchase anyway!

Well, when it was announced I had the cash ready to go.

Something happened in the interim.

It is a tad pricey. I played with it in the store, read the reviews, looked at the price again and again, a bought a Nikon D700 instead. I'm exceptionally happy with the D700, and I get to keep all my old lenses.

Since all my lenses are Canons, including the revered 24-105L, I am pretty much locked into Canons for the foreseeable future. Too bad the lenses weren't compatible across brands because then we could make our decisions about new models based solely on their merits.

well depends on how you look at it.. your 24-105 dumped would equate to about a $225 loss (or think of it as a cheap rental). Even if you have a few Ls and lost a couple hundred on each, dumping the lot would be less than the depreciation on the 5dmk2/ d700 the first year.

For nikon users, the d700 is a no brainer upgrade due to IQ at higher ISO. For the canon folks, a bit less so. The 12MP file was plenty large enough and high ISO performance holds it's own against the newer bodies.

Changing brands makes little sense-- I doubt either brand would be the limiting factor in terms of photographic quality.

My problem with dumping lenses, or any other consumer goods I own and no longer use, is the hassle involved. For me, it's just not worth the time and aggravation. For example, to ebay something requires that you are in one place long enough to post it, sell it, and ship it. I often am not.

Are you aware, that there are stores that will ebay things for you?

Actually, I wasn't aware of this but would be interested in any information you have about how to find a reliable one and what to expect (in terms of commissions, and so forth).

Question for the traveling photographers here that take their DSLR's and a couple of lenses and flashes with them. What kind of bag do you use to carry your gear? I need something that can hold my Nikon, 2 zooms, a prime and an sb700.

Thanks.

I like cross the shoulder type bags that you can 'sling' across your back or front (for safety) Take a look at the LowePro. http://www.adorama.com/LPSS302BK.html