Enter the Americans...

Amazing photos, very good lighting technique.

I have to ask though, what equipment are you using? :rolleyes:
 
Cold Fussion said:
I can set my 10d up on a tripod, use f9 with a perfect focus and my shots turn out to be no where near as crisp as yours :(
Click to expand...
I am shooting some of this stuff at ISO 50, 1/200, f10+
like i said...use more light :) the 10D body is dated, but still a good sensor. more than capable of similar results.

TopGearDog said:
Amazing photos, very good lighting technique.

I have to ask though, what equipment are you using? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

for these photos...

Canon 1D MKIII
16-35 f/2.8L II
24-105 f/4L
85 f/1.2L II
70-200 f/2.8L IS

the lighting package used here is a speedlight (580EXII) two 800W strobes and a 1600W, plus accessories.
 
syf0n said:
I am shooting some of this stuff at ISO 50, 1/200, f10+
like i said...use more light :) the 10D body is dated, but still a good sensor. more than capable of similar results.
Click to expand...

So on a sunny day, the direct sunlight isn't enough? I think the fact you have a 1d mk3 with if its infantley times better censor is how your images come out so crisp. Even on a tripod with f22 with proper exposure with nothing moving, my shots are no where near the level of crispness as yours.
 
Last edited:
Lighting will bring out detail that might be hidden in shadows, even light will give you the ability expose in a way that doesn't blow highlights, and so forth. That probably has some play.

Sharp lenses are also very important, and all those he use are crisp.
 
Cold Fussion said:
So on a sunny day, the direct sunlight isn't enough? I think the fact you have a 1d mk3 with if its infantley times better censor is how your images come out so crisp. Even on a tripod with f22 with proper exposure with nothing moving, my shots are no where near the level of crispness as yours.
Click to expand...

direct sunlight is definitely not enough to get serious image quality. the camera body itself makes almost no difference, especially at these rinky-dink 35mm sizes...the sensor isn't *that* much bigger percentage-wise that it would mean some immediately noticeable difference. if i were shooting medium or large format digital then you may have a point. granted the 10D is 4 generations older than the 1D3 so the sensor tech. itself is obviously better, but I also use a 20D and get similar results to the 1D when I use a lot of light.

nomix is also correct about his post, and I am using a fairly sharp stack of lenses which helps with crispness.
 
Yeah not everyone realizes how much photography revolves around lighting.
 
syf0n said:
direct sunlight is definitely not enough to get serious image quality. the camera body itself makes almost no difference, especially at these rinky-dink 35mm sizes...the sensor isn't *that* much bigger percentage-wise that it would mean some immediately noticeable difference. if i were shooting medium or large format digital then you may have a point. granted the 10D is 4 generations older than the 1D3 so the sensor tech. itself is obviously better, but I also use a 20D and get similar results to the 1D when I use a lot of light.

nomix is also correct about his post, and I am using a fairly sharp stack of lenses which helps with crispness.
Click to expand...

What about a longer exposure on a still subject? Will that yeild the same results as more light? I mostly use the 24-105 and it seems very soft. My 50mm lens feels sharper and its no where near as sharp as my 100mm macro :\
The only "real" crisp and sharp shot i've ever had is this one: http://cold-fussion.deviantart.com/art/Depth-of-field-study-65200619 That was with the 100mm macro at like 1/250. I've been unable to attain sharpness like that on my 24-105 and 50mm.


You should do some behind the scenes style shots so we can see your light setup and stuff :)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top