Haven't posted much here, lately. I have an enormous backlog of stuff to get through. But, I've just got home from a wonderful day/night and thought I'd share some images.
The original 5D, released in August 2005, is likely the finest camera Canon ever made.
When I shoot weddings, the 85mm f/1.8 USM is permanently attached, to give the most wonderful, Romantic, and intimate portrait images.
It takes just as beautiful an image today, almost 6 and-a-half years later, as it did the day it was released.
Nice shots H, but I wonder about your comments regarding the 5D vs newer offerings.
Are these shots really "pushing the envelope" with your 5D? These subjects are well lit and you're using a fast lens, so I presume you're operating at a fairly low ISO. With well lit subjects, the differences between my 6yo camera and a 1yo camera are small, but for low-light subjects the newer sensors produce far superior results in terms of noise, colour accuracy and dynamic range.
I know the older chips have larger pixels with their lower MP count, and there are physical reasons why this is superior, but I believe the electronics attached to the chips have come a long way in 6 years.
I'm not disregarding the results you are producing with this camera when used in this manner, but I don't agree it would be Canon's finest offering.
I have shot a number of weddings too - but back in the film days using a mix of 35mm, 6x6cm and 6x7. I shot both colour and black and white. I still use film but have of course embraced digital too. I'd say my laptop screen is a bit on the rubbishy side, but I got much better looking skin tones with kodak vericolor film than these. Maybe I'm missing something for that reason.
guy
Greg, cheers. I love shooting that lens wide open. It's quite sharp and the shallow depth-of-field is wonderful. However, I never mentioned anything about skin tones, here...
Troy, as mentioned on iMessage, the two outdoors images of her were natural light with reflector fill, with the sun behind her left shoulder (when looking into the image). The final image was a bare flash aimed at them, and exposed for a bit below ambient for separation.
David, thanks. I never said that these images were pushing the envelope, nor was the camera. If we were discussing high ISO sensor/noise performance, then, yes, my 5D Mark II apes the 5D. What I did mention, though, was the quality that the camera delivers when coupled with that particular lens. I have shot enough weddings and portraits with both systems, and, I can tell you, that I am simply unable to achieve the same look to portraits that the original 5D delivers. The 5D Mark II gives a busload more resolution, but, there is an intangible quality to the original 5D when it comes to portraiture; something that I can't quite put my finger on, but, I can see it, and, so can many other people -- particularly those who own that camera and put an effort into making pictures.
Perhaps, I should have mentioned that it was in my opinion (although, it's not just me; there's plenty of testimonials online) that considers it the finest camera that Canon made. Perhaps, I should have qualified my comment even further my adding "finest portraiture camera".
Cheers, Jeanette and Frank!
Guy, thanks for your comment. I saw a couple of your black and whites you posted in the IISAC thread and I loved what I saw! Were they shot with a 'blad? I've also gone back to 120 film, and thoroughly enjoying it! It really makes you think about what you're doing; it forces you to practise photography. However, again, I never said anything about skin tones.
I've just got a bunch of Astia 120 back today and I have been admiring the slides all afternoon. I just love the way Astia renders skin tones. It's realistic and low contrast -- something I've been a fan of since I took up photography, and, something which I've been criticised for in the past. I'm not sure if we can really compare film and digital, because there's so many different types of films, all specialising in something or other; black and white portraiture, to wildlife to landscapes, and, so on. A lot of it also comes down to scanning, as well. The scans I received today were pretty much rubbish, with a very, very heavy red bias, particularly in the shadows.
At the end of the day, I try and make pictures which the couples will hopefully cherish each time they pick up their wedding album; I think very hard about what I'm doing, as oppose to just taking snapshots.
Judging by her SMS to me after viewing these very images this morning, "Oh wow, those pics look AMAZING" I think I'm doing OK.
Thought I'd mix it up a bit, as no-one posts any portraiture on here. Like landscapes, it's something I'd love to see more of. Making photos of people is extremely difficult, particularly when you're having to think on your feet and pressed for time.
Hi H
I like the first and third images , some of the others the back ground look a bit busy for my liking .
The one of the couple snogging looks like a car add and the the last pic looks like she's worried a baby bump is showing.maybe crop out her hand.
If its not skin tones what makes the 5D better for portraits ?
Hope you don't think I'm being too critical your shots are better than ones I used to do at weddings when I was young and silly enough to try to make a quid from it.
Wedding photography has to be the hardest way to to make a quid in photography , If you can do it , make a living and keep your sanity more power to you.
I saw a good review of the 85mm F1.8 versus F1.2 L lens recently on digitalrev TV. Both sound good. Have you tried the F1.2? Per this review it sounded like the go.
5D's are selling on Gumtree now for under $1000. I saw one for $900 the other day.
Thanks for the comments! Yeah, I know that the background is a bit busy in a couple, but, it's very hard to get the perfect background when /they've/ chosen the location to be shot at. I have to work with what I have, and to a deadline -- the limousine driver was waiting to take us to the next stop.
I honestly can't tell you what it is about the original 5D that makes it so wonderful for portraits. The images just have this certain... texture, almost? I really don't know. But, I can see something. A quick Google search will take you to posts by others who also observe the same thing. It's a bit like the 3-dimensionality which is most prevalent with shots taken with the 1Ds Mark III. That camera has something that, again, my 5D nor my 5D Mark II can't do. It's why they cost the big bucks! When I get the chance, I will put up two images, side-by-side; one taken with the older camera and one taken with the newer camera. You will note a particular look to one image over the other. That's the 5D magic.
You are right; wedding photography is hard, not just mentally, but, physically, as well. I carry two cameras; one with the 85mm stuck on it predominantly, and, the other I switch between the 24-105 and 70-200. After a day/weekend of carrying them around, you're stuffed. Just as well I've been running and hitting the gym again lately so can put up with it a bit better now than I used to. At the end of the day, my trigger finger would be tingling, my right arm, shoulder and back would be stuffed for a couple of days afterwards.
Greg, I haven't tried the 85mm f/1.2L, but, it's something I'd love to get in the future. The 85mm f/1.8 is ridiculously sharp, even wide open; stop it down to f/2 or f/2.2 and it is superb.
I would stay away from Gumtree. Gumtree: you will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.
Thanks, gents.
H
Last edited by Octane; 07-02-2012 at 08:56 AM.
Reason: s/can/can't
I've been thinking about why you have such great success with this particular lens and camera combo
My hunch is that the resolving "limit" of that lens matches the sensor is a particular mathematical way that you are hitting a theoretical maximum. A "sweet-spot" perhaps.
The newer sensors may well show up flaws or limitations in lenses that look good on a lower resolution sensor.
DT
PS. The above is probably just dribble and I really should just go to bed!
, some of the others the back ground look a bit busy for my liking .
maybe crop out her hand.
