# I used the EOS M to shoot for one of the biggest model agency in America.



## Taemobig (Jul 30, 2013)

*Here's the edited video if you guys wanna check it out:
Women's Promo Summer 2013

Our crew just did a promotional video for a modeling agency's website with their top 12 models. Of course we had pro equipment but I decided to use the EOS M as a "B-roll" and stills camera. I have the 22mm and 18-55 lenses and the EF lens adapter but for about 80% of the shots, I just used the 18-55.

It worked better than I expected for such a small camera. Very sharp and clean when its properly exposed. I got alot of shadow noise but I get that problem even with my 5D mkIII. Blackout time is pretty long compared to a dslr but tolerable. One of my main gripes: there's no way to set a specific Kelvin for the white balance (I needed to match with the other cameras). Video worked very well, especially with the IS on the 18-55 when I was handholding it.

For stills I shot with raw+jpeg but I'm just gonna upload the jpegs (cropped/resized/unprocessed) and for the b&w shots, I just set the picture style to monochrome.

Here are some sample shots/vid.

http://youtu.be/NcXDZFT1LMY

1/160, F/5.6, ISO 100, 55MM

*Edit: posted link to the finished video.


----------



## Taemobig (Jul 30, 2013)

1/160, F/6.3, ISO 100, 55MM


----------



## Taemobig (Jul 30, 2013)

1/125, f/7.1, ISO 800, 33MM


----------



## Taemobig (Jul 30, 2013)

1/80, f/5.6, ISO 800, 18MM


----------



## Taemobig (Jul 30, 2013)

1/30, f3.5, ISO 200, 18MM


----------



## Taemobig (Jul 30, 2013)

1/125, f/6.3, ISO 200, 18MM


----------



## Taemobig (Jul 30, 2013)

1/100, f/6.3, ISO 100, 18MM


----------



## Taemobig (Jul 30, 2013)

1/250, f/5.6, ISO 400, 52MM


----------



## jebrady03 (Jul 30, 2013)

This thread views like a "who's who" of my ex girlfriends.  
Seriously though, great work! 

Should be easy enough to dial in the white balance in post, right?


----------



## Taemobig (Jul 31, 2013)

jebrady03 said:


> This thread views like a "who's who" of my ex girlfriends.
> Seriously though, great work!
> 
> Should be easy enough to dial in the white balance in post, right?



lol thanks! As for the white balance issue, for stills its easy since I shot both raw and jpg but I don't know how much it would affect videos since we have someone else in the crew that edits the video we take. I should ask him next time...


----------



## Act444 (Jul 31, 2013)

Nice!

It's a surprisingly capable camera for its small size, which was why I was drawn to it despite its starting price. The more I used it, the more I liked it for the purposes of replacing my P&S, and now that I have FF DSLRs it becomes the perfect complement. The hit in IQ is minimal compared to the size reduction which is dramatic.


----------



## TAF (Jul 31, 2013)

Nice photos! Proving once again that it is the operator, not the equipment, that rules in the end.

Now, you owe it to those girls to take the money you saved by buying the M instead of another DSLR and get them each a cheeseburger. They all look like they could use it.


----------



## RomanRacela (Jul 31, 2013)

For stills, were you using the "touch shutter" or the button to shoot? I haven't tested my EOS M or used it extensively yet so I haven't quite fugured out the best way to shoot with it. Very nice images and video. I was stoked to see the real world examples you posted.



Taemobig said:


> Our crew just did a promotional video for a modeling agency's website with their top 12 models. Of course we had pro equipment but I decided to use the EOS M as a "B-roll" and stills camera. I have the 22mm and 18-55 lenses and the EF lens adapter but for about 80% of the shots, I just used the 18-55.
> 
> It worked better than I expected for such a small camera. Very sharp and clean when its properly exposed. I got alot of shadow noise but I get that problem even with my 5D mkIII. Blackout time is pretty long compared to a dslr but tolerable. One of my main gripes: there's no way to set a specific Kelvin for the white balance (I needed to match with the other cameras). Video worked very well, especially with the IS on the 18-55 when I was handholding it.
> 
> For stills I shot with raw+jpeg but I'm just gonna upload the jpegs (cropped/resized/unprocessed) and for the b&w shots, I just set the picture style to monochrome.


----------



## Taemobig (Jul 31, 2013)

RomanRacela said:


> For stills, were you using the "touch shutter" or the button to shoot? I haven't tested my EOS M or used it extensively yet so I haven't quite fugured out the best way to shoot with it. Very nice images and video. I was stoked to see the real world examples you posted.



I didn't used the "touch shutter", I used the shutter button instead. It was easier for me to prevent camera shake that way and keep my composition exactly how I wanted it since my thumb/finger isn't covering part of the screen. But for "regular" day-to-day situations, I don't mind using the touch shutter.

As for real world examples...if you can call having a studio set, scrims, reflectors, white boards, hot lights, and a whole production crew real...then I guess its real lol.


----------



## Taemobig (Aug 12, 2013)

TAF said:


> Nice photos! Proving once again that it is the operator, not the equipment, that rules in the end.
> 
> Now, you owe it to those girls to take the money you saved by buying the M instead of another DSLR and get them each a cheeseburger. They all look like they could use it.



Completely agree to both points.


----------



## Viggo (Aug 12, 2013)

Taemobig said:


> 1/125, f/6.3, ISO 200, 18MM



At the first glance at this one I thought ," Man those legs are crazy long and widespread!" then I saw the girl next to her ;D


----------



## AlanF (Aug 12, 2013)

Taemobig said:


> TAF said:
> 
> 
> > Nice photos! Proving once again that it is the operator, not the equipment, that rules in the end.
> ...



Was this a shoot for a warning ad against anorexia? Or was it for a remake of Schindler's List with a more authentic looking cast?


----------



## bycostello (Aug 13, 2013)

just goes to show, once again, it is the photographer and not the camera that takes the picture....


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Aug 13, 2013)

Excellent work Taemobig


----------



## Taemobig (Aug 26, 2013)

dilbert said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > Taemobig said:
> ...



As much as most people want to say they're too skinny, each girl has contracts and earns $100,000 (lowest) to $1 million a year. If I can make that much money by being skinny, you bet your ass that I will eat salad and hit the gym everyday. Not to mention, they date famous athletes, actors, producers, etc. (I know for a fact one of the models in the sample photos used to be Kobe's mistress).


----------



## dtaylor (Aug 26, 2013)

dilbert said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > Taemobig said:
> ...



They're not anorexic. You haven't actually seen or known an anorexic girl if you think so.

They are definitely thin/petite. And yes, most men either like that, or it's within the range of what they like.


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 26, 2013)

dtaylor said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > AlanF said:
> ...


None of them look like they could carry my cedar-canvas canoe over a 5K portage..... Not interested.....


----------



## Pi (Aug 26, 2013)

Honestly, I do not like them. Uneven lighting, some a bit dull, some of the faces too dark. Shots like those, taken with professional lighting should shine. Weird artifacts in #3, the composition and the wide angle in #4 are questionable. #7 and #8 are really good, and the latter is my favorite. Still, technically, it is a bit dull. 

This is just an honest opinion, I have no intention to offend you. 

EDIT: I just watched the movie clip, I see where the "artifacts" are coming from (bubbles?). They look good in the movie but not so good in the stills.


----------



## Taemobig (Aug 26, 2013)

Pi said:


> Honestly, I do not like them. Uneven lighting, some a bit dull, some of the faces too dark. Shots like those, taken with professional lighting should shine. Weird artifacts in #3, the composition and the wide angle in #4 are questionable. #7 and #8 are really good, and the latter is my favorite. Still, technically, it is a bit dull.
> 
> This is just an honest opinion, I have no intention to offend you.




No offense taken, I know exactly what you mean about the lighting. In my defense this shoot was for a promo video with no stills in mind, these are more "behind-the-scenes" type of photos I did in the middle of the shoot, they weren't post processed either. I would have done it way differently if it was supposed to be a group photoshoot. The weird artifacts in #3 are bubbles from a bubble machine.

Once the video is on their website, I'll post the link here.


----------



## bedspringlex (Aug 26, 2013)

At no time did anyone ask for a critique. The original poster was trying to just show the potential of the eos m. You may have not meant to hurt anyone but commenting on simple sample photos from work is too harsh. Now where they were published in print ad or commercialized then one has reason to comment. I find them good examples of the strengths of the eos m. A little camera that still amazes me with just how good images it captures.


----------



## Pi (Aug 26, 2013)

bedspringlex said:


> At no time did anyone ask for a critique. The original poster was trying to just show the potential of the eos m. You may have not meant to hurt anyone but commenting on simple sample photos from work is too harsh. Now where they were published in print ad or commercialized then one has reason to comment. I find them good examples of the strengths of the eos m. A little camera that still amazes me with just how good images it captures.



Speaking about the technical IQ only, it is what you can expect from a crop camera and the kit lens. Not bad at all, but... something is not there. No surprises here, and seeing how the M works in great lighting is very useful, actually.

You are right, I should have kept my comments strictly technical.


----------



## dtaylor (Aug 26, 2013)

Pi said:


> Speaking about the technical IQ only, it is what you can expect from a crop camera and the kit lens. Not bad at all, but... something is not there.



And that has nothing to do with crop, and everything to do with lighting / exposure / post processing. Which we know was not setup or done for the stills.


----------



## Taemobig (Sep 8, 2013)

Here's the link for the video if you guys wanna check it out:
More Odds Than Even on Vimeo


----------



## axtstern (Sep 14, 2013)

Somehow People seem to be scared to use the M for a paid Job with famous customers.
When the world was about a quarter of a century younger I used a EOS 620 with some crapy first generation EF lenses for shots of this kind. Not the camera, not the lenses could stand a comparison to what the M can bring to the field... SO why be afraid?


----------



## Taemobig (Dec 23, 2013)

Here's a behind-the-scenes video to give you guys an idea of how the shoot was done:

LA MODELS 2014 CATALOGUE Behind The Scenes on Vimeo

I'm the one dancing at 1:02 and doing the "make-it-rain" at 1:07 on the left corner. Wearing my gray "Reckless" hat


----------

