very pleased, reads percentage charged also
It's a fabulous picture, I immediately wanted to know what wonderful lighting you used and then I finished your response and found it.
As an absurdly obsessive perfectionist (it's my curse), if you carefully examine the people on the edges, they are NOT as sharp as the interior group. I stand by my Prime lens choice.
P.S. I use zooms in all my weddings, EXCEPT the group shots.
Your photos are FABULOUS!! I have followed your responses for a few years and am very impressed. But show me a shot with 22 people, are the out side heads true, or do they have some "pumpkin characteristics"? Head shots with good zooms look OK, but what about those people on the EDGE? They don't make for an exciting shot, but for the family ......they are still important . That's why I shoot a prime WITH LITTLE DISTORTION.
I shoot families on a tripod, cable release, and a 35 mm Zeiss f2 manual focus lens. That lens has LESS DISTORTION than any lens I have researched - I defy any Zoom to match the realistic rendition of faces! It's that simple. I also have a Zeiss Otis 55 and a Sigma 40 (which has horrible focus shift and must be stopped down to f5 and focused manually to insure proper focus in the plain if faces). I print 36" x 48" prints that "wow" people, not because I am a good photographer but because I have good glass and good fill (Profoto flash/shoot-thru umbrellas),
Yes, I have zooms, mainly for sports & functions.
I have Topaz Denoise but currently I am using DXO's new program PR on trial. I shot a lacrosse game under lights at night with VERY high ISOs from 5000 to 32,000. The DXO's are remarkable, clearly better than Topaz, but the resulting images have very bright colors, almost like daylight. The players love them. I have done no exploration of the details of the program, I simply process and import them back into LR where I finalize cropping, etc. Hate to commit to another program, but in extreme ISO problems I think of purchasing it.
More important to good photos is the NOISE PROBLEM. I have shot lots of indoor hockey lately with ISOs in the 2500 range . That's 2500 with lights not the sun, and the results are disastrous . I used all of Topaz's programs (DeNoise, sharpen, Ai) but I recently tried DXO's on a trial basis. Its is far superior in this situation. Post processing the raw images is incredibly time consuming - if it wasn't my grand daughter, I never would have spent the time on technically lousy pictures. Good luck
I have all the Topaz but while recently editing INDOOR HOCKEY shots, all with TERRIBLE LIGHTING - HIGH ISO (not professional hockey rinks - high school), AI was the only program that worked. I tried DXO's on a trial basis and that may prove better. In all cases, the faces were poorly lit and the results were at best OK - view prints from a distance .
I believe fill-flash MAKES the difference in a good print. I disagree with the gentleman who likes the sun at his back - it gives raccoon eyes. I want the sun in back of the group ( never at mid day) which will result in Dark shadowed faces, which your fill will eliminate. You almost have to have a mirrorless camera for this to work - you haver to view the test shot THRU THE VIEWFINDER (to avoid the light from the sun) to see if the strength of the flash is perfect. Do NOT count on post processing to adjust the light of the subjects or the background - it can help a poor balance of light but will never look natural.. You need to magnify your shot ion. the viewfinder to determine the correct balance
That's a wonderful shot - congratulations
I always use a shoot thru flash set several feet higher higher than the camera . Set all controls to manual (especially ISO), set aperture to a 5.6/F8, don't let shutter speed get lower the 1/30 (ghosting), make sure test shot had good histogram, and THEN turn on flash and "inch"it up where faces look good. Do NOT let the flash change the overall exposure - it will look artificial. And , tripod and cable release (with lens on MANUAL) so after focusing, you can face the crowd and become the CONDUCTOR orchestrating positions, spacing, smiles, etc. Look at the crowd and become their cheer leader/coach/teacher/discipliner/clown/comedian, whatever it takes makes for a fun shoot. Every group is different - it is my "golf game". Last thing, with a huge group, be prepared to switch a few heads (eyes closed, etc.). Second lastly, a PRIME lens is essential to avoid "pumpkin heads" on the edges - find o 35 or 28 with low distortion. Good luck and enjoy - no pressure (there's always pressure - its the high)
Am an old dog, almost 80, and after learning about Diglloyd thru the LUMINOUS LANDSCAPE many years ago, have become fascinated with the evolving technology. I am NOT a shill for his blog, but if I was planning to spend the thousands to buy a Hassy or Leica, I would certainly advise to look before you leap and read his evaluations. His lens & camera testing is sooooo comprehensive, unlike anyone else. He calls it like it is - many companies decline forwarding new products because of his frank, comprehensive analysis. I was "set" on buying the new X2D Hasselblad (which can produce fine images) but it's lack of so many features & stupid short comings (no lossless compression) I decided to pass.
Was motivated to reply (very late from original question) as I doubt the buyer was aware of the short comings so I thought I would throw out some comments for consideration
Was looking at purchasing either the Fuji 100 meg camera or the Hasselblad (I still own my beloved 500 & 3 lens)
but have decided against it. I subscribe to DIGLLOYD, Lloyd Chamber's subscription blog ( $225/yr) which is unequivocally the BEST camera/lens evaluator in the industry. (While reading the LUMINOUS LANDSCAPE blog in the
early days of digital cameras, they stopped their evaluations and recommended him). He gave the Hasselblad the edge in output over the Fuji, but the Hasselblad camera itself is so bqackwards with no modern innovations which we take for granted, I decided to pass. From my personal perspective, Hasselblad is owned & manufactured in China,
something I can not handle. As for the Leica, it is so absurdly overpriced, not up to the innovations of Canon, Nikon & Sony, and their "legendary" lens are outperformed by Zeiss & Voigtlander.
I have shot Nikon for 60 years, Canon sports cameras for the 14 shots/second, and now, painfully, Sony. The NEW A7RV with
pixel shift, along with Zeiss & Voigtlander lens (manual focus), will match/surpass current medium format.
You can read Chamber's blog free, but the detailed analysis and extensive crops of lens are reserved for subscribers. He calls it as it is, and after reading his detailed performance of a lens, you will never make another purchase relying on the "u tubers". Good luck with your decision.
Buy the longer one. I rented both from lens rentals, the short one's zoom ring is slow and lousy, the long one is fast.
I am a 78 year old computer/technology idiot who has been printing & photographing since I was 10! Topaz is a GAME CHANGER! I love it, sometimes I have sharpening turned off and only denoise, sometimes the opposite. I shoot a 200-600 f6 something for my grand kids sports & birds - I ALWAYS have to denoise. The program is fabulous, and believe me, if I can use it, you won’t have any trouble. It is CLEARLY the best add-on to LR - I use it all the time. My three photo buddies all now use it. Even Christmas pics I used small sharpening to make eyes “pop”. You can not tell!