View Single Post
Old 01-16-2013, 10:26 PM   #2135
xluben
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 261612
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Vehicle:
2012 Forester 2.5X
2002 WRX Sedan

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KLBO View Post
Trust me having the correct WB whether shooting RAW or JPEG does MATTER. It's the difference between a person having the right color or them looking like an alien. Sure you can fix it in post, but it isnt always right.

I shoot about 20+ weddings a year and before I take any shot (especially when the main light source has changed) i re-do my WB.

For my work, I find that having the correct WB in camera yields much better photos. And it saves a ton of time when editing. When editing thousands of photos every week getting it right (WB) in camera is crucial.
Getting to the correct WB is extremely important, but if you understand post processing, there is no way that doing it in camera is "better". At best it's the same. Yes, it can save time later, but I would argue that it takes less time overall (using a mouse and keyboard interface vs. tiny screen and little buttons on a camera). And I'd rather take my time editing it at home, than waste time trying to set it perfectly while on a shoot. Especially a wedding.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INKMAN View Post
Thanks for all the info guys! One last question; does using the my flash effect anything or is it the same as processing any other RAW file?
Quote:
Originally Posted by INKMAN View Post
I have a 430EXII mounted flash
As mentioned before, flash is usually betweek 5000-5500K. Normal light bulbs are maybe 2700K and regular florescents are probably a little over 3000K. So if you are mixing flash and indoor lighting it just won't work. You either have to gel the flash to match the color temp, or adjust your settings such that the flash is your only source of light. If you have mixed lighting you will never be able to get the white balance correct.

Quote:
Originally Posted by king. View Post
As far as glass goes, I can't stress enough about getting out of the kit lens series ie 18-55, 55-250, etc. If you don't feel like shelling out for pro L glass, sigma and tokina are still viable options that will produce good results.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubert69 View Post
18-55mm is a fantastic lens. At least for Nikon it is. Super sharp.
The 18-55 IS and 55-250 IS from Canon are also very, very good lenses for the price. IMO they lack in build and AF speed. The image quality is actually quite good. Sure they don't have an f/2.8 aperture, but depending what your goals are (let's say you're shooting a static subject, at f/8, and you only want to use the image for web use), then it will probably look exactly like a $1000 "L" lens would look. The 3rd party lenses can be good, but generally I've found the quality control can be pretty bad. Within the same model you could get one copy that's better than an "L" lens and the next is worse than a kit lens.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
xluben is online now   Reply With Quote