Hi William/Paul, I ready your comments with interest and wonder if you'd care to comment on my the position I now find myself in. I have the opportunity to pick up a Minolta Flashmeter IV for a good price, but now the comments you both have made have given me pause. I currently have a very basic flash meter, and wanted the Minolta for more accuracy/flexibility (I'm getting into more studio work, with more multiple head setups) Having said that, I'm also planning on getting a DSLR in the next 12 months or so. Would you say I should just save my money on a meter I may not use when I've gone digital? Cheers, Simon
-----Original Message----- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, 12 April 2004 6:47 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: More thoughts on the istD in the studio I love the *istD in the studio. Sometimes I start with the flash meter, but I always end up just using the histograms. The PC socket location is nice because you can loop the cord over the top of the camera, which helps prevent disconnects. But to me, the big advantage of digital in the studio is that one can experiment more and see the results immediately. I frequently bring my laptop to the studio and download after a few shots, just to see where I'm at. It's a lot better than waiting for something from the lab. Paul On Apr 11, 2004, at 4:43 PM, William Robb wrote: > I shot a couple of gigs of pictures last night in the studio. > I was trying to make use of some of the features of the camera that I > have ignored up to now, such as the autofocus. > For portraiture, the selectable AF area function is really quite > nice. The sensor locations are pretty good, though the end ones are > next to useless. > Running the camera vertically with the grip is pretty nice. The > shutter button to 4 way switch distance is almost perfect for me. The > switch itself when used with the camera in vertical orientation is > quite good, far better than when being used to flip through menu > options on the LCD. > The camera is a bit short, and I found myself knocking the AF > selector button quite often. A lock on it, much like the lock on the > Program Plus on/off switch would be nice. > The PC socket initially is a pain, I started off cursing where it > was, and then came to like it. One of the bains of studio photography > is the flash disconnecting because of the stupid PC socket, which has > to be one of the most moronic designs for a plug in any application. > I quickly came to appreciate that a comfortable way to hold the > camera also involved holding the PC plug into the camera when > shooting vertically. > > The 31mm is, as expected, somewhat short for use in the studio, > although I did use if for a couple of longer shots. > I ended up using the 77 for most everything. I am getting used to the > look of it, I haven't liked it for portraiture up to now. I find it > is too sharp. I do like the working distance I get with it, and it's > inherent sharpness works advantageously with the sharper look of the > digital camera, providing that is what you want. > > I like not having to use a flash meter any more. The histogram is so > much nicer, and having immediate access to a preview, however small, > is great for visually checking light ratios. > > Depth of field is a bit of a bugger. It is difficult to throttle the > Normans back far enough to get a wide enough aperture to throw the > background out of focus. > My next shoot I won't be so lazy, and I'll take my Photogenics > downtown with me. I can throttle them back to just about nothing. > > I did a couple of side of the road landscapey shots with the 31mm > today. I will try to post some pictures later on. > > Thats all for now > > William Robb > >
