Close
Close
Page 3 of 4 First 1234 Last
  1. #21
    doctorjames is offline Dont change this!
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Hampshire, UK
    Posts
    494

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by inkista View Post


    Which, of course, I entirely agree with, or did you miss the part in my first post where I said that the reasons to go with the Big Two had to do with availability, and not image quality. Maybe it's time to take your head out of your *&^%" and actually read what people write.
    Well lets start with the OP:


    "concentrate on building a decent portfolio and buying better lenses."

    "I would like to stick with Sony and I will eventually look to upgrade to the A77 (Is this a reasonable Idea, or is Nikon/Canon the only way to go no biased opinions please.)"

    "I should mention that at this time I have limited resources so affordability has to be a decisive factor."

    "I would like to stick with Sony"

    He doesnt mention a second pair of hands for off axis flash. Im sure you are aware of just how expensive the eTTL pocket wizards are, so that doesnt fit with affordability either.

    as for your understanding of the flash mount.... this: (and its cheaper copies)

    Amazon.com: Manfrotto 026 Swivel Lite-Tite Umbrella Adapter: Electronics

    mounts directly onto the equipment provided with both the sony and third party alpha flashes, negating the need for the hotshoe 'adaptor'. So trying to find one becomes childsplay.

    any M42 glass can work with the alpha system, by means of a (non optical) adaptor ring, so that blows the old glass argument out of the water, and highlights your ignorance of the alpha system.

    My point was that for what he/she wants to acheive (initially) within the restrictions he/she has applied there is no need to switch manufacturers.

    If he/she had 5000 set aside for setup costs then yes, moving to canon or nikon might be appropriate, but with minimal funds I think this and pocket wizards are out of the question.
    Sony Alpha 77 and 100 with a variety of lenses
    Lightroom 4 /Photoshop CS5

    My Flickr
    500px

  2. #22
    Biomech's Avatar
    Biomech is offline World Commended
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    4,528

    Default

    I can confirm that the ISO perfomance isn't great on my Sony's - however, saying that I shoot APS-C, no obviously the ISO on a full frame Canon/Nikon will be better, but so will it be on a full frame Sony. Further, each step up / new release on the Sony's do have significantly improved ISO. I noticed a huge difference just between my a200 and a580
    Art: www.jamieorourke.co.uk
    Work: www.jamieorourkephotography.co.uk
    Sony a200 Sony a580, Canon 500D, Canon 550D, Canon 600D, Canon 600D

  3. #23
    inkista's Avatar
    inkista is offline Gear Geek Girl
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    San Diego CA, USA
    Posts
    11,152

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by doctorjames View Post
    He doesnt mention a second pair of hands for off axis flash. Im sure you are aware of just how expensive the eTTL pocket wizards are, so that doesnt fit with affordability either.
    Phottix Odins. Pixel Kings. Oh. Wait. No Sony/Minolta versions of those, either. Well, not until the damn Kings fix their firmware for Sony.

    as for your understanding of the flash mount.... this: (and its cheaper copies)

    Amazon.com: Manfrotto 026 Swivel Lite-Tite Umbrella Adapter: Electronics
    Which you will note you still have to buy the Sony/Minolta (or iso shoe) adapter for, as a separate piece. Most of the ripoffs come with the iso shoe adapter, so you don't have to add on or pay for another piece.

    Midwest Photo Exchange LumoPro LP679 Umbrella Swivel

    any M42 glass can work with the alpha system, by means of a (non optical) adaptor ring, so that blows the old glass argument out of the water, and highlights your ignorance of the alpha system.
    Ok. I forgot that M42 can be used on Alpha, but I don't think it "blows the old glass argument of the water" even if it does highlight my ignorance of the Sony system. Every M42 lens you can adapt to Sony can be adapted to Canon the same way. And in addition, you can also adapt Leica-R, Nikon F, Contax/Yashica, Olympus OM, and Pentax K lenses to Canon EOS the exact same way: with a simple adapter ring, no glass. You can't adapt any of those other five mounts to Sony Alpha without replacing the lens's mount. So "having lots of M42" choices, in my mind, gets trumped by having lots of glas from six different manual focus mounts--including M42--if you shoot Canon.

    My point was that for what he/she wants to acheive (initially) within the restrictions he/she has applied there is no need to switch manufacturers.
    True. I agree completely. Where I'm making the point is that after that initial use, once the OP has (hopefully) established them as a professional, and they have more money to spend, the expansion options could be more limited on the Sony side of the fence than on the Canon/Nikon. The Sony system is terrific, and all the camera systems fulfill the basic photographer's needs, but when you start getting into the more advanced/pro stuff, where a small edge can mean the difference between having the image that everyone wants, or the "also ran" can be half a second or three feet in placement, then maybe having one of those expansion advantages will be worth the cost.

    The Big Two offer you some choices you simply can't find on the Sony side.

    And, btw, the argument to make when someone points out that Sony's high iso performance is behind the Big Two is that yeah, it is, but the low iso performance kicks Canon's ass, and the dynamic range of the Sony Alphas is still top of the heap. There's a reason Nikon and Pentax use the Sony sensors. But to my mind Sony is the perfect landscape system, especially when they still offered the A900 and A850. But for event shooting, it may not be the best fit as a system, especially for a pro.

    If he/she had 5000 set aside for setup costs then yes, moving to canon or nikon might be appropriate, but with minimal funds I think this and pocket wizards are out of the question.
    I'm not saying "move to Canikon all pro gear and TTL PWs, right now!" I'm saying that Sony isn't exactly equivalent to Canon or Nikon as a system. I honestly don't care what system the OP wants to shoot, as long as they're happy and successful at what they want to do. But they were asking for reasons as to why moving to one of the Big Two might be a good idea. To me, a bigger equipment pool that's easier to find with more midrange price choices and more expansion choices is it.

    And setting up with the same basic system the OP has now: a crop body and basic lens-wise on the Canikon side of the fence isn't going to cost nearly 5000, and that system can then be built upon if the need for things like TTL radio flash triggers arises. The thing is, even if you do have 5000, you simply can't get TTL radio flash triggers on the Sony/Minolta side (that work) right now. This is just my opinion, but better to have a choice and not need it, than need it and not have the choice. But more choices does not mean "the one and only way" and I really really resent that you are saying that's what I must be thinking/implying/ordering someone to do. I'm just pointing out differences that were requested by the OP.

    Sticking with Sony is obviously the easy and low-cost path. I'm simply pointing out a few ways that a professional photographer might be hampered by that decision years down the road when they want to expand their equipment capabilities. If you are going to make a system switch, it's probably better to do it before you sink 5000 into it than after, from a monetary point of view.
    Last edited by inkista; 05-02-2012 at 03:27 AM.
    I shoot with a Canon 5DmkII, 50D, and S90, and Pansonic GX-7. flickr stream and equipment list

  4. #24
    doctorjames is offline Dont change this!
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Hampshire, UK
    Posts
    494

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by inkista View Post

    Which you will note you still have to buy the Sony/Minolta (or iso shoe) adapter for, as a separate piece. Most of the ripoffs come with the iso shoe adapter, so you don't have to add on or pay for another piece.


    Sticking with Sony is obviously the easy and low-cost path. I'm simply pointing out a few ways that a professional photographer might be hampered by that decision years down the road when they want to expand their equipment capabilities. If you are going to make a system switch, it's probably better to do it before you sink 5000 into it than after, from a monetary point of view.
    I dont want this to get too drawn out (again). But you dont need a hotshoe adaptor, certainly not if you buy a sony flash, as their flash comes with an adaptor plate/stand included that allows the flash to mount directly onto the light stand tilt/swivel. My YNs did too.

    I do however completely agree that sinking 5000 into a system that ultimately you are going to change doesnt make any sense, because you wont see half of it back once you are done selling.
    Sony Alpha 77 and 100 with a variety of lenses
    Lightroom 4 /Photoshop CS5

    My Flickr
    500px

  5. #25
    NatalieJohn is offline I'm new here!
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    9

    Default

    At most events you will need to use soft light. Soft light will give you an ability to take a wide range of photographs and know that you will reduce the amount of visible shadows that display in your complete photographs. Direct and harsh light, as a contrast, will only create deep dark shadows and will take away from the finished product of your photograph.

  6. #26
    TheSaintlyOne is offline I'm new here!
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    30

    Default

    Thanks for all the replies.

    I have really two options for what/how I see my career developing. as I attend each red carpet event I take a good look at pro equipment and the conditions they work in.

    Alot of the time they are stuffed into tight pens so off camera flash is simply not an option - rain can be an issue at times.

    My Options Are
    1) Stick with Sony, whilst I'm not heavily invested in that system at the moment my immediate requirements are Flashes and Faster Glass 24-70mm f2.8 (not the big long lenses) plus by eventually upgrading to an A77etc I will always have my original spare body wich with a prime could be an advantage.

    2) Go to Nikon i.e. the D7000 or its potential upgrade - this upgrade is possibly the biggest off put for Nikon as only rumors are being discussed and the idea of buying a 900 body only to have a new improved version come out soon after....!!!

    many thoughts have and will go into this.

    Best Wishes

    Duncan

  7. #27
    doctorjames is offline Dont change this!
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Hampshire, UK
    Posts
    494

    Default

    I guess what you really need to decide on is what you want in the short, medium and long term.

    If this is just about learning your trade, its not going to make a huge amount of difference which system you use, and you shouldnt need to invest huge amount of money for learnings sake.

    If this is about turning out professional quality shots on a day in day out basis, and making your living out of it, then significant investment is going to be required, and it would really make sense to choose a system which is probably going to cover all your requirements.

    If the cost of a 900 body is worrying you, then im guessing its the former of the two options, and in which case I would splash on a a77 with 16-50mm f2.8, a f58am sony flash, and if you have the money the 70-200G f2.8, but then I would because aside from the 70-200G thats what I have.

    It will serve you well as you learn.

    However, the same could be said about the canon/nikon equivalent, although I think that you get more bang for your buck with sony at this level.

    Id suggest you shortlist what you want to do/achieve and then shortlist kit, because if you are looking for the latter of the two options, its going to cost you a packet and you may do no better than with what you have if you dont have the technique/skill.
    Sony Alpha 77 and 100 with a variety of lenses
    Lightroom 4 /Photoshop CS5

    My Flickr
    500px

  8. #28
    TheSaintlyOne is offline I'm new here!
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    30

    Default

    Hi DoctorJames

    As a Sony shooter do you consider Sony to be a Long term sustainable system, there is of course more than just rumors of an A99 to compete with the 5D or D800 as a mid level pro camera, Sony have all but confirmed its development with the release being Late this year/early next with the only question being what specs it will have.

    One of the reasons I am looking at getting a new camera is the need for weather Sealing. which of course the Sony has as do the Nikon D7000 and Canon 7D

    I can understand the need for a Multi-thousand pound full frame camera if shooting high Quality studio shoots/weddings/fashion but do I really need that kind of camera if I'm primarily focusing on celeb red carpet with magazine style images Will the A77 not cover that adequately.

    I do like the A77 and there is something about the rebellious side of not shooting with Canon/Nikon that appeals.

    Best Wishes

  9. #29
    chuckdee's Avatar
    chuckdee is offline I'm new here!
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    4

    Default Been there, done that

    I worked for Getty Images in LA for 3 years before I got out of THAT business.
    One, as others have mentioned, you're going to need to get credentialed. Not sure how you go about doing that if you're not working for an agency.
    People that do the credentialing want photographers that have outlets to get photos published for their event. IE Getty, AP, Reuters, Wireimage, Filmmagic and some others.

    Two, there's really no money in it. Wireimage damaged the industry when they started giving away photos for free for exclusivity of covering an event. IE Radio Music Awards, AMA's, etc.

    The web presence over the last 10 years has grown into the 800lb gorilla leaving print in the dust. You used to get paid really well for a shot ran in People, that number has dropped significantly and for a web shot, it's a lot less.

    Speaking from experience, the business of entertainment photography is not what it used to be and it's not glamorous at all.

    But, if that is your dream and what you aspire to do, go for it and best of luck!

  10. #30
    TheSaintlyOne is offline I'm new here!
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    30

    Default

    Hi Chuckdee

    Thanks for your input.
    I can now confirm that I am being supported by an agency, by which I mean they send me daily emails re: celeb events in London and I FTP my images to them, I get 60% of sales.

    They are called Press2000 not one of the major ones but the emails are a major bonus so I'm happy to see how it develops.....I've only been with them since seeing them on the Alamy News feed last Thursday.

    As far as Accreditation goes I've been advised to contact the British Press Photographers Association which is one of the Accredited gatekeepers, but they charge 150 (the cost of membership but without benefits) I've heard the actual pass is only 15 so I'll probably give it a little while.

    I find the biggest bonus of a press pass seems to be that at premieres and the like there is a dedicated press pen in front of which the celebs are guaranteed to pose for the mag style shots i.e. face on.
    There are occasionally events that that require a press pass to gain entry but i've got shots of the celebs arriving mostly.

    I will get accreditation but I've got other things to spend money on at the mo like better glass, a weathersealed body wouldn't go amiss either.

    I'm not really looking for the Glamour, Just was over on the west coast of America for work recently (driving Job) and I enjoyed looking out for stuff to shoot, Police crime scenes, Filming and the like whilst I was driving around.
    That Job ended cause of downsizing and I decided that I wanted to be in charge of my own destiny So when I returned I upgraded my camera to a beginner level DSLR due to price and looked at ways of making money with it.
    yeah your probably right that the price of images has dropped but its a hell of alot easier to sell a picture of a celeb than selling landscapes and cheaper too. travel to London as opposed to remote parts of scotland and the like.

    Best Wishes

    Duncan
    Flickr: Duncan Penfold Photography's Photostream

Page 3 of 4 First 1234 Last

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Log in

Log in