Back in January when I rented a (crop-sensor) D7000 to test along side my (full-frame) D700 at a wedding in Tahoe, I jotted down a few quick notes while I was playing with the camera, and saved them for later. I've now had the time to finish my thoughts, so here they are. Some are just random thoughts, some have more explanation. Feel free to comment your own excitement or disappointment over this new "advanced amateur" camera!

=Matt=
________________________

* DUAL CARD SLOTS!!! This feature alone makes my heart sing. Redundancy, FTW!

* No more mass storage option for plugging into the computer? Lame. Actually, it appears they stopped providing this feature a long time ago, I guess I've just always used card readers. But since I didn't have an SDHC card reader, it was quite a chore to get image files off the the D7000 while traveling, because Nikon's transfer program is kinda ghetto.

* No LCD review one-click 100% zoom. Sigh. I know that's a pro feature, but MAN I sure miss it. The worst part is, it's totally the type of feature that someone could just hack a firmware update for. Seriously, anyone? I'll pay very well for anyone who can find a way to bootleg custom functions into the firmware of any Nikon DSLR. Anyways, as a hobbyist adventure photographer I could totally live without one-click 100% zooming, but as a professional event / portrait photographer I honestly have to say it would slow me down way too much. Kinda like shooting a Canon. I think I would pass on the D7000, for this reason and also for a couple others...

* Nice to have a battery release switch, FINALLY. Canon has been doing this pretty much since day one, I believe. When you're on a tripod over a stream and you need to change batteries, it makes your heart skip a beat when you open the battery door and that thing just comes flying out. (Such as on the D300, D700, etc.)

* Nice to have the pro-grade strap ringlets instead of the normal / Canon style.

* Nice to have custom settings modes, but NOT nearly as good as the semi-pro / pro bodies! In fact it's downright dangerous to put Manual exposure mode and C1 just one click away from each other. Huge reason why I prefer Nikon's pro grade button configuration. Actually, while shooting with the D7000 I made the mistake of saving C1 for super-low light, I believe I saved manual exposure, ISO 6400, and indoor WB. Once or twice while shooting in broad daylight, I accidentally bumped the camera from "M" to C1, and WOW those images look like a polar bear blinking in a blizzard! Again, can't recommend the D7000 for professional event photography. They really should have put the exposure mode dial on a locking button too, I was excited that they added a locking mode dial similar to the pro-grade cameras, but that excitement disappeared when I saw how easy it was to bump the camera out of the actual exposure mode...

* Miss the AF-ON button of the D300 / D700, and the metering switch as well. But I understand that those are pro features.

* Nice to have the dedicated "drive mode" dial like the pro bodies, with timer, mirror lockup modes, etc. Also VERY nice to have exposure delay mode, AF fine tuning, non-CPU lens compatibility!

* Did I mention, MANUAL FOCUS LENS COMPATIBILITY!!! Very happy about this. The 24 f/2.8 AIS has been one of my favorite "medium wide" landscape lenses on my D300. Now I just need to buy an 18mm f/2.8 AIS, or of course they just need to make a full-frame D7000.

* Did I mention the Intervalometer yet? HECK YES! Thank you, Nikon! I can't believe they added this feature to the camera. Seriously, I don't know how many times I'll say this by the end of the post, but for adventure and go-light photography, the D7000 is an absolute winner.

* Nice to have AF-S/C closer to the pro-grade setup, although it still requires a button AND a command dial to switc from Single to Continuous focus etc.

* PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE add ISO to the options for customizing the DOF and FUNC buttons! Actually I think it has this, I just didn't dig deep enough into the menus. I was able to find a setting for the D90 that turns one of the command dials into ISO control, and that's a start, but SERIOUSLY, why don't all cameras these days make ISO a bigger part of the exposure equation? I've blogged about this before...

* Oh, one more thing, the image quality! Well, the fact that I almost forgot to mention it should be a very good thing. It's sweet. The expected progression of the crop sensor system, yet still surprising performance for a 16 megapixel DX sensor. At ISO 100 I would shoot anything with this camera, it makes the perfect adventure / creative camera for go-light photographers who need something small but feature-packed. It is also great up to ISO 1600, even for professional use, and usable at 3200 and even 6400. Tests show that Canon's 18 megapixel sensor is a little better, but honestly that doesn't matter to me because the bottom line is that it gets the job done.

CONCLUSION:

Holding the D700, D300, AND D7000 side by side, the D300 is the perfect size and I have to admit, I look forward to Nikon making a D400 with the D7000's amazing ISO performance! I had previously wondered if the D7000 might be SO awesome that Nikon wouldn't even need to make a D400; maybe they would just let the crop-sensor format die with the D300s, but now having handled the D7000 I'm pretty sure that while it's an amazing camera, a D400 will come. And it will be awesome.

I received an email today that read the following:

(from: chan jackie - Subjec: service)

Frodo

Now I know that most aspiring photographers out there are NOT as gullible as the old grandma's who actually get duped into sending money to Nigeria, but I just thought I'd point this out really quick. Part infomercial, part joke because the names are so ridiculous. Frodo the wood carver!

Anyways, this is the oldest scam in the book. Nobody's gonna email you out of the blue, from London, about their travels to your area and their need for your services. One way or another, it would end up with them over-paying me with a money order or cashier's check, then asking me to pay them back a little bit, and of course the money order goes bad.

There are many other variations on this scam, but I can't remember the stories at the moment. Anybody got any links to other stories that other photographers have been fed by scam artists?

Good luck out there! The internet is a dangerous place...

=Matt=

(Samsung cell phone, SOOC JPG, spot metering,
AWB, in-camera contrast & saturation turned up.)

Blog • Website • Articles • Workshops • Contact

(Updated November 2010)
...It's that time of year again, folks! I only wish I could have gotten this blog post re-published before black friday, but halfway through "Cyber Monday" will have to do. Please feel free to leave a comment, share this blog post, etc. etc. My personal bit.ly link for this blog post is: http://bit.ly/cameratalk-scamalert in case you'd like to use that.

Since this post was last updated as recently as May, I don't have much new to add. But, just off the top of my head, I googled "Nikon D7000" and came up with a handful of online camera stores, and especially "price shopper" websites, claiming some ridiculously low prices. If you don't care to read the post below, here's the short version- Save yourself a lot of trouble, shop at a reputable dealer such as B&H, Adorama, or Amazon etc... (And if you use those links when you shop, it does indeed help me out a little, without charging you any extra.)

(UPDATED MAY 2010)

(updated Aug 2008)

Those of you who have been long-time subscribers to this blog will know that every now and then, I bring to the public's attention the "brooklyn scam group". It's not a fun topic, but I feel that it's very necessary. SO many people out there are buying digital cameras and equipment, many their very first digital camera ever, and they don't realize how widespread online scamming is.

The largest group, out of brooklyn, (in the 718 area code and 112xx zip code, I believe) is sort of a fly-by-night group, churning out new websites every few months, basically doing the same scam business under a different name, until word gets out that they are a shady company. As soon as one online store front gets shut down, another one (or two) MORE pop up...

I first encountered them when I ALMOST purchased my first D70 from a company called "Digital Liquidators"... Since then, the list has grown:

Broadway Photo - bwayphoto.com, broadwayphoto.com
(They say they are under new management, but their tech support still shows at least one 718 area code number.

Digital Liquidators - digitalliquidators.com

A&M Photo World - amphotoworld.com

The Camera Pros - thecamerapros.com

USA Photo Nation - usaphotonation.com

J&K Cameras - (eBay storefront, shut down)

Genius Camera - geniuscamera.com

Express Camera - expresscamera.com

Best Price Camera - bestpricecamera.com

RainbowTronics - rainbowtronics.com

Royal Camera - royalcamera.com

Added Aug 2008:

Sonic Cameras - soniccameras.com

Added May 2010:

Total Pro Digital - www.totalprodigital.com

42nd St Photo - www.42photo.com

Primo Cameras - www.primocameras.com

US1 Cameras - www.us1photo.com

Thunder Cameras - www.thundercameras.com

Fumfie - www.fumfie.com

...And these are just the ones I can think up OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, or by a quick google search. There are MANY others! (And don't hesitate to mention some more if you know of any, and I'll add them to the list when I re-post this blog entry, every year or so...)

You may notice that a good number of these sites have been shut down, and most ALL of them when googled will generate results that are 90% complaints. Often the complaints out-rank the actual website itself! NOT good!!!

Broadway Photo, the place where I just saw the Nikon D300 for $1381, is the "ringleader" and they do business practically in broad daylight. Even though the very second link right underneath them on google reports that they are a scam group... HAH! (They've registered with google or something, to force their link up to the top...)

Basically, here's the bottom line(s):

Legally, these companies are legit. (this one overlord company, that is...) I'm sure if you took them to court, they could figure out a way to appear within the law. After all, accidents do happen, and sometimes you "accidentally" get shipped and billed for a bunch of stuff you didn't order, or charged $500 for shipping, or your order gets mysteriously canceled altogether. So, they're quasi-legal. But they'll still get you on the phone and try to sell you a bunch of junk, or charge you extra for things like the battery & charger that should come WITH the camera. And then they may accidentally charge your credit card for way too much, or claim that, oh, I dunno, read some of the sad stories yourself...

Yeah. Unscrupulous, shady, dishonest, shameless, evil, etc. etc.

So, what can you do? Well, it's pretty simple...

Never, NEVER, NEVER buy a camera simply by googling the name of the camera and then clicking on the lowest price, that is just suicide. As I like to say- you'll get more excitement out of lighting your money on fire.

Also, NEVER trust those "price shopper" sites to only shop legit stores. In fact on many price shopper sites, the ENTIRE first page of results will consist of scam companies. For example I just used "lowpricedigital.com" to search for the Nikon D300, and Broadway comes up even with a "customer satisfaction award". The rest of the results, including the $999 D300 from "1wayphoto.com", are all part of the scam group.

Then, if you are seriously bent on saving money on your electronics purchase, here's how to identify a scam group:

Well first of all, use resellerratings.com. They're a legit review site for online stores. Click "store ratings" and search for the company you're thinking of buying from. If there are a ton of negative reviews, case closed. If there are ZERO reviews, or just one or two, then that means the company is SO new they haven't been around long enough to get reviewed. Not a good sign, in my opinion, and I'd walk away right then.

[EDIT: Lately I've seen these scam companies make MASSIVE efforts to spam resellerratings with fake reviews. So many fake reviews that they even make the 1-star reviews hard to find. Just another reason to WALK AWAY, and buy from a reputable dealer...]

Secondly, if you place an order online and they immediately ask you to "call and confirm your order", that is red flag #1!!! They will invariably attempt to sell you on a bunch of exorbitantly priced extras, in fact they'll even try and convince you that your camera doesn't come with a battery or charger, and that you need to buy those things separately! Red flag #2.

Thirdly is the "overpriced extras" I mentioned - you don't need to place an order to see the overpriced junk they try and push. Just type in "CF card" into any of these websites search engines, and you'll see a bunch of generic, un-labeled memory cards pop up that cost 5-10 TIMES what they ought to, even from the most reliable brands. Red flag #3. [EDIT: Recently I have noticed a different trend: Some of these resellers don't even list accessories at ALL. Probably to hid their overpriced bait-and-switch joke of a business model. I guarantee you that if you bought something from them, they'd call you up and try to sell you the overpriced stuff just the same...]

Fourth, if they put up some silly customer testimonials on their page, I just roll my eyes. "there are a lot of scam groups out there, but *I* trust this store..." Yeah right! A legit outfit shouldn't have to rely on cheesy customer testimonials to get business!

Oh, and also, if they have a BUNCH of "seals" on their front page that say they are hacker safe, and credit-card safe / registered / verified etc, then that also CAN be a bad sign. They're over-compensating for something. Also, I've noticed that all the scam sites have a generic, "tech support" face on their website somewhere. Probably to instill trust in buyers by *looking* nice and cozy.

Here's my advice:

Buy your camera from Adorama, B&H, or Amazon. That's the simple answer. When I search for "Adorama" in my email receipts folder, twenty different invoices come up, and I remember each of those purchases being perfectly smooth... I've spent thousands there, and thousands at B&H and Amazon as well.. Each purchase has gone smoothly and arrived on time. Really, the discussion should end right there, with that statistic...

You MIGHT be able to save a FEW dollars from some of the other legit online stores. Or of course there's always your local walk-in stores... I've bought from Sigma4less.com a couple times, and they're very friendly, helpful people, if you need a lens or something that Adorama doesn't have in stock...

A list of stores that I trust, have shopped at before, and highly recommend:

Adorama - www.adorama.com

B&H - www.bhphotovideo.com

Amazon - Amazon

A list of stores that also look legit, but I can't speak for them personally:

Roberts Imaging - www.robertsimaging.com

Abe's of Maine - www.abesofmaine.com

J&R Music & Computer -

BuyDig -

Crutchfield -

OneCall -

...But, tried-and-true, just don't google the name of the camera and click the lowest number. Oh and by the way, KEH.com is a great safe place to buy used gear. Some items, like camera straps and batteries, I buy in store because I need them immediately. I also buy my memory cards in-store sometimes, because you can always trust them to carry legit stuff. Ebay and Amazon for example, since they allow 3rd-party sellers, may have FAKE Sandisk cards. STAY AWAY from either of those stores when buying memory cards...

Now a rule of thumb: If you're finding prices that are more than 5% lower than "the big three", then it's too good to be true, 99% of the time. You gotta ask yourself a question: "Do I feel lucky?"

The next question you should ask, if you're JUST saving 5% from a semi-legit retailer- is 5% REALLY worth the risk of becoming yet another "customer dissatisfaction" statistic?

I dunno about you, but I'll take peace of mind, thank you very much...

Take care,
=Matt=

PS: Support my addiction to giving free advice - Donate via Paypal, or by shopping at B&H.

Blog • Website • Articles • Workshops • Contact

There are two things photographers like to talk about when it comes to "the cost of digital"...

Some people talk about how digital is a never-ending money-hole, and how equipment is infinitely more expensive now with digital than it was with film. They talk about how with digital, you MUST upgrade your DSLR body all the time, you HAVE to always buy each new Photoshop upgrade, and hard drives, and memory cards, and so on and so forth. (Which is absurd on the face of it, of course, but you know how that argument goes already...)

Some people talk about how FREE digital is, how all you need to do is buy a camera and a memory card, plus the computer you already have, and you can take an "infinite" number of pictures for "free"...

I don't know which is LESS true, the first idea or the second. Clearly you do NOT need to upgrade to every new digital camera that comes out, it's just that many hobbyists choose to do so of their own free will. Equally as true but maybe NOT equally as clear, is the fact that when you shoot digital images you ARE paying a price. Time in front of the computer, new hard drives to store each picture, ...it all adds up one way or another.

I find myself somewhere in the middle. I certainly don't carelessly spend money on every single digital gadget that is announced, otherwise by now I'd probably own every current Nikon body in production along with a few Canon, Sony, Olympus, Sigma and Pentax DSLR's. Yeah, I'm a geek, but not a fanboy.

However even though I'm not a "compulsive upgrader", I'm still keenly aware of how quickly digital expenses can add up. Hard drives, memory cards, software, etc. etc... and of course, TIME. Each image I click is going to cost me X number of seconds to download, sort, and delete or edit. Especially as a professional freelance photographer, sometimes work piles up. And when I'm short on time, it starts costing me money. (out-sourcing color correction) ...So one way or another, I pay for each image I click.

Why did I start this rambling post, you may ask? Because I was bored today at lunch, so I got out my calculator. It is always very dangerous when I get out my calculator. Okay, it's an app on my phone, but you know what I mean. But I digress. Here's the fact:

If every digital image I've ever clicked had been made on film instead, I would have recently passed the $100,000 mark in film+processing.

This very rough (but quite conservative) estimate can be really helpful if you sit and think about it for a while. Let's start with the obvious discussions that always come first when someone does this kind of math...

* Clearly, if I DID shoot film, I simply would not have captured this many photos. I just don't have $100,000 to spend! So, it is incorrect to claim that I have actually *SAVED* a hundred thousand dollars by shooting digital instead of film.

* But the figure still implies many things. At the very least, it means I was allowed to do something that I would not have been able to with film. Did I learn a lot by clicking those pictures? You bet! Did I gain experience on all those photo shoots with fellow photographers, those family / friend events and parties? Absolutely.

* Bottom line: digital gave me the confidence I needed to learn new things I might never have tried on film. I like to use the example of star trails and time-lapses. Would I have ever gone out and tried to shoot photos of the stars on film? Probably not. And if I did try, my first few rolls would probably be completely black or completely white, and I would have been very discouraged. I would have had to work VERY hard to note exposures, learn reciprocity, etc. etc. ...instead of just going out with my DSLR, shooting 30 second exposures, then trying one minute, then two, four, eight, sixteen, thirty two, ...and yes, I've made a 64 minute exposure on a DSLR at least once or twice...

* What digital saved me wasn't exactly money, but time. I'm sure my film+processing tab would have *eventually* reached a hundred grand, but not in just a few years. It might have taken me two, three, or four decades maybe? My point is of course something we already know- digital changes the learning curve for photography in a drastic way.

* But of course, what about the fact that sheer numbers do NOT imply gift, talent, or skill? I wholeheartedly agree. Nobody should ever throw around a number as if it is some sort of trophy, or mark of quality. I have most likely shot a quarter or half-million digital images over the past few years, but it would be foolish to think that qualifies me for any title other than "guy with a twitchy finger"... So, I hope everyone can remember to always let their images speak for themselves, and avoid getting into a numbers contest. Personally, whenever I see someone talking big on the internet, I don't listen to a word they're saying if I click on their website and their pictures stink.

Thanks for reading; I hope I didn't waste your time with this rambling. I'm just an information junkie, I guess...

Take care,
=Matt=

I feel bad sometimes because I've almost completely stopped giving advice on public internet communities, now that I'm in the [b] school. The internet is such a vicious place, you're always competing with others who either hate your opinion with a passion, or are just completely mis-informed. I only really *enjoy* giving technical advice, and unfortunately the technical aspects of any subject are usually the most hotly contended.

However part of the reason I started this CameraTalk blog was so that I could have a place to quietly post my own opinions, for those who cared to read. Yes, I'm opinionated, but hopefully I'm NOT a fanboy. Those who have followed CameraTalk long enough know that I criticize Nikon and Canon almost equally, the same with Mac & PC, film and digital, RAW and JPG, etc. etc... I'm biased, but I'll try and always present both sides of an argument.

Anyways after saying all that, this post is NOT about cameras, it's about business. I thought I'd cut-and-paste one of my responses, every now and then, and hopefully Becker won't be upset with me for sharing "inside information". I don't get any money if people sign up for the [b] school, but I do think it's the best online community for freelance photographers who want to stay connected with what is happening in the industry. It's also nice to have a PRIVATE place to go and discuss more sensitive manners. Again, part of the whole reason I have really cut back on posting everywhere else...

Check out the [b] school study hall this afternoon from 4-5 PM. http://bit.ly/StudHal

A photographer vented about how former clients were complaining that their new print prices were kinda high, and they wouldn't offer a disc of all the images. In response I wrote:

Ouch, I feel your pain!

Unfortunately, there's a little bit of truth in every aspect of what you've said...

* Yeah there will be a LOT of frustration when raising your prices, this will not be the last time that someone whines about "what you used to charge"...

* However, that's just what comes with the territory when you start small by sticking your foot in the door at a very low price. So if I were cruel and heartless, I might say you brought the situation upon yourself? Of course I'm not going to go there, because I know EXACTLY the frustration you're feeling. All I'm saying is, unfortunately it comes with the territory of starting low and rising once you get some experience under your belt. For example if you had started out by studying the business, got really good at portraiture by OTHER means instead of doing business almost for free, ...then you could have entered the market a few more steps up the ladder. And those first few steps are always the hardest; it often can seem like you're starting over from scratch with your clientele; because quite honestly the people who expect a free disc AND a cheap session usually don't hang out with the people who aren't going to bat an eye at spending $900+ on prints.

(Note: I'm talking about the portraiture business model, not the event photography business model. I firmly believe that the two are polar opposites, and the event photography business model DOES usually require the delivery of a disc. But that is another discussion for another time...)

* Just keep on working hard! You ARE on the right track, and feel free to simply tell this client "I started out where I did because I was a hobbyist doing it for fun, but I'm trying to make an honest wage at this now, and it simply is not worth my time to do this type of work for any less."

* Yes, unfortunately, as a result of the double-whammy that is the economy AND the digital camera craze, more and more "clients" (in our industry, they're consumers) ...are NOT willing to pay very much for photographic services. You're right, everyone knows what a 4x6 costs at Costco now, and they expect to get a disc from you so they can get those cheap 4x6's... After all, everybody ELSE is giving them a disc! (I received three or four un-solicited image discs from friends and family after MY OWN WEDDING. Of course there's nothing wrong with this, and I LOVE seeing pictures taken by / with friends in a non-professional capacity or environment. That's why I LIKE photography. But my point is, discs are the currency of this digital age.)

* So, you can either choose to embrace the under-valuing of the photography industry, because honestly that is the way the tide could continue to go for many years to come, OR you can continue fighting against the current and know that, with the right kind of personal service and stunning imagery, people will see the light and pay whatever you ask. Because you CAN achieve that, I promise! And personally, I believe that "selling yourself short" is what may soon eliminate the entire low-end of the photographic industry, as well as a significant chunk of the mid-end market. I totally understand that it is a perfectly acceptable business tactic, in this thing we have called capitalism. So by all means, hobbyists are welcome to shoot "on the side" for cheap, offer a disc, etc. There is no law against shooting in your spare time for a few extra bucks, as long as you stay under the minimum profit for your particular state's tax bracket. (again, HUGE can of worms for another time!) But my point is, eventually it is going to catch up with everybody. If one hundred hobbyist photographers start shooting for money on the side, they'll probably make enough money to pay for their next lens purchase, etc. But what happens when the hundred grows to ten thousand? That's exactly what has happened over the past ~5 years, and the ONLY way to compete is by price. Which is what has happened recently with the "micro stock" industry- Millions of photographers around the world have flooded the internet with decent and even great photography, and now all the design and ad agencies know that they can have content for literally pennies. And people are FINALLY starting to rumble about it being un-sustainable. But again, huge discussion for another time...

Take care!
=Matt=

Today is a day that will live in digital infamy. All photographers will remember August 24th as the beginning of the end. Goodbye, optical viewfinder.

Okay, am I exaggerating just a little? It depends on who you ask. Here's the facts- today, Sony announced the first really serious incarnation of an "EVIL" DSLR, in the form of the A33 and A55. They are now called "SLT" cameras, the "T" standing for translucent instead of "reflex" like in SLR. And EVIL stands for "electronic viewfinder, interchangeable lenses". What Sony has done is replaced the standard SLR parts (mirror and shutter) with new parts. No shutter, (I think) and a new mirror system that doesn't move, it just splits the light to two different sensors, one for autofocus and one the real image sensor.

Doesn't sound evil yet, you say? I forgot to mention that there is no prism, no optical viewfinder whatsoever. Just the LCD on the back of the camera, and another LCD inside the viewfinder. That's right, you don't get to see the real world when you look through the viewfinder, you just see another little screen.

Purists are most likely doing harm to themselves in medieval ways right now. And I'm not talking about the monk scene in Monty Python.

Read it and weep, fellow camera geeks: http://www.dpreview.com/news/1008/10082421sonyslta55a33.asp

Make no mistake, this affects us all. If you ask the glass-half-empty crowd, this signals the beginning of optical viewfinder extinction. It starts with Sony's entry level SLT's, catches on with the hip young digital generation, and spreads to other camera makers, to other classes of advanced and professional cameras, until maybe a distant future successor to the Canon 5D mk2, or Nikon D700, could have an electronic viewfinder... Say it ain't so!!!

Because the bottom line is that camera companies don't actually care, they make whatever sells. And if EVF's sell as well as it sounds like they will; we can expect a LOT more of them in the future...

I would encourage Sony users to 'abandon ship' like it's the Titanic, but I think it's too late. In the review posted above and in other internet chatter, the system is already being well-received and praised for it's newfound versatility. And the flaws in the system are not receiving very much press at all. So, Sony users, (and eventually everybody else) ...the end is near. Iceberg dead ahead, captain.

...Okay, enough with the doomsday analogies, I've had my fun. Seriously now, what does this all mean, and is it all bad? Let's weigh the facts.

* It's an EVF. (Electronic ViewFinder) That means that when you raise your camera to your eye, you don't see the real world, you see another electronic screen. I don't like screens, monitors, TV's, etc. I have to stare at them enough these days, and it makes my eyes hurt. Adding yet another LCD display to my life makes my stomach turn.

* But evolution is inevitable. Just consider the serious compromises we've already put up with over the years in the viewfinder department alone. Ever looked through the viewfinder of an early 80's 35mm SLR? How about the prism of a Hasselblad? Truly a glorious view. Even my mediocre Nikon FM2 (1982-1984) has a viewfinder that BLOWS AWAY the latest most expensive DSLR's, as far as size is concerned. I also like how you always see the true depth of field because the focus screen is optimized for manual focusing. Anywho my point is that EVIL is inevitable and we've already survived plenty of huge compromises in the past, WRT viewfinders alone. Remember the Nikon D70 viewfinder? Talk about light at the end of a tunnel.

* The question is, will it really take over the entire market, and will *ALL* DSLR's eventually become EVIL? I honestly doubt it. They'll become popular, and they'll gain market share, but I highly doubt optical viewfinders will go away altogether.

...So, what are the advantages and dis-advantages?

* With EVIL, you get full-time phase-detect autofocus even while in live view AND while recording video. What the heck is phase-detect? Don't worry about the science behind it. Just know that phase-detect is the good, fast AF in DSLR's, and contrast-detect is the lame, slow AF you have in a point-and-shoot. So, I guess this is a step forward in general, a "win" for digital technology as a whole.

* With EVIL, you get tons of new live readouts in the viewfinder. The most important things are going to be live exposure simulation, histogram viewing, and highlight warning. Just think about it- You'll DRAMATICALLY reduce the number of completely ruined exposures because every time you look though the viewfinder, you'll automatically SEE the final image before you capture it. Too dark or too light, you instantly know and just turn a dial in the direction you want. Especially in P mode, you won't need hardly any working knowledge of camera settings, you just turn a dial or two. Imagine how quickly everyone will learn photography!

* Silent shooting. Again, no mirror + no shutter = no sound. COMPLETE silence. This will be great for trigger happy wedding photographers who disrespectfully blaze away at 10 FPS during a ceremony. Now you can shoot 2,000 images during the ceremony and nobody will ever know. Or you can shoot during those dead silent moments in a golf tournament, like some professionals have already done with misc. P&S cameras.

* Oh, and did I mention these cameras can hit 6-10 FPS? Without that pesky mirror and shutter to deal with, you can really juice your camera's performance for cheap, it's just a matter of processor speed. And CPU's get faster and faster, buffers get bigger, until cameras like RED (google it) are affordable enough for the masses, and all we'll have to do is record video, and afterward sort through a practically continuous stream of 10+ megapixel images. Imagine what that will do for bracketing exposure and focus!

...But enough about the advantages. What about the disadvantages?

* As I mentioned, my eyes already hurt from looking at computer screens all day. Now I have to look at another screen when I raise my camera to my eye?

* Reduced battery life. Of course I'm sure batteries will always be improving, so I won't dwell on this much, but for now the two new Sony cameras have been rated at just a couple / few hundred clicks on one battery. That's laughable; I get 100+ images per each ONE PERCENT of battery power on my old, outdated D300.

* LAG! In case you didn't notice, there is always a fraction of a second worth of lag between a video feed and it's display. A true photojournalist would be MORTIFIED to think that they have to time their candid moments with a lag time involved. However, I won't dwell on this point too much because I'm sure that the future probably holds some advanced technology that virtually eliminates lag time... And I haven't handled either of these cameras yet so I can't speak to their performance, but so far there aren't any major complaints.

* All sorts of new image issues to deal with. Since the camera now works by actually capturing images THROUGH a piece of glass / mirror, I'm betting you can kiss some low-light performance goodbye, while saying hello to one or two weird artifact or aberration / ghosting issues in tough lighting conditions. I don't know what they are yet, but I guarantee you they'll pop up. And so will many other issues, now that they've added yet another fully electronic aspect to our imaging tools. Dead pixels in the viewfinder. That weird rainbow alias-y effect. Connections shorting out. ...It's just more to go wrong.

...And LASTLY, we need to discuss how this affects the world of photography as a whole. I've already mentioned just how much easier it's going to be to make perfectly exposed, sharp images.

The advent of digital photography already eliminated many of the barriers of entry between amateur photographers and professionals. All thanks to the LCD on the back of the camera, and $50 memory cards that can hold "1.2k" images. And Photoshop.

Now that we'll soon have electronic viewfinders, beginners will learn about exposure practically overnight. Like, literally within days, and maybe even without truly understanding shutter speed, aperture, or ISO... Then there's the aspect of high-speed shooting. The faster cameras get, the larger the buffers etc, ...the more it will become a lost art to anticipate and perfectly time that one *click* that captures a memorable moment.

So the bottom line is that the bar for attaining mediocre / decent images will yet again be lowered. Which does two things- 1.) It inherently RAISES the bar for truly standing out as an artist with creative vision, and 2.) It shrinks the professional industry to an even smaller size. The market for "decent" images is no longer a professional market at all, it is a market for the hobbyist, the side-job.

Should professionals worry about this? YES, if they're not professionally trained in business strategy. Your business model could fail practically overnight sometime in the next 5 years, if it hasn't already. Unless you're the next Henri Cartier Bresson, your business can't be about the images you create. It has to be about everything ELSE that makes you a professional.

Personally, I like to think about three things- professional service leading up to the wedding, performance under pressure on the wedding day, and peace of mind after the wedding. Those are the things I can offer a client that uncle Bob, or cousin Jill, cannot. I have nerves of steel, a calm, cool attitude, and most importantly years of experience at dozens of weddings. So when things go awry, I guarantee that I won't panic and start taking terrible pictures. And after the wedding, I can guarantee that client's images are backed up like crazy; I don't go to sleep on the wedding night until I have at least three copies of my data, and one of them is off-site. And so on and so forth.

But enough about that. I'm not a business guru by any stretch of the imagination, and that does NOT constitute business advice that YOU should follow if you're also a full-time freelance professional.

Back to EVF's. Are they a good or a bad thing? It depends on who you are and what you feel about the evolution of digital technology. At the end of the day, you just have to ask yourself- When you raise your camera to your eye, what do you want to see? A high-tech display that gives you all the information you need to easily create a great image, OR the real world? Honestly, I'm tempted to give it a try, even though I know I won't ever be able to fully embrace it. The day Nikon makes their pro DSLR's with EVF's will probably be the day I stockpile a bunch of old use D700's for $900 or something.

=Matt=

I recently saw this article on Twitter:  http://is.gd/cH69E

Basically, someone (in the UK) photographed a wedding, apparently using a Canon 500D and just *ONE* memory card, and somehow the camera was stolen during a home burglary while the photographer was "out with her kids"...

This immediately raised a TON of questions for me to ponder:  Why did the photographer only use ONE memory card?  (approx. 1500 photos, according to the article)  ...Why did the photographer NOT download the images to a computer immediately upon arriving home from the wedding, nor back them up to an external hard drive or off-site source?  And lastly, why was ONLY the camera stolen, and nothing else?  Of course I don't know the whole story, and maybe there were other circumstances that prove this accident was simply un-avoidable.

However it sounds really fishy to me, or at the very least EXTREMELY un-professional.  I suspect the camera was NOT stolen, but simply mis-placed, possibly even lost before even arriving home from the wedding.  Or even if it was stolen, it's still extremely foolish to shoot an entire wedding on just ONE memory card, let alone allowing that camera / memory card out of your sight for even a split second, before backing things up.  You simply DO NOT do this, especially when you're photographing a once-in-a-lifetime event that hundreds of people hope to cherish for generations to come.

Some of my friends on Facebook and Twitter brought up some good points though-  Sometimes, the WORST does happen, and circumstances are simply out of your control.  I could get carjacked at gunpoint on my way home from shooting a wedding.  My entire house could burn down the night after a wedding.  Heck, all of Southern California could get leveled, if "the big one" comes...

Of course while those scenarios seem a bit far-fecthed, I do know for a fact that entire camera bags ARE stolen from wedding reception halls, and unfortunately quite often. 

So, it's just a game of statistics, really.  While the stolen 500D incident was probably very avoidable, to put it nicely, the fact remains that NOBODY is 100% safe.  So, what do you do?  How do you make sure that (wedding) photos are as safe as they can possibly be, at ALL times, from the moment they're captured to the moment they're delivered, and for the rest of the couple's married life?  Well, ain't that the million dollar question....

All I'm going to talk about is how to pile the odds in your favor.  This is NOT a fool-proof plan, nor is it the only or the best plan.  I'm just thinking out loud; thinking about how might I avoid image loss in various different disaster situations...  I'd LOVE it if you chimed in with your own experience, questions, or input!

First of all, let's start with the moment you click that picture.  This will be part 1 of a complete series: 

Heck, before you even CLICK the picture, you gotta have these ducks in a row.  What brand memory card are your images being written onto?  Where did you buy that card?  Did you test the card to full capacity once or twice, before using it at this wedding?  How do you store your memory cards?

1.)  I only buy legit, name-brand cards from reputable, authorized dealers that sell directly.
I personally ONLY ever buy memory cards from Adorama, B&H, or in-store at reliable dealers.  NEVER NEVER NEVER buy memory cards on eBay, or from Amazon 3rd parties.  (Additional reading:  Google "fake sandisk on ebay")  I personally know people who have lost images on fake memory cards that looked EXACTLY like the real thing, were sold by legit looking dealers, but were in fact complete junk.  I don't care how many bucks you can save; DON'T DO IT.

2.)  I only buy cards that have a LIFETIME warranty.
If a card goes corrupt, usually you can get the images back using recovery software, regardless of whether or not the card has a warranty.  Really, all that a lifetime warranty is for is the re-assurance that a company is standing behind it's product.  The lifetime warranty implies that this particular card is a cream of the crop, it has been tested and found flawless, and if there's ever a problem with the card they'll take care of it.  Oppositely, if a card DOESN'T have a lifetime warranty, what does that say about the product?  It might have actually been made in the same factory as the lifetime warrantied memory card, but THIS card has no lifetime warranty because the company simply can't afford to stand behind it.  It's probably a generic brand that you simply don't want to trust.  It's just a game of odd,s and their cards are probably a little more likely to die on you.  Or maybe the memory cards ARE made by a reputable company, but they're just cutting their costs by not offering a warranty.  Again, why would you try and save a couple bucks when someone's (wedding) images are on the line?  Are you really going to try and save $5, or even $50, when you're charging your clients *thousands* for your services?  Shame on you.  (See a trend here?  Trying to save money on memory cards is a great way to risk stacking the odds AGAINST you...)  (Additional reading:  Google "sandisk rebate class action lawsuit")

I personally have used many different cards, from Lexar, Sandisk, Kingston, Transcend, Delkin, and Calumet.  I have yet to try Hoodman cards, but they have a perfect field record, apparently. ALL of the cards I've ever purchased have come with a lifetime warranty.  I HAVE experienced corruptions in the past, but have always been able to recover images using Photorescue. (www.datarescue.com)  And after ANY card's complete failure, I send it in to be replaced by the manufacturer...

3.)  I phase in and phase out my cards.
Before shooting at a wedding, take your brand spankin' new card out for a spin a couple times.  Try and fill them all the way up, just to see if the entire card can handle data OK.  This is just common sense...  Delete a few images on the back of the camera, zoom in, review them on the computer, format the card, shoot a few more pics, ...THEN you're good to go for a wedding day.

Also, after 2-4 years I would consider retiring a memory card.  OR, if I've shot over 100,000 or 200,000 images on a card.  Like I said, it's just a game of odds, and these are ways I can stack the odds in my favor.  These days $200 can buy enough memory cards to shoot 2-3 weddings back to back.  So even if you're only charging $2000 to photograph a wedding, don't cut that corner.  Put quality memory cards in your budget, and re-budget every few years.  If your business is run so poorly that you can't afford reliable memory cards, maybe you shouldn't be shooting professionally.

4.)  I label all my memory cards very specifically.
All of my memory cards are labeled with one of those labeler things.  This should be a last resort, since your cards ought NEVER leave your sight, but worst-case scenario, your cards gotta say more than "Saville" or "Reception"...  You need to give people as many ways as possible to contact you, even anonymously if they're a thief, and you need to make it clear that the images on your cards are worth FAR MORE to you than the face value of the card itself.  Heck, those images should be worth more than the value of your entire lost/stolen camera bag!!!  And lastly, I like to keep track of when I bought a card, so that I can retire it after a few years or a hundred thousand read-write sequences, whichever comes first.

That's all I can think of right now about memory cards.  Please add your comments in case I'm forgetting anything, and I'll add it here.

NEXT, I'll ponder how to actually shoot safely.  This will include a similar discussion on how BIG your memory cards should be, when to swap cards, etc...  So stay tuned for that...

Take care!
=Matt=

At this time in early 2010, we have the 7D, 5D mk2, 1D mk4, and 1Ds mk3. This is Canon's pro-quality lineup. Well the 7D and 5D mk2 are officially listed as "advanced amateur" or semi-pro camera bodies, but you could use them in a professional capacity.

Questions arose from the discussion today, about which Canon DSLR body to buy. Lots of people talk about how the 5-series autofocus just isn't good enough sometimes, in low light and at fast apertures to be specific...

I'll cut right to the chase: The ultimate Canon system *requires* using more than one different model of DSLR body, and at least one crop-frame sensor, if you really want to cover all your bases and do it without breaking your bank. If you did have an unlimited budget, of course you could just buy two or three $7000 1Ds mk3 cameras and be done with it. (Although if you want to do video, you'd need to get a lesser camera, or wait for the 1Ds mk4 which will cost $8000.)

The bottom line (in my highly opinionated opinion) is that one or two 5D mk2's just won't cut it in a professional capacity, if you're trying to be diverse and ready for anything. Don't get me wrong, the 5D mk2 is GREAT as an affordable, high-res low-light camera body. It affords the best image quality for the price, when comparing all the factors. (Sony's two full-frame DSLR's may offer a better value and 3 more megapixels, but their low-light performance is at least two stops behind Canon's...) The 5D mk2 is a PERFECT portrait camera, with just enough speed & accuracy to rock out great portraits of almost any kind. Bottom line: it has a resolution advantage over the Nikon D700, and a low-light advantage over Sony. So, it wins the well-rounded prize for portrait photographers.

However if you shoot moving subjects in low light, or ANY kind of fast-action, you're probably not going to be 100% satisfied with the speed nor the focusing accuracy. Bottom line. It CAN perform great especially if your lens is perfectly calibrated and you use the center focus point, but quite simply, there is a reason that pros use the 45-point AF system in the 1-series Canons. You can argue all night long about whether or not the 5-series is adequate for this or that job, but the bottom line is that the 1-series is still above and beyond, and any dedicated, responsible professional should probably invest in a more diverse system.

So, what to buy?

The main gist of this particular blog post is going to be this: Don't be afraid to buy a crop sensor camera. The Canon 1.3x crop has been respectable in low-light and shallow DOF for two generations now; in my opinion both the 1D mk4 AND 1D mk3 are *perfect* wedding photojournalism cameras. The 1D mk2 N will even do, if you're JUST starting out, or if you're a hobbyist "day job" photographer simply looking for a camera body that is fast and reliable.

The Canon 1.6x crop doesn't have PERFECT low-light high ISO performance, but in my opinion (and reviewing hundreds of images shot by myself and others) ...both the 50D and 7D are acceptable enough to be used in many different conditions. Bonus points for the 7D's new AF system and pop-up flash with wireless capability.

So, honestly, if I were a Canon shooting wedding photographer, I'd buy three cameras- A 1D mk3, a 5D mk2, and a 7D. I'd probably use the first two cameras 90% of the time, and just leave the 7D in my camera bag as a *backup* backup, but then again I really do like the Sigma 50-150 2.8, and I've heard great things about the Tokina 11-16 2.8. I might still go my route of "2.8 zooms on crop, primes on full-frame" route like I am going with Nikon.

However, Canon's lens situation is a little different, and that does change things. Before I go there, here's the current pricing on new / used Canon bodies:

1D mk3: $2000 used

1Ds mk2: $1800 used

1Ds mk3: $6-7K?

7D: $1700

50D: $1200

5D mk2: $2350

...So, you could pick up your THREE bodies for about $6,000. If you can't afford that right away, pick any two and you'll be fine until you can afford the third. Personally, I might just get the 7D and the 1D mk3. That drops you down to $3700.

Okay, lenses. Canon has a couple key lenses that Nikon does not and it changes the game a little bit.

* The 70-200 f/4 IS, which would probably be my bread-and-butter event photography lens on either the 1D mk3, or the 5D mk2 if in close quarters. If I were shooting something that just ABSOLUTELY required f/2.8, maybe I'd rent the 70-200 2.8, but honestly I don't enjoy that extra weight enough to own it. I do just fine with an un-stabilized Sigma 50-150 2.8 on crop, so I could easily make do with a stabilized 70-200 f/4 on 1.3x...

* The primes- I personally am a bit of a telelphoto shooter, so as long as I can give my subjects distance, I do. So an 85 prime on crop is awesome. Unfortunately, Canon doesn't make an 85 1.4 and I'm not about to spend $2000 on the 85 1.2, which is a bit too slow to focus for my fast style of shooting. THEREFORE, if I were shooting Canon I'd be REALLY looking forward to the Sigma 85 1.4, hoping that it's sharp, with good background blur, and no autofocus issues. If the Sigma is a dud, (which I doubt) ...then I'd just get the Canon 85 1.8 and be happy. Or I might get the lesser known Canon 100 f/2, which is a similarly affordable yet incredibly sharp lens.

At the wider end, I must admit I have a soft spot for the Canon 35 1.4. If you're a 50mm kinda person, you'll want to get either the Sigma 50 1.4, or the Canon 50 1.2. The Canon 50 1.8 and 1.4 are decent backup / hobbyist lenses, but a professional should have something a little more high-performance...

* Other lenses- Aside from the above items, the situation is about the same as it is with Nikon- Personally, I'd keep a crop-sensor camera around for specialty lens kinda stuff, and use full-frame for the hardcore, bread-and-butter images. So for me, that might mean:

1.) Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 (crop sensor ultra-wide zoom, almost as sharp as the Nikon 14-24 and the Canon 16-35 mk2. If this isn't your style but you still want to cover this range, PERFECT purchase.)

2.) Sigma 17-50 2.8 OS HSM (Sigma's latest crop-sensor mid-range zoom, should be the *best* third party mid-range 2.8 zoom considering it has both stabilization *and* the high-end autofocus system. Again, if this isn't your style but you just want to cover the range, PERFECT fit.)

3.) Sigma 50-150 2.8 HSM (Awesome crop-sensor lens for telephoto candids / portraits, a whole pound lighter than the 70-200 2.8's and much, much smaller.)

4.) Sigma crop-sensor fisheye lens, if you like that style. Sigma makes a 10mm "diagonal" fisheye that fills the entire frame, or a 4.5mm circular fisheye that literally makes a circular image. Tokina also makes a zoom fisheye, if you're really into that. (If you're only going to be shooting 0-1 photos with these lenses per job, why spend hundreds of dollars more and take up precious time on your MAIN bodies? Your main bodies should ALWAYS have at least one of your key lenses on, in case a moment happens. If a beautiful, intimate moment happens in front of you and your MAIN camera has a stupid fisheye lens on, you're dead. That's why I say use an auxiliary camera body for the specialty lens stuff. So your MAIN body can have that 35 1.4 or 50 1.2 GLUED to it at all times.)

5.) Macro lenses: Since I'm really into macro photography, I don't mess around. I get a real macro lens, and I use a tripod. (But yes, I still use crop for macro) Personally I have an old, old Tamron 90mm f/2.5 manual focus with an adapt-all mount so it can fit on both Nikon and Canon, but that's a hard-to-find lens. I also have a Sigma 150 2.8 macro that does full 1:1 reproduction and is RAZOR sharp, but that lens is a little big for the average wedding photographer to lug around... I only use it when I'm shooting full-frame and want to ALSO use the lens for portraits and candids. Personally, for macro lenses I would recommend any of the Tokina, Tamron, or Sigma macro lenses in the 100mm range or wider. They are all very sharp, at least on most cameras. Sigma makes a great 50mm macro lens that is nice and compact, does full 1:1 reproduction, and has great resolution if you're shooting around 10-20 megapixels. If you have +20 megapixels, you might need the new Canon 100mm L macro, which has superb resolution for the next generation of high-megapixel camera bodies. But again, we're talking about specialty lenses, and if you just need one quick shot of wedding rings, maybe you should be using a crop sensor lens anyways...

SO, as discussed earlier, my KEY lenses would be the following: (used on full-frame, or 1.3x)

* Canon 35 1.4, or Canon 50 1.2, or Sigma 50 1.4, depending on your style / budget.
* Canon 85 1.8, or Canon 85 1.2, or Sigma 85 1.4, depending on your style / budget.
* For me, I'd probably really prefer a Canon 135 f/2, just because I tend to shoot more telephoto. Or, on 1.3x crop, I think the 100 f/2 would be GREAT. Almost nobody knows about the Canon 100 f/2, but it's quite sharp, GORGEOUS background blur, and fast, light, affordable, etc.

* ALSO, whichever zoom range is really your style on full-frame, whether it be 16-35, 24-70, or 70-200, I'd consider getting that particular lens in full-frame instead of crop sensor. Personally, the lens I'd probably get as a Nikon shooter is the 24-70, but the Canon 24-70 is not as desirable, a lot of people dislike it. As a Canon user, I don't think I'd buy a single 2.8 zoom for full-frame, if anything I'd buy the Canon 70-200 f/4 IS. But again, if one particular lens is REALLY your style, buy the best. For me, I think the absolute best setup, the setup I could shoot 95% of a wedding with, might be a 1D mk3 with an 85 1.8 and a 35 1.4. Yes, it's 1.3x crop factor, but the performance of the camera itself (speed, accuracy, reliability) is more important than a marginal difference in low-light, high ISO performance. Since we're talking about weddings and you MUST always have two cameras, as I said before I would probably get a Canon 7D with a 17-50 2.8 and 50-150 2.8, just to round things out. I'd shoot most everything on a 1D mk3 with those two primes, but from time to time when "zooming with my feet" is just not really possible, I'd turn to the 7D and whichever 2.8 zoom suited the condition.

I think that's about it. Did I miss anything, fellow wedding photographers? I should mention that owning this gear, and knowing how to use it skillfully, are two very different things. Master your gear (and make sure you're actually artistic) before you start taking people's money!

Take care,
=Matt=

Today I chatted on The [b] School with Becker about camera equipment. The real goal I think was to talk about "debate" in general, how people on the internet tend to give advice, seek advice, debate, argue, fight, insult, ...and so on and so forth.

What I've noticed over the years is that MOST online communities *de*volve into one of two things- Either a raging flame war forum where people just argue and fight all the time, OR a quiet, benign community where everyone just sits around and pats each other on the back saying "nice photo!"

I used to check forums like DPReview's just to hear the latest rumors on Canon / Nikon gear, as there are a couple reliable inside sources who do often leak information on new gear. However once Nikonrumors.com and Canonrumors.com started up, I stopped visiting the DPReview forums almost entirely. In fact, I hardly visit ANY community anymore, apart from the [b] school. I still use certain websites, including DPReview, SLRGear and others for reviews and more factual information, however.

(By the way, links to all these sites can be found above at the top of this page. ALSO, by the way, I don't get a dime for "plugging" any of these sites, mind you, and I like it that way. I joke about being sponsored by Sigma some day, but in reality there is probably NO product or service in existence that I don't see at least one fault in, and so I'd rather not take anyone's money, ever. Of course free products are always cool! *cough* Sigma 85 1.4 *cough* )

Anyways, like I was saying, people waste a lot of time on the internet. There are the "knowledgeable", experienced photographers who try and preach a RAW / Canon / Mac gospel and speak in absolutes. And there are the beginners who stress out because of this preaching. In reality- Being condescending gets nobody anywhere. Really. Opinions are awesome, I love to hear them, but they're NOT fact. Oppositely, neither does "nice photo!" get you anywhere, when you really want to improve. I'm not condemning all "nice photo!" comments, because I indulge myself too... However when someone asks for useful, constructive criticism, you shouldn't worry too much about being gentle.

And that's the gist of any debate, whether it be Nikon versus Canon, RAW versus JPG, Mac versus PC, etc... The bottom line for me is this- the grass is always greener; experience both sides before making any decisions. If you're chugging along just fine with your current equipment or system, there's no need to stress out if some "pro" comes along and tells you you need to change this or buy that. When the time comes for you to get fed up with this or that, you'll KNOW, and change will be as simple as giving the "other side" a test run. It's great to seek advice, but be careful where you ask and always have a grain of salt handy. Have a big chunk of salt handy, if I'm the one giving the advice.

Just as a bonus round, here's a few questions I saw on Twitter that didn't get answered in time. I'd better get back to work so I'll make this quick...

@erinpurchase - D80 upgrade path:
The D300 and D300s are both very powerful, capable cameras if you're on a crop-sensor budget. I still shoot with a D300 regularly. The D700 is *the* camera to have for wedding / portraits, and in the long run you MUST own one as a serious professional,

@brandmanphoto - 50 1.4 focus issues:
Any lens f/2.8 or faster is going to give you focus problems at least once. The most important thing is to test lenses under controlled circumstances that eliminate any possibility of user error. Checking focus is as easy as using a tripod and taking multiple pictures of a stationary object, with a clear view of a foreground-background transition. Any newer camera that has "AF fine tuning" can correct a pretty considerable amount of front focus or backfocus on a lens by lens basis. ALSO, proper camera technique is important and that's what the camera workshop is for! Of course depending on what camera you have, an individual focus point itself may actually be out of alignment, and that's a more serious issue that you can't really adjust yourself.

@bsweetfoto - switching to film stuff?
Yeah, I think it's just a fad. Some people are just jumping on a bandwagon, but of course others are truly pursuing an artistic passion and "look" that only film can achieve. Personally, I shoot film as a hobby. As a camera geek I really enjoy the oldschool operation of a fully mechanical camera, and I just like the way slides and other films look. If you're interested in trying film out, I can highly recommend going on eBay and picking up some old, used gear. If you're wondering wheter or not film is going to be the next big thing, a trend essential to business survival, I definitely think NOT.

@peytoncooke - crop factor come in handy?
I like the crop sensor cameras for just a few reasons. First, the focus point spread which is outlined a few posts ago, HERE. Second, the compact size of my D300 and Sigma 50-150 2.8 is just fantastic compared to the equivalent 70-200 2.8 on full-frame. (Although of course if you shoot Canon, you do have the full-frame option of the 70-200 f/4, which is just as light as the Sigma 50-150 I think.) Third, well, they were a much more affordable option back in 2007 when I bought my last crop-sensor body, a D300. (although now you can get a used D700 for almost the same price as a new D300s!) Fourth, I do enjoy the extra reach because of my telephoto kind of style. I love using an 85 1.4 (or 1.8) on my D300. It's a great candid setup for extremely low light. ...At the end of the day however, you WILL want at least one full-frame body if you plan on shooting portraits or in low-light, especially in a professional capacity. So that is in your future, eventually. However that doesn't mean a crop sensor body is a waste of money in the long run. I outlined this philosophy HERE.

@marcweisberg - G-Tech backup drives:
Yep, I love G-Tech. They seem to be one of the more QUALITY brands out there. I like RAID 1 more than I like the DROBO concept. Ultimately, I'd love to have a G-SAFE. Or two.

...Anyways, maybe next week or next month, I'll turn on the "Xanga TV" feature and we can chat some more about camera gear. I better not do that tonight though, I've spent enough time on this for now and I gotta put a few more hours into taking care of my CLIENTS before the end of the day.

If you missed the [b] school broadcast, you can view it INSIDE the [b] school if you join. Honestly though, don't pay $10 just to see ME ramble on about cameras! The real reason to join is the fantastic community that I talked about, and the MUCH higher quality content that Becker and others have uploaded (videos) to the "classroom" section. If anything, skip your next five Starbucks binges, join the [b] school for a month, soak up as much knowledge as you can, and see what you think at the end of the month.

Take care!

=Matt=

Blog • Website • Articles • Workshops • Contact

Got a couple new workshop dates for anybody who wants to get together and work on natural light portraits, or workflow. Very simple, core concepts will be covered. Just 5 people, and everyone is welcome to re-attend future workshops of the same kind. (If you've already attended one of the previous "Workflowshops" or natural light portrait workshops, and are available on one of the upcoming dates, email me! Re-attendance is also limited to 5 people...

I really believe that the most progress in any endeavor does not come during the course of a 3-hour lecture or photo shoot, but from continued correspondence and mutual learning with friends. That's how I went from taking terrible photos to making half-decent images, at least.

The natural light portrait workshop is April 11th, and the next "Workflowshop" is April 25th.

/photos.matthewsaville.com/For-photographers/workshops/workshop-info

Side note: Considering the recent flurry of "industry" trash-talking, bashing, and hate mail, I hesitate to shout from the mountain tops "I'm hosting a workshop! Come learn from me!" So you won't hear very much about these things on my main blog or Twitter, just here on CameraTalk where this stuff belongs. And I certainly have no intention of ever hosting an all-inclusive, high-dollar workshop that covers everything from cameras to branding. Make no mistake, I HAVE attended workshops of that kind, and they are amazingly beneficial; I'm just not that kind of guy. I only *enjoy* chatting about cameras, light, and workflow. Not much else. I do what I gotta do to run a photography business, and if you wanna chat about that you're welcome to bribe me with lunch at Claim Jumper, or set up a private coaching session, but in general I'm trying to keep things low-key. I'd rather have friends than fans...

Take care,
=Matt=

(Nikon D300, Nikon 24mm f/2.8 AIS, tripod, SB800 fired manually during a 30 sec. exposure. 20-30 mins after sunset.)

Blog • Website • Articles • Workshops • Contact