Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 57
  1. #41
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Chicago, IL USA
    Posts
    935
    Seriously though? $1700 for a damn flash? That's a waste of money.

    Pick up some pocket wizards or cybersyncs and some used SB-24's. You could probably get 10 SB's and the accompanying radio triggers for the same price.
    Nikon D300 | MB-D10 | Nikkor 12-24/4 | Nikkor 50/1.8 | Nikkor 70-200/2.8 VRI | Sigma 18-50/2.8 | SB-800 | SB-80DX (x4) | Radiopopper JrX Studio |

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560

    Thumbs down Stay on topic ... enough bashing the OP

    Quote Originally Posted by Rooz View Post
    meh...don just wants a new toy. its got nothing to do with photography. at least we'll get a change from the tamron/ sony sales job. now metz can join the sales family, at least its a quality product.
    Thanks for your "NOTHING of substance to add" contribution, 'Rooz'. Why don't you and your good buddy, Nikon-boy, oh ... I mean Ashton Kutcher ... hit the road, going around the Outback snapping lil' joeys being born or something. Oh, and introduce Ashton to one of those Aussie-crocs, will ya, and spare us any future nauseating Nikon-commercials?

    Now, before things really get silly ... here's a final thought: How about less diatribe on my personal affiliations with TAMRON, et al, and we concentrate on more important stuff ... like pseudo-flash photography? Keep it on topic... Good grief. Man, this is beginning to border on annoying.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560
    VTEC ... unless you speak from direct experience ... please don't.

    I, personally, know that having the convenience of this type of power flash unit is what can make or break a business deal. This tool is one of the most serious additions you can make to your lighting solution and well worth the reliability and convenience. Populating the planet with miniature flashes is one plan, but sucks up resources like batteries and wireless triggers to make sure everything stays in sync and works when and as expected.

    I have done the multiple flash idea, a couple times, and have found it to be expensive and with limited reward. The number of flash units, to make it work correctly, are truly cost prohibitive, in the long run. Back in 2006, I had four 580 EX units to play with ...

    Name:  580exii x 4.gif
Views: 73
Size:  49.2 KB

    and the hardware cost alone for that was $2000. Add another $300 for the ST-E2 Trigger ...

    Name:  ste2_586x225.jpg
Views: 67
Size:  11.7 KB

    and we still have not gotten to the 16+ rechargeable batteries to keep it all moving.

    Name:  crossbow-final.jpg
Views: 70
Size:  229.8 KB

    It makes $1700 look "under-budget."

    I recommend you take some time and investigate its use, then decide. Until then ... I'll go with what I know. Besides, the price is a product of development and capability. Like Zeiss does glass ... Metz does lighting.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 12-14-2009 at 03:10 PM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    1,680
    Don....I'm just a little worried that the heat from that sucker will melt your camera
    Canon 5D MKlll & Canon 50D
    Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L USM | Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM | Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM | Canon 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro | Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM | Canon 50mm f/1.8 | Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 | Canon 430EX Flash | Lowepro Mini Trekker AW | Lowepro Toploader 65 AW | Lowepro Slingshot 200AW | Kata 3n1-10

    Panasonic Lumix FZ200
    Panasonic Lumix TZ7 (aka ZS3)
    Panasonic Lumix FT3 (aka TS3)

    Ali Baba.....the Thief of Bad Gags

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560
    Or set some poor cheerleader on fire !

    As it stands, I am currently abandoning the flash upgrade ... perhaps, until the next cycle.

    I have decided to concentrate on my glass, again, if I get the deal I am looking for. I should know by tonight.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 12-14-2009 at 03:13 PM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,424
    Quote Originally Posted by DonSchap View Post
    The number of flash units, to make it work correctly, are truly cost prohibitive, in the long run. Back in 2006, I had four 580 EX units to play with ...

    It makes $1700 look "under-budget."

    I recommend you take some time and investigate its use, then decide. Until then ... I'll go with what I know. Besides, the price is a product of development and capability. Like Zeiss does glass ... Metz does lighting.
    don, i apologise if i offended you, seriously. me doing a sales job though ? are you kidding me here ? the one doing the annoying spamming constantly is not me Don.

    as for the subject, you;re doing it all wrong. you dont need 580ex's at all. you need 4xsb's. all you want is a strobe...since you got PW's already the extra features of the flash itself are irrelevant so why buy the top end stuff ? we're talking $140/unit. thats around $500 for 4.

    you are not basing it at all on what you KNOW. you are basing it on what you WANT. yes you can decide yourself what you want but buy what you want based on the facts. if you just wanna buy it cos you want the gear just be honest with yourself and say thats what you want it for. case in point, i just bought a zf25 for myself for xmas. i didnt want it for any other reason than i wanted it. i just like the look and feel of it. thats all. i dont try and pull some con job on people about why its essential for any otehr reason other than its light, superb quality and wonderful to hold.

    as per always, if you do in fact buy the metz, good luck to you and i eagerly await the RESULTS.
    D800e l V3 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Bay Area, California
    Posts
    1,546
    Quote Originally Posted by DonSchap View Post
    and the hardware cost alone for that was $2000. Add another $300 for the ST-E2 Trigger ...
    Sure the high end flashes cost will add up but when we are talking old SB, Sunpak, and Metz flashes that can be had for a little over (and sometimes under) $100 dollars and CyberSync triggers at $60 a piece your final cost for the lighting wont be anywhere near $1700. And you only need 4. Check out the Strobist Pool and Flickr and there are tones of different gym setups done with 2 flashes at each end with excellent results.

    I picked up 2 Sunpak 433D, a 333, and an SB-24 on eBay all for around $60 a piece.
    Nikon D90, D40 Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 | Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 | Nikkor 35mm f/1.8
    Vertical Grip, SB-600, SB-24, Sunpak 433D, Metz 40AF-4N, Alienbees CyberSync Triggers

    R3G Media | Flickr

    "You're pulling some awesome action shots with a cam and lens that are supposed to be rubbish ! " - Rooz

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560

    Lightbulb Adding a refined element into my photography

    Quote Originally Posted by Rooz View Post
    as per always, if you do in fact buy the metz, good luck to you and i eagerly await the RESULTS.
    Like I stated in the post BEFORE this quoted one ... I have abandoned the quest for the STAR IN THE SKY for now.

    I got a decent proposed deal on a lens I have wanted for a long time and has been on my "Wish List" ... but I was afraid to seriously ask for it. It compliments one I already have and I am anxious to put it through its paces ... because I am that way. I feel it adds some "artistry" into the rather mundane point & shoot that we all seem to be doing with what we have. ("Oh, how insulting! Did you hear what Don just wrote? He's not a photographer ... he's a ... well, he's something. Imagine, the gall of him comparing us to common P&Sers!")

    Okay, all kidding aside ... planning the bokeh of a portrait is something I have never done. Okay ... done with any serious consideration. Well, that may not be true, either. My Christmas shots often use the bokeh from the background lights for effect. Normally speaking, though, the photographer usually winds up having to deal with whatever the lens you have mounted gives you with no real control other than adjusting the aperture and praying. Well, with this particular lens ... bokeh is groomed in a way unlike any other lens. The uniqueness of it is what I find the most attractive about this piece of glass. The design is entirely unique in photography.

    According to Michael Fotheringham,

    "The closest imitation is offered through Nikon with their 135/2.0 AF DC (Defocusing Control) Nikkor lens, designed with similar purposes. The Defocusing Control is an excellent lens, that offers Nikon users the ability to make out-of-focus areas appear softer by strategically introducing spherical aberration to just the defocused areas (in-focus areas are not affected). The Nikon DC lens has Autofocus, but cannot meet the supreme standard of bokeh of the STF lens... the DC lens shifts lenses around to over-correct or under-correct for spherical aberrations, to optimize the unsharp areas in either the foreground or background, but not both. Only the apodization filter in the STF lens optimizes both foreground and background unsharp areas."

    Well, if Michael feels this way about its design ... I suppose I can indulge my more inquisitive aspects and give it shot, too.

    It boiled down to either chancing the purchase of a SIGMA AF 24-70mm f/2.8 IF DG EX HSM, as a replacement for my TAMRON SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR DI LD Aspherical (IF) MACRO (which mine has been factory re-tuned, unlike many out of the box lenses). I figure my 28-75 is as sharp as any of them are ever going to get, so I am reluctant to let it go. This "STF" lens, though ... there aren't too many of them in use. So for the rarity, what the heck? I have a Christmas tree to shoot.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 12-15-2009 at 12:20 AM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,204
    Quote Originally Posted by DonSchap View Post
    Like I stated in the post BEFORE this quoted one ... I have abandoned the quest for the STAR IN THE SKY for now.

    I got a decent proposed deal on a lens I have wanted for a long time and has been on my "Wish List" ... but I was afraid to seriously ask for it. It compliments one I already have and I am anxious to put it through its paces ... because I am that way. I feel it adds some "artistry" into the rather mundane point & shoot that we all seem to be doing with what we have. ("Oh, how insulting! Did you hear what Don just wrote? He's not a photographer ... he's a ... well, he's something. Imagine, the gall of him comparing us to common P&Sers!")

    Okay, all kidding aside ... planning the bokeh of a portrait is something I have never done. Okay ... done with any serious consideration. Well, that may not be true, either. My Christmas shots often use the bokeh from the background lights for effect. Normally speaking, though, the photographer usually winds up having to deal with whatever the lens you have mounted gives you with no real control other than adjusting the aperture and praying. Well, with this particular lens ... bokeh is groomed in a way unlike any other lens. The uniqueness of it is what I find the most attractive about this piece of glass. The design is entirely unique in photography.

    According to Michael Fotheringham,

    "The closest imitation is offered through Nikon with their 135/2.0 AF DC (Defocusing Control) Nikkor lens, designed with similar purposes. The Defocusing Control is an excellent lens, that offers Nikon users the ability to make out-of-focus areas appear softer by strategically introducing spherical aberration to just the defocused areas (in-focus areas are not affected). The Nikon DC lens has Autofocus, but cannot meet the supreme standard of bokeh of the STF lens... the DC lens shifts lenses around to over-correct or under-correct for spherical aberrations, to optimize the unsharp areas in either the foreground or background, but not both. Only the apodization filter in the STF lens optimizes both foreground and background unsharp areas."

    Well, if Michael feels this way about its design ... I suppose I can indulge my more inquisitive aspects and give it shot, too.

    It boiled down to either chancing the purchase of a SIGMA AF 24-70mm f/2.8 IF DG EX HSM, as a replacement for my TAMRON SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR DI LD Aspherical (IF) MACRO (which mine has been factory re-tuned, unlike many out of the box lenses). I figure my 28-75 is as sharp as any of them are ever going to get, so I am reluctant to let it go. This "STF" lens, though ... there aren't too many of them in use. So for the rarity, what the heck? I have a Christmas tree to shoot.
    So, this whole "I need to do something to improve my basketball shots" thread has now turned into a I want the legendary STF lens for portraits? The Zeiss 135mm F/1.8 has similar bokeh, do you really need 2 135mm lenses?

    But seriously for basketball, a couple of flashes and another PW with your existing equipment would solve your lighting issues.
    flickr

    Canon 7D - 5D | 550EX - 430EX II - (2) PW FlexTT5 | 24-105 f4L | 70-200 f2.8L IS | 100 f2.8L IS | 50 f1.8 II

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560
    Thanks for flashing me that advice, Ryan. I'll bounce the idea off the college next month and see if they are interested in springing/providing some equipment support. They have a photography department and there may be a possibility I can work something out with them.

    Meanwhile ... I have to say that the bokeh I am getting from my CZ 135mm f/1.8 is not quite as round as I anticipated I would get. The STF better NOT look like this ...


    A700 w/ CZ 135mm f/1.8
    @ f/1.8 - 1/50 sec - ISO-100 - Spot Focus - Manual

    or I will have a long face.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 12-15-2009 at 07:58 AM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •