# Canon 24-70 MKii vs 5D mkIII choice (moved)



## Ozarker (Jun 30, 2015)

Well, I thought I would be ordering a 5D Mark III this week. While that would have been great, I think I'd have been getting the cart before the horse. Recently I sold all my EFS lenses (Except for my 1 STM lens) and my T5i to help fund this purchase. This sort of left me with a hole in the shorter focal length range. While having a 5D Mark III will be wonderful later on, I decided instead to get the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L Mark II today. It will be here from Adorama tomorrow.

It just makes more sense for me to round out the lens kit more before the jump to Full Frame bliss. That is something I can keep looking forward to. That and a Canon EF 11-24mm f/4 late next year.

This is a wonderful forum to be a part of. The information to be had here has really helped me make better decisions, more informed decisions.

Thanks to all of you!


----------



## wsmith96 (Jun 30, 2015)

Congratulations on your purchase! You'll love that lens


----------



## sunnyVan (Jun 30, 2015)

Do you really have 7 600exrt? That's really substantial investment. Not a bad idea to get 6d if you're on tight budget.


----------



## Pookie (Jul 1, 2015)

Congrats... it's a stellar lens. I had the ver.1 before and now the 2. One of my "indispensable" lenses in business. 

Now dump all 7 of the speedlites, all those AA's and get yourself some Profotos or Eli's... camera bodies come and go... if you have a good cam stick with it and invest in lenses & light. 

Love my 24-70...


----------



## nc0b (Jul 1, 2015)

I concur you should also consider a 6D. They have been available for as little as $1200 new, and below $1000 used. Even with the bad press on focus, I do well with BIF with my 400mm f/5.6 and the center focus point. Whether shooting a 70-200mm f/4 IS outdoors or 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II indoors, I couldn't be happier with the results. Later you can get an even cheaper 5D Mk III or see what the Mk IV offers.


----------



## timmy_650 (Jul 1, 2015)

Pookie said:


> Congrats... it's a stellar lens. I had the ver.1 before and now the 2. One of my "indispensable" lenses in business.
> 
> Now dump all 7 of the speedlites, all those AA's and get yourself some Profotos or Eli's... camera bodies come and go... if you have a good cam stick with it and invest in lenses & light.
> 
> Love my 24-70...



Is that first picture taken in Santa Cruz?


----------



## Click (Jul 1, 2015)

Very nice shots, Pookie 8) I really like the first picture.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 1, 2015)

sunnyVan said:


> Do you really have 7 600exrt? That's really substantial investment. Not a bad idea to get 6d if you're on tight budget.



Yup, 7. I'd have 9, but there was a rumored EX-660. Want to wait and see what happens. I am always on a tight budget (lowly truck driver right now). 

I chose the 70D over the 6D for the shutter speed. I photograph a lot of birds. 

It will either be the 5D Mark III or the 1Dx next. I just plod along a little at a time. There really isn't anything I spend on other than photo gear right now. I am trying to build a respectable kit for my retirement years. Although much of this will be dated by then... it is still quality gear.

I hope to get more into portrait, fine art nude photography, and sports photography later on, so I am not sure the 6D would fit my needs. I'm sure it is a fine camera though.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 1, 2015)

Pookie said:


> Congrats... it's a stellar lens. I had the ver.1 before and now the 2. One of my "indispensable" lenses in business.
> 
> Now dump all 7 of the speedlites, all those AA's and get yourself some Profotos or Eli's... camera bodies come and go... if you have a good cam stick with it and invest in lenses & light.
> 
> ...


----------



## nc0b (Jul 1, 2015)

You shoot birds faster than 1/4000th second? I shoot mostly raptors with the 400mm f/5.6, and do keep the shutter speed above 1/1000, but would rather reduce the ISO or shoot at a modestly narrower aperture than go above 1/2000. Maybe humming birds could use that shutter speed, but no longer living in the Rocky Mountains, but on the Colorado plains, I no longer see the speed demons. I understand your interest in frame rate for sports. Even wildlife on the run can benefit from a high frame rate burst.


----------



## bwud (Jul 1, 2015)

CanonFanBoy said:


> I hope to get more into portrait, fine art nude photography, and sports photography later on, so I am not sure the 6D would fit my needs. I'm sure it is a fine camera though.



Why don't you think the 6D would fit your needs for portraiture and nudes? It's arguably better than the 5D3 and 1Dx for those purposes, and the cost delta (especially vs the 1D) will buy a lot of light.


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (Jul 1, 2015)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Well, I thought I would be ordering a 5D Mark III this week. While that would have been great, I think I'd have been getting the cart before the horse. Recently I sold all my EFS lenses (Except for my 1 STM lens) and my T5i to help fund this purchase. This sort of left me with a hole in the shorter focal length range. While having a 5D Mark III will be wonderful later on, I decided instead to get the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L Mark II today. It will be here from Adorama tomorrow.
> 
> It just makes more sense for me to round out the lens kit more before the jump to Full Frame bliss. That is something I can keep looking forward to. That and a Canon EF 11-24mm f/4 late next year.
> 
> ...


Investing in lenses is a wise decision always. Indeed, Canon 5D IV is around the corner


----------



## Pookie (Jul 1, 2015)

Click said:


> Very nice shots, Pookie 8) I really like the first picture.


Thanks again Click... The jump photo was a total surprise, didn't know she was a Saberkitten aka cheerleader, for the San Jose Sabercats (arena football). I jokingly asked her if she could jump  That 24-70 never misses action shots like this... always dependable when it counts.


----------



## Pookie (Jul 1, 2015)

timmy_650 said:


> Is that first picture taken in Santa Cruz?



Good eye, yes it is... Lighthouse Field State Beach. I get a lot of requests for this as a location. This or Panther Beach just west of here.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 1, 2015)

bwud said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > I hope to get more into portrait, fine art nude photography, and sports photography later on, so I am not sure the 6D would fit my needs. I'm sure it is a fine camera though.
> ...



I think the AF on the 5D MKIII or 1Dx would better suit my needs all around. Not just nudes and portraiture... sports too.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 1, 2015)

nc0b said:


> You shoot birds faster than 1/4000th second? I shoot mostly raptors with the 400mm f/5.6, and do keep the shutter speed above 1/1000, but would rather reduce the ISO or shoot at a modestly narrower aperture than go above 1/2000. Maybe humming birds could use that shutter speed, but no longer living in the Rocky Mountains, but on the Colorado plains, I no longer see the speed demons. I understand your interest in frame rate for sports. Even wildlife on the run can benefit from a high frame rate burst.



Hummingbirds are of particular interest to me. I can never get near the raptors out here in the desert of Nevada. When I can I like to set up flash for the bird shots.


----------



## anthonyd (Jul 1, 2015)

Pookie said:


> Congrats... it's a stellar lens. I had the ver.1 before and now the 2. One of my "indispensable" lenses in business.
> 
> Now dump all 7 of the speedlites, all those AA's and get yourself some Profotos or Eli's... camera bodies come and go... if you have a good cam stick with it and invest in lenses & light.
> 
> Love my 24-70...



Awesome shots Pookie and +1 on investing in glass and light.


----------



## Pookie (Jul 1, 2015)

anthonyd said:


> Awesome shots Pookie and +1 on investing in glass and light.



Thanks !!!


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 1, 2015)

anthonyd said:


> Awesome shots Pookie and +1 on investing in glass and light.



I disagree, those two shots could have been taken with a 50 f1.8 and a PCB anything with a battery pack.

Not dissing the specific images, but lets be honest here you do not need a $2,000 lens and a $2,000 light to get those pictures.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 1, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> anthonyd said:
> 
> 
> > Awesome shots Pookie and +1 on investing in glass and light.
> ...



Maybe not, but one sure needs some skill / talent. He's got it.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 1, 2015)

CanonFanBoy said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > anthonyd said:
> ...



Not really, just put the camera in M mode and under expose the background by 1 to 1 1/2 stops and set the flash to give you a good exposure on the subject. With the 80cm or 100cm octabox and 15 minutes tuition anybody could shoot these, the technique has been widely used and taught for a long time now and isn't difficult or equipment intensive. 

Again, not saying pookie doesn't have talent, just that these particular images don't require any particular talent, skill or equipment.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 2, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



Well, I'd have to respectfully disagree. These are fine photos. While I do know how he did it (and I ALWAYS shoot in manual), not everybody produces this quality even when they do follow the template. That's the skill and talent part. That's my opinion. You are welcome to yours, my friend. Just like the math you amazed me with a while back. Simple to you... not so much to everyone else. And that's been taught for thousands of years.


----------



## Pookie (Jul 2, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



Jealous much? From the guy who's afraid to show any work... You and Dilbert are a matched set, great with "facts" but no real substance for support. I love comments like yours above, it lets me know I'm doing it right. 

You should stick to numbers and forum banter, it suits your photography well ;D


----------



## Pookie (Jul 2, 2015)

CanonFanBoy said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > CanonFanBoy said:
> ...



And thanks... much appreciated. I think it's funny, his point about not needing quality gear or not showing any innovation. I guess you could also apply his critique to any photographer's work if you're green eyed. As for shooting in M... he's probably more comfortable with the soccer mom green box skill set. 

PCB are good lights, I own a few of them also but he's dreadfully wrong. Try working a PCB on a boom while carrying a giant PCB battery pack in the surf, they are not up to the rigors of heavy outdoor use. Eli's and the Profoto's are a much easier on set. Don't even get me started with the 1.8, they get a little sand and you are DONE. That was the point of real world photos in regards to your post... it's easier to give shady advice when you won't (or can't ) prove what you say.

As a side note... why so many speedlites? HSS or ETTL? The Profoto's have that covered and you have easily spent more on 7 than any of the professional setups. I was joking about dumping all the speedlites... not the double A battery part though


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 2, 2015)

CanonFanBoy said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > CanonFanBoy said:
> ...



Of course we can disagree, but don't misunderstand my point, and I agree, they are fine photos. My point was not a personal one, it wasn't disrespectful either, I was merely pointing out that though the photos are fine, they do not require a $2,000 lens or a $2,000 light, nothing more; further, in my personal opinion they do not require much in the way of skill or talent, but maybe I am wrong and have an unrealistically high baseline.


----------



## Pookie (Jul 3, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiggght ... you are so helpful you couldn't even offer a real opinion based on usage of the lens or camera this post was regarding. You're so special with your unrealistically high baseline. Coming from a forum member with no ability to show any work or skills with a camera having such high standards is less than credible.

I have no issues with critics or even with the fact photos like this have been done before. If that was a determining factor in photography... no one would be taking photos. It's the posers that really make me smile though. You do it so well I'd love to take your photo ;D

You said anyone could take a photo like that with a PCB and 50 1.8... ok, let's see it... I'd love to see a photograph from an individual like yourself with such a "unrealistically high baseline".


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 3, 2015)

Pookie said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



Yes, I use HSS quite often. I like the speedlites because I can put them all over the place and they fit into some very tight spaces. There is nothing I have done that I would post here. I'm not proficient enough or good enough yet. I have posted some bird shots, but that is about it I think. One is supposed to be able to control up to 15 speedlites at once. I like that and may get there one day. So far I've used four at most. Three are still in their boxes and on the shelf. Not because I cannot find a use for them, but because I'm recovering from injuries from an accident.

Profotos are on my list of things to get, but I'll need to do a few other things first (FF camera, EF 11-24 f/4L, EF 200 f/2L, EF 400 f/2.8L mkII, EF 600 f/4L mkII). I'm just a truck driver so it is going to take a while (years) to get around to everything. 

I actually need to get back to your area and reshoot some things I did when I had a Canon XSi and kit lenses. I've got a pro friend (magazines, etc.) that refuses to share technique and methods with me. He calls it job security. I call it insecurity, but he's a great friend otherwise. I need to find some photographers I can assist and learn from during my vacation times.

This website has been a great help to me. Seeing the work of great photographers and trying to figure out how they did what they did is a lot of fun.

I took this skyline of San Francisco several years ago with a Canon XSi and I believe a EFS 55-250 lens or something like that. It is a long exposure. Not near as good as what some people post, but considering I'd only been shooting for a couple of months at the time... I was happy with it. Taken from across the bay at about 4am I think. Lots of banding in the sky.


----------



## Pookie (Jul 3, 2015)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Pookie said:
> 
> 
> > CanonFanBoy said:
> ...



Wow, 3 speedlites still in the box. I have four that rarely get used except for event work where having an assistant in tow is difficult. You've invested loads into that rig... you've essentially bought a two set-up Elinchrom Quadra or 1 Profoto B1. The Eli's system is equivalent to about 5-6 speedlites. Both come wireless also, with the Profotos you get ETTL but honestly I stopped shooting ETTL years ago.

I've been in the business for about 15 years... tons of family, corporate and wedding work. Which after a few years kind of takes the wind out of your sails photography-wise. Lately I do lots of model work, like above, which is a lot more fun that stuffy business/computer tech work. Corporate accounts pays the bills though. The best part of new models is that you get published quite often as they are "on-it" trying to get exposure. I have a spread (and hopefully a cover) for iKon mag coming up in the next couple of months from a shoot recently.

You're lens list is good. I have the 11-24 and the 200 f/2. Honestly I think the new 16-35 f/4 is a better lens in utility but if you're a landscape guy the"want" is understandable. I have had to buy 2 16-35 f/4 of them as mine keep disappearing out of my Pelican due to my wife using it so often. I actually bought one from McGyvver here on this site when he picked up his 11-24. The 200, stellar lens but the 70-200 ain't no slouch either and less than half the cost. The long teles I have not much use for but I've rented the 400 about 5-6 times over the years, it's a very nice lens.

Be careful of this site as often you get some real winners here. Dilbert is high on that list. PBD is another one with loads of good info but no real substance and is deathly afraid of showing any portfolio. I know I am by no means "the best" out there but I pay the bills with my business and have a large client list in the bay area (google, apple, and tons of family/weddings). I'm associated with ASMP which is for professionals in the business and a great resource you could also benefit from by joining for seminars and workshops. In all my years as a working professional photographer I've never run across pro's that 1, won't show any work and 2, won't divulge the "hows". That's really the litmus test here. It's actually the other way around 99.99% of the time. Joe M is a classic example of that. On this site I've only run across 1 or 2 members that can back up their advice with a sweet port, Zlatko come first and foremost there.

Great photo of the bay, my home base  Sorry to hear about the injury... I destroyed my shoulder years ago surfing just south of that jump shot above and it was a long road back.Since there is a possibility of you being in the area...shoot me a message if you're ever in the area you can come by the studio and maybe I can show you a few good sites from a local's standpoint. Maybe even shoot with a model if that is something you're in to.

Oh, BTW... PDB with all his "I know how it done and it's no talent". Actually doesn't know how it's done as he missed a huge gap in the how with a critical piece of gear. I'm still waiting for him to come across with his entry. Posers be posers for life.


----------



## Pookie (Jul 4, 2015)

Sporgon said:


> Pookie said:
> 
> 
> > Oh, BTW... PDB with all his "I know how it done and it's no talent". Actually doesn't know how it's done as he missed a huge gap in the how with a critical piece of gear. I'm still waiting for him to come across with his entry. Posers be posers for life.
> ...



Unreasonable... Let me make a few points about your comments above;* "All he said was that you don't need expensive equipment and vast natural talent to produce that effect ! And come on Guys, he's right about that."* Sporgon, you did prove my point perfectly and contradicted at the same time your point with the images above. You have the gear right? a speedlite and a camera...

I really appreciate that you show some work but PBD said anyone could do it. Is he anybody or nobody? So far, I still haven't seen his entry. It's easy to say, another thing to do. I've seen how Formula 1 drivers drive the course... doesn't mean I can enter the race. I watch lots of college basketball, I know how the game is played... doesn't mean I can pull it off. I've been to the ER, seen doctors work and people recover... I'm game, let me pull you appendix. You need some type of proof I can do this, whaaa... You'll take my word I can do it right?

The steep learning curve has been so reduced so that anyone can do it.... I do agree to some extent but I haven't seen it yet. Probably why so many here are here. To try and do, rather than sit by the sidelines and comment. He also said you don't need all that gear... so you could pull off a shot like that in the surf with a Buff light? I'd dearly love to see that. Let's try that with 5-6 speedlites? Where you goona set up the gang lighting stand... just to the left where 4 foot surge is coming or to the right where the cliff wall lands? And why is everyone interested in using weather sealing L glass? Couldn't be because if you do this for a living, get hammered by surf occasionally and your 1.8 might not survive one shoot? Do you think your photos above might look professional with, wait for it... professional lighting? They don't just give you professional lighting for free, there is a reason they actually cost more.

How about the easiest parts of this whole venture, getting this "effect" and a little natural talent? Let's start with the getting clients that want to take these photos... paying clients. Not your wife or your neighbor. And the even "easier" part, working with clients while on the set to get them to do this for you while on camera? And the easiest part, a month of client back and forth... followed by building an almost instant rapport on set so they are comfortable giving you their best. Did I mention they pay you for this?

All that... 15 years experience, and 15 years of client work to pay for all that gear, 15 years of client lists to get a rep, so someone like the model above comes to you? Again, tell me how you pulled that off and show me some photos... you know, since it's so easy. Show me how easy it is and prove to me "anyone" can do it. 

The green-eyed spiteful comments by PBD lack any logic. Never said I was the most talented... but PBD thought to chime in with a unrelated comment to this thread. A post about the 24-70 II and the 5D3 specifically. I supported my approval of the 24-70 to the OP with actual, real world photos. Mine. All I ask is some work to prove his unrelated point... since he decided to chime in with "no talent" and everyone can do this there is no innovation. So he doesn't think the photos are good and show no talent, could have walked on by but green eyed he had to comment. 

I have much respect for those that at least participate with some images to back up a point. 20 years ago I was fooling around with film and learning the ropes. From the beginning I've never been afraid of critics or wouldn't want to show my work... its how you learn. I also know if you're going to offer a critique/comment be prepared to back up what you say. This is a website about camera gear and photography or am I horribly mistaken. Hot air dissipates quickly doesn't it PBD? Then your comments have no substance beyond bad breath and heat. I do have to apologize though... I lumped PBD into the same pool as Dilbert. At least Dilbert has shown some images from time to time. Sorry Dilbert. PBD flouts that he's a pro and doesn't need to show his work because of privacy... show me... I'll say it again, you should stick to numbers and your dissertations on "compression", it suits your photography well. 

Or is it possible not everyone can do it even if you went down to Costco and got a perfectly good DSLR. Maybe you can't take a photo like this with an iPhone. Maybe it does take a little more than internet banter to really pull this off. 

PBD, your silence is deafening.


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 4, 2015)

Pookie said:


> Don't even get me started with the 1.8, they get a little sand and you are DONE.



yeah.... everyone thinks about water when they talk about weather sealing.... sand is horrible stuff and destroys gear....


----------



## Pookie (Jul 4, 2015)

Don Haines said:


> Pookie said:
> 
> 
> > Don't even get me started with the 1.8, they get a little sand and you are DONE.
> ...



Indeed... sounds like you've experienced this first hand. Sometime you do need gear that can survive the rigors of daily abuse. Especially on the beach. 

I love flip flopping fight that it's all gear or it's all photographer... as if life was simply black or white. Maybe, just maybe, it's a mix of many things that allow someone to excel in this field... talent included.

I'm still waiting to see if PBD can produce some high quality images to back up his mouth and allow me to learn from his wealth of "real world" experience. I'm not afraid to admit he can do better, if he can show me. If not... his opinion is worth about, well... let's be nice... not a plug nickel.


----------



## Pookie (Jul 4, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> anthonyd said:
> 
> 
> > Awesome shots Pookie and +1 on investing in glass and light.
> ...



Prove it... With at least one example. I know it can be done by highly qualified, talented individuals using quality equipment. Realistically, and consistently... something I can demonstrate, you show me using a 50 1.8 and PCB on a boom with a huge pack do this. 

Sometimes you do need $4000 in higher end lights (by far some of the cheaper alternatives), and sweet, lite, tight and sharper lens overall to provides you just a little more confidence it will survive the job... and yes, the help of 2 or 3 other people to play along. I put my arse on the line every time I go out there to not fail in front of everyone... And yes, to get paid. So, show me, teach.

No malice but I do take exception to your statements... especially from the time I've seen here on this forum. Even before my current profile. You show nothing and only talk. I'd really like to see your port. If you blast me down with a KILLA portfolio... hell yeah I'll admit it and learn from what you say and do. I've always found your opinion rather good in this forum but man... Put your money where your mouth is.


----------



## Dick (Jul 9, 2015)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Well, I thought I would be ordering a 5D Mark III this week. While that would have been great, I think I'd have been getting the cart before the horse. Recently I sold all my EFS lenses (Except for my 1 STM lens) and my T5i to help fund this purchase. This sort of left me with a hole in the shorter focal length range. While having a 5D Mark III will be wonderful later on, I decided instead to get the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L Mark II today. It will be here from Adorama tomorrow.
> 
> It just makes more sense for me to round out the lens kit more before the jump to Full Frame bliss. That is something I can keep looking forward to. That and a Canon EF 11-24mm f/4 late next year.
> 
> ...



I'm not sure if that approach makes much sense. The focal lengths on FF are different and you will learn to love totally different lenses than what you do on a crop body. Buying the lenses beforehand might not really be possible. I for one mainly use the 24LII and the 85LII on a FF body. On a crop body those two would have been quite weird lens choices. The 24mm lens is already quite wide on FF and taking photos of people with it is not all that simple. On crop it would be a totally different lens and the wide end would be missing from the kit if that'd be the widest lens. I'm not too sure why you want so many zooms either. The shallow DOF that people want comes with different kinds of lenses. That would once again be a FF specialty.


----------



## Pookie (Jul 9, 2015)

Sporgon said:


> Continuing in the theme of very simple equipment and lighting, this was shot again with just 55/1.8, on camera flash + reflector and a 5DII. Pretty simple stuff but I think it has produced a pleasing effect.



It's pretty funny that this is the "theme" for you when the OP was asking about the 24-70 II and 5D3. Something that I responded too and nothing to do with your theme... 

I'd also say pleasing to your eye is highly subjective. An on-axis speedlite image, nice one... I prefer off axis and enough power to light the scene... the entire scene. With nice soft directional light. You could do with the right equipment, not super expensive but you'd have to know what you're doing. 

So let's have a go at your theme... girl with dog. Can you see any differences in the sample below compared to yours... I know my clients can, do and pay for it every time. What you posted above is what my clients can do in their very own back yard with their very own equipment... when they realize that and have issues coming up with a quality photos for a special occasion, they come to me. That is the point, that is the reason why sometimes you do have to spend some money to buy pro-quality gear and/or hire a professional. If it were "just that easy" nobody would ever hire another photographer. Think of how cheap every wedding could be if you could get the same results photographically with a 1.8 and speedlite or maybe just an iPhone.



 

And as I suspected... PBD is all talk and no substance. It's easy to have high baseline standards when you have no personal frame of reference... aka The arm-chair quarterback.


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 9, 2015)

Pookie said:


> So let's have a go at your theme... girl with dog.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I accept your challenge ! Semi naked girl + dog. 

It'll take me a little time to fit that in but I'll produce a budget version ;D

Also, I wouldn't write PBD off so quickly, maybe he's at sea


----------



## Pookie (Jul 9, 2015)

I'd love to see it... it's not the semi naked girl that is my point and probably why you can't understand... Your responses to date haven't addressed the point that your trying to make. Quality gear isn't important and you can get the same results with less equipment or talent. 

And how about the point PBD tried so desperately to make... you could do that with a 50 1.8 and a PCB. Shoot wide open and with just a PCB to get these results... let's see it. And when you fail, tell me again how you don't need ETTL or HSS. Or a handful of ND filters? Something that PBD failed to mention. I gave you that as part of a "missing" from his comment. Then tell me what else your missing from that "list" of all you need to get that result. And while your producing something to respond to my latest... remember, don't shoot that in a backyard or dry land... or you won't even come close to this challenge Sporgon. 

Write off PBD, I did that a while ago. PBD hasn't EVER produced a portfolio in his time here, not before this thread or since... He always invokes the "privacy" excuse. His expertise is in forum banter and "compression" semantics.

*** Wait a minute Sporgon, why did you remove all but one of your images? Shoot me a private message when your ready to show your example, I'd really love to see it. Same goes for PBD.

Here ya go, dressed girl... maybe that will help you with your lighting set-up and get you past the skin "issue".


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 9, 2015)

Pookie said:


> *** Wait a minute Sporgon, why did you remove all but one of your images? Shoot me a private message when your ready to show your example, I'd really love to see it. Same goes for PBD.
> 
> Here ya go, dressed girl... maybe that will help you with your lighting set-up and get you past the skin "issue".



Isn't one of each was enough ? 

Dressed girl ? Hmmm, I think the semi naked ones are better ;D


----------



## Pookie (Jul 9, 2015)

Sporgon said:


> Pookie said:
> 
> 
> > *** Wait a minute Sporgon, why did you remove all but one of your images? Shoot me a private message when your ready to show your example, I'd really love to see it. Same goes for PBD.
> ...



One would be enough if it addressed the point you're trying to make. Look, I have no problem with "you could do this with simple equipment". I know it can be done but not by everyone, not even a minority... a select few with talent, skill and yes, some gear. It's the talent and equipment issue that get me... especially coming from someone that can't produce a even modest attempt. 

What this really bakes down to is this... show me if you're so good and this is so easy, prove it. I say it isn't that easy and it does take some skill, talent and gear. I didn't say I was the most talented, greatest photographer in the world. I do say it takes a lot more than the arm-chair quarterback thinks. It's isn't all camera gear or all photographer... it is both. And sometimes you can't get the results you want with just a PCB and 1.8.

I can appreciate that you actually post some images but honestly... you can't say they are in anyway supporting the claim you and PBD make. A point that had nothing to do with this OP about the 24-70II. If anything you've proven my point perfectly.


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 9, 2015)

Pookie said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > Pookie said:
> ...



Be patient ! It's night here now, the beach is two hours away and all the nude models are tucked up in bed getting their beauty sleep.


----------



## Pookie (Jul 9, 2015)

Sporgon said:


> Pookie said:
> 
> 
> > Sporgon said:
> ...



So you are going with nudes... careful there, I have loads of those in my port too but you're not going to be able to post them here.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 10, 2015)

Dick said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > Well, I thought I would be ordering a 5D Mark III this week. While that would have been great, I think I'd have been getting the cart before the horse. Recently I sold all my EFS lenses (Except for my 1 STM lens) and my T5i to help fund this purchase. This sort of left me with a hole in the shorter focal length range. While having a 5D Mark III will be wonderful later on, I decided instead to get the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L Mark II today. It will be here from Adorama tomorrow.
> ...



Hello Dick! I've had many EFS lenses... From the EFS 10-22mm all the way up to 250mm. I started with an XSi when it came out, the T5i, and now the 70D. The one EFS lens I have left is Canon's EFS 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 IS STM lens because I very occasionally shoot video and I like the way the 70D focuses for video.

Why so many zooms? Well, while it is a zoom I won't count the STM zoom because i do not take photos with it. So now we are only talking about 3 zooms. I have two and now just want the EF 11-24 f/4L. 

Granted, the zooms will not give me the beautiful bokeh an 85L would give on a FF camera. On the other hand, I hope to live long enough to cruise the rivers of Europe. I'll have a FF camera by then. Personally, the zooms make perfect sense to me for that (so would a wide angle tilt shift lens).

As far as portraiture goes, I do have the EF 200mm f/2L on my list. Besides, I don't get much chance at portraits. I am such a hideous looking man that women tend to run. That's why I think I shall prefer the EF 200mm f/2L... it will be much easier on the girls that way. The speedlites allow me to set a kind of "speedlite trap" for my quarry.

We aren't talking about years to go to full frame for me. Hopefully that will happen by the end of the year. Then the 70D will serve as back-up and for birding (which I enjoy).

I decided about a year ago that it makes sense for *me* to have at least the FF zooms in hand before getting the camera.

Fair enough? 

Here are the only portraits I've taken in the last year. All with my 70D and EF 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II. No bokeh at all with low key shots.

While I am a complete hack... not bad for a first try with one speedlite and 43" soft box. I don't know super models like Pookie does. ;D His models pay him. I'd probably have to pay mine.

Also, I'm a hobbyist... I'll never be a pro. My lack of raw talent limits me.


----------



## eninja (Jul 13, 2015)

Sporgon said:


> Continuing in the theme of very simple equipment and lighting, this was shot again with just 55/1.8, on camera flash + reflector and a 5DII. Pretty simple stuff but I think it has produced a pleasing effect.



Hi Sporgon,

What exactly you did there? did you mean you direct on camera flash to the reflector and bounce from it? Could you share your gear: reflector and its stand?

Appreciate a lot.


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 13, 2015)

eninja said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > Continuing in the theme of very simple equipment and lighting, this was shot again with just 55/1.8, on camera flash + reflector and a 5DII. Pretty simple stuff but I think it has produced a pleasing effect.
> ...



You've got it. This was an example of keeping things really cheap and simple. The flash was on cam for simplicity, but the head directed away about 100 degrees and shot back into a portable 42' 5-in-1 lasolite, which was directed at the subject. The stand was me, holding the lasolite up high, pointing down, the camera was on a tripod. Ambient exposure was set to under expose by about 1 stop, and the flash was about +1 EV, but the lens I was using doesn't sent any distance information to the camera, and this does make it a little more trial and error. 

Anyway, upping the ante now, and turning the heat up in anticipation of the bikini clad beauty I'm having a session on the beach with soon, here's a shot with a little more sophistication. The 55/1.8 Takumar has changed for the wonderful EF 50 1.4, so there is E-TTL this time, and carefully choosing the subject so as not to cover any flaws in the technique; this lass means business. Once again shot just using the faithful old 550EX, and a cheap lens. Simples.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 14, 2015)

Sporgon,

That seems to illustrate _'the look'_ very nicely with a modest setup, not quite the 50 f1.8 but I am certain the 50 f1.4 is well beneath Garfield's teddybear's (amongst other cartoonish caricatures) level, it doesn't have a red ring for a start.

Can you confirm for us that the 550EX, a sub $100 flash, does stop working on beaches? Thanks :

If I was a generous soul I'd be tempted to point out how appropriate the lighting is to the subject, an interesting play on the female form with softer light on her 'fuller' figure yet harder light on her face, a real slap round the face for conventional female portraiture and oh so appropriate for her pose and obvious attitude, certainly no hint of formulaic or inappropriate posing and lighting as so glaringly displayed by others posting this same 'look'.


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 14, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> Sporgon,
> 
> That seems to illustrate _'the look'_ very nicely with a modest setup, not quite the 50 f1.8 but I am certain the 50 f1.4 is well beneath Garfield's teddybear's (amongst other cartoonish caricatures) level, it doesn't have a red ring for a start.
> 
> ...



Thanks Private ! I agree that this one does have a more professional touch about it.

I must pull you up on the red ring though. I always use a Hoya rubber collapsible hood with the EF 50/1.4, and this has a red ring around the front of it. One can only go so far in simplifying gear. 

Regarding the 550EX flash; well I was within about two hundred yards of the beach, and its performance did seem to drop a little, but I put this down to fading batteries rather than the proximity of sand. I'll find out for sure later on when I'm shooting on the actual beach.


----------



## Pookie (Jul 16, 2015)

Sporgon said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Sporgon,
> ...



Ok, great work. Lovely actually, love the pose but man you totally missed the comp, you didn't get the whole bike in the photo. That's why people pay professionals, so those little touches don't slip by. I'm not afraid to admit it's an admirable attempt but this is a pale comparison... You're not in the sand, not at the beach, not in the afternoon. That is a street right there : Take this model out to the beach now, around 2pm. 

So your image took no talent at all right? You have absolutely no talent... not any at all because everyone can do this super simple lighting setup. *This is where the difference lays between us. I say it does take talent, even to pull that shot off. I'd say you probably know what you're doing but if you say no, ok... If you claim your talentless, you're well within your rights to make that point. Who am I to argue if you have talent or not... I'm not PBD.* 

Great try but clearly not the same. Now, PBD and Sporgon, tell me again why you don't need a battery pack above the salt water or HSS when you're shooting wide open. Again, as I said before... tell me how you would do it in the same circumstance as I do and why you had to do this on dry land.

And PBD... you never answered the challenge did you? You let Sporgon try and answer it.

Oh... Thanks Sporgon. The fact that you went out to try and replicate my work, it's actually a great compliment.

EDITED to address the talent issue... I missed that point when replying.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 16, 2015)

Pookie said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



I think Sporgon would agree that he didn't find it particularly difficult to take the shot 

Can you explain why the exact same setup wouldn't have worked at a beach or in sand? Or why it didn't need HSS or a battery pack?

I have never said having better specced gear doesn't make it easier or extend the window of shooting time, all I said was you don't need $2,000 lenses and $2,000 lights to take those kinds of shots. The above image shot with a 50 f1.4 and single 550EX with RF-602 triggers proves my point it true.


----------



## Pookie (Jul 17, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> Pookie said:
> 
> 
> > Sporgon said:
> ...



You said a lot more than that. One point I want to make right off the top... 2000$ lenses and 2000$ lights are not high-end by any means. You say you work in the industry, you do know this to be true? I wish I could afford a Phase One and some Broncolor but instead I go Pentax, Canon and Profoto because it's what I can afford as a working photographer.

His was not a difficult shot, my point exactly... See, we do agree. He shot after sundown... why is that? Maybe he was power limited using just a 550ex and couldn't overpower the sun. He shot on dry land. There was no sand, no surf. Let me point out again the difference...shoot in the day, shoot on the beach... have your lighting in the surf, shoot wide open. Show me with a 50 1.8 and a single 550ex. Or even five speedlite, which will come pretty close to a Quadra or Profoto rig in price. Or your vaunted Buff with the battery hanging in the surf. Then tell me again from the ER when the battery electrocutes you why the Profoto B1 on a boom isn't necessary (battery 8 feet above the water). Or 500ws with HSS isn't necessary to overpower the sun. I know it can be done without HSS or ETTL but I am asking you to show me. I really want to SEE YOU do it.

You talk of no talent and no need for quality gear. I disagree wholeheartedly especially when it's your job, you get paid and have to decline jobs because you're overbooked... My answer to your points have never wavered because I know from years of working in the industry and owning my own business, you do need talent and gear to survive more than a few months. Sometimes you do need a little better equipment to perform like this daily, not a one off shot... daily for clients. You wanted to chime in with no talent and you don't need a 24-70. Funny, the OP was asking specifically about the 24-70 II/5D3 and nothing about talent. I showed a few photos to show real world use. You were the one with the snarky comments out of left field. It looks very much like jealousy from this end, especially when I know you don't own the 24-70 II. Your points were absolutely unwarranted. If you ever showed your work and someone made a comment like that, you'd roll over for it? Not me, I will call BS on you or anyone else every time because I take pride in what I do for a living, I don't hide in the shadows.

Let's just kiss, make up and agree to disagree that it does take talent and yes, some specialized gear to take pictures of any quality, hobbyist and professional alike. I apologize for calling you a poser but you talk a lot of smack for someone without a portfolio. I admit it was totally unprofessional of me. You don't need to show your work but I don't and will never understand that coming from a photographer. I gotta say... that doesn't fly in the crowds I work with. You'd get eaten alive here in Cali.


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 17, 2015)

Pookie said:


> You don't need to show your work but I don't and will never understand that coming from a photographer. I gotta say... that doesn't fly in the crowds I work with. You'd get eaten alive here in Cali.



Actually the shot of the girl on the bike was taken by private - quite a few years ago in fact. 

CR is lucky to have a genuine professional like private who genuinely makes his living from photography, participating on the forum, and can give a reality check to the thirst for gear now and again. 

Personally I've got drawn into posting here too much, and I've got tired of it being used as a platform by those who's main desire in life seems to be to spread misinformation about Canon sensors.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 17, 2015)

Sporgon said:


> eninja said:
> 
> 
> > Sporgon said:
> ...



Nice photo. Brings back memories of waiting for the ice cream truck when I was a kid.


----------



## Pookie (Jul 18, 2015)

Sporgon said:


> Pookie said:
> 
> 
> > You don't need to show your work but I don't and will never understand that coming from a photographer. I gotta say... that doesn't fly in the crowds I work with. You'd get eaten alive here in Cali.
> ...



That's quite odd because he can't remember taking this and had to confirm with you what you shot this with? Regardless, you have to admit the quality of light coming from 1 speedlight has nothing on 500ws. There is a real & definitive reason why 500ws on-location professional strobes like these exist and sell like hot cakes.

In regards to this site. It is the main reason I post images instead of talking about cameras and endless blathering about DR/sensors. Call it my personal crusade if you will but I believe showing real world use trumps talk any day of the week. The whole point of a camera and all this gear is making photos, not the other way around. It's what I do for a living and I take pride in it... if I didn't then I would never have survived this long. Too often I find people who complain and moan about their purchase yet can't use 50% of the capabilities of the very same camera they deem "inadequate". One who shall remain nameless here is absolutely delusional.

Prior to these comments about my work from PBD, I use to think he was well intentioned and fairly informed but have always found it hard to understand not showing any work, especially if he's in the business as he says. I used to post here under a different profile but killed it when the 5D3 madness hit here. Now back but really questioning the group of individuals that are frequent posters and whether I should stick it out. I do enjoy photography though and even more, I really enjoy the company of those that share my same interest. I've been in the business paying the bills for 15 years and had photography in my life much longer. I am a member of ASMP, WPPI and WPJA for many, many years... I go to critiques, contests and conventions all the time. Never met a single professional photographer that won't show any work and I have never been confronted by anything less than professional attitude in this realm. I give workshops and share all the time. I am also keenly aware that there is always something new to learn or see from a different POV. When critiques are given in public forum the requirements are mutual share. When PBD makes comments about talent, and I am well aware they were directed at me and not a general statement no matter how much he claims they are not... I will respond. I understand his point that there is little new about this work or anyone else's. Hell, if you get right down to it that is true of most any art these days. To say it takes no talent and quality equipment to perform at a high level day after day is plain and simple wrong, completely wrong and sounds very bitter. Don't get me started on the 50 1.8 or 1.4 you both mentioned. You ever had the AF drive on the 1.4 crap out on ya? I have, more than once.. in front of paying clients. I do get snarky here too when I see less than a solid effort or really poor form because it does take a LOT more to take quality photographs than going out to the mall and buying a camera. It does take more than 20 minutes of fiddling to do what you've shown or I show as our work. It takes years to get past fiddling and know what is needed when you walk on set. It takes years to evaluate the light and then dig into the bag, pull the right gear and more importantly... know exactly what to do almost instantly. Not luck, by design. Sorry, that is directed at the ever increasing flood of soccer mom photographers I constantly deal with but bite my tongue 

I'm going to chalk all this up to bad days by everyone involved, I've been hammered by wedding after wedding, and gals wanting beach photos. In the winter I get a bit of a break but right now it's pure madness and I am fraying ever so slightly. But who in their right mind would pass up shooting cheerleaders in bikinis if they want to pay you. 

Again, I stand by my words but apologize for the flame war.


----------

