-
My favorite lenses for weddings are the 24 1.4, 50 1.2 and 135 2.0. I don't need anything else. I pay attention to directional light and can add it when I need it but I find off-camera flash to be a hassle and I can generally find some great light on an available basis and when it isn't there you can often bounce on-camera flash directionally
-
As far as the underexposure is concerned I find the mark2 to be much more accurate than the mark 1. After shooting with the mark1 for 3 yearsI had gotten to the point where I knew when the meter was "on" and when it was giving me false info and I knew exactly how to compensate. I'm finding with the mark2 that its far more accurate and
-
I've got a 24-70 2.8L I'm trying to sell... :D - trr
-
From the little testing I've done I'm not seeing the 14-24 as that much different than the new 24. Both have a different quality though so I can see why you might prefer one or the other. I'd love it if Canon came out with a 14-24 but judging Canon's other zooms I can't expect it to be any better IQ wise than the primes. My eyes
-
Using manual focus for wedding work really isn't practical for me. I've decided to go with the new 24 1.4. The 16-35s need to be stopped down way too low to get close to wide-open prime performance. - trr
-
I'd be super excited for an L series 28mm and 100mm. Looking at the current product lineup that's wildly unlikely, but it would make me really happy. Say a 28mm 1.2 and 100m 1.4? I wouldn't need anything else! - trr
-
We only shoot weddings and mainly shoot at 4.0 and under. I generally keep in the 2.0-3.2 range most of the time. We only use L series primes because the image quality is great at those apertures - I have to stop my L zooms down to 5.6-8 to get similar image quality which is too restricting. - trr
-
I sure can't change your mind Karel, and I imagine everyone else is getting tired of our back and forth, though its been fun. All I can say is that when my order comes through I'll own 4 5d mark 2s and no other cameras and I'll shoot everything I do with them. Its certainly general purpose for me, through I don't shoot sports which is
-
I thought I was going to let it go but I can't!! I was wondering about the title of this thread and really wanted to know if Karel thought the 5dmk2 was worth the price but just barely or whether he questioned the value altogether. The AF/price question in interesting. Karel believes that because you can get a "better" AF system in an
-
[quote user="KarelDonk"] A lot of people, including me, were hoping Canon would come with a 5D upgrade that would at least come close to the performance of the D700. Nikon has 2 cheap bodies for pro users. D300 and D700. Canon has none. Or at least, they pretend to have 2 as well but they're significantly inferior to the Nikon bodies.