DSLRUsers.com

Ron Reznick has kindly sent me shots of his method for holding a camera.


The Portrait hold is here:

http://www.trapagon.com/temp/PortraitHold.jpg

The landscape hold is here:

http://www.trapagon.com/temp/LandscapeHold.jpg

Ron Reznick's site

http://www.digital-images.net


Rodger.

Is that a D2x he is holding?

Chris

sirhc55 wrote:Is that a D2x he is holding?

Chris

That's the D1x! these are around 2 YO photos from him, first posted on DPR.

Birddog114 wrote:

sirhc55 wrote:Is that a D2x he is holding?

Chris

That's the D1x! these are around 2 YO photos from him, first posted on DPR.

And to think I have just had my eyes tested

Chris

I saw the post on dpreview forum last year,but I couldn't find it ,so I asked for his help and he sent the links.

I thought they may be of interest to members.

Sorry if it's old news

Rodger.

chris,

i tend to agree with you. these must be updated pictures. D1x doesnt have the red strip under the shutter does it?

Actually, that is a D2h... these are updated versions of the shots I originally posted on DPreview -- I redid them for the eBook.

The D2x will be here in early March, most likely. I've not yet seen one.

I hope these holds help you. They most certainly should increase your yield at difficult shutter speeds, but the holds require a little practice before they will be second nature to you.

Ron

dperrett wrote:chris,

i tend to agree with you. these must be updated pictures. D1x doesnt have the red strip under the shutter does it?

If it's not a D1x, it's a D2h then, Couple day ago, on DPR he posted a reply to people asking him about the D2x and he confirmed he haven't received it yet

Ron Reznick wrote:Actually, that is a D2h... these are updated versions of the shots I originally posted on DPreview -- I redid them for the eBook.

The D2x will be here in early March, most likely. I've not yet seen one.

I hope these holds help you. They most certainly should increase your yield at difficult shutter speeds, but the holds require a little practice before they will be second nature to you.

Ron

Welcome aboard Ron and thanks for the clarification. I have your ebook and must say I found it very engrossing reading.

Chris

Thanks... it was interesting, going through the procedure to get in :^)

I'm pleased you found the book worth spending some time with. Practice!

Ron

WOo Hoo!!! Anothe Californian! And I'm trying to get my brother to join as well....Were slowly taking over the world!!!! Welcome Ron. What shutter speeds do you have success with these holds? And I assume those are primes your shooting? Does the "cradle?" cause any lens creep if attempted with zooms?

Andy

I have two zooms that I work with (17-35 and 70-200). The rest are primes. There really isn't a problem with focal length alteration as long as you're reasonably careful. Of course, if you're going to use this hold you're going to have to set the focal length on the zoom first, unless you have a truly educated elbow :^)

The shutter speed you can achieve will be dependent on the focal length and how stable you are. Stability increases with practice... what I'd suggest is to take a breath, let a little out and hold it.

I can typically get a 100% yield at the reciprocal of the focal length, a 50-75% yield at 1/2 the reciprocal, and a 25% yield at 1/4-1/3 the reciprocal of the focal length (the reciprocal is 1/focal length). For instance, if I'm shooting with a 28mm lens at 1/10 sec., I'll shoot a sequence of four. Usually, two are sharp to my admittedly ridiculous standards, but at least one will be. Know what your yield capabilities are and shoot accordingly.

For instance, this is a 1/10 sec. handheld shot at f/5.6 with the 85mm. This is a really marginal shot at 1/8 the reciprocal of the focal length. I took four shots in sequence. I got three clean ones, but one critically-sharp shot to my standards.

http://www.digital-images.net/temp/Morn ... 32sRGB.jpg



Ron

Ron,
I love your techniques & shots same as your workflows, I've learned lot from your ebook since I got it.
Last time since we talked, I dreamt to be the owner of 28/1.4, after few months sourcing, I got it last December same as the 200-400VR, I'll get the Wimberly Side kick to go with it soon, now I use the RRS-BH55 and the G1325 with the beast, very slow in action shoot and panning once it mounted on the head so the Wimberly Sidekick is a must.
Now I understand how did you proud of the 28/1.4 and your techniques mainly using prime lenses instead of zoom, as I have seen many pics from your Japan trip last year same as your workshops accross the USA, mainly in Washington DC and Yellowstone etc...
Well, wish one day we're able to drag you to Down Under for a workshop,
talked about it with few other members but haven't get the ball rolls yet, or I'll have a vacation and join one of your workshops there.

I've got an RRS head on order -- it will get here sometime this year (hopefully).

You'll find that using a gimbal makes ALL the difference when working with a long lens. Locating and tracking a subject is so much easier...

That 28/1.4D is very expensive, but it, along with the 85/1.4D, allow for extreme flexibility when shooting in variable light and in difficult lighting conditions, and the shot yield is extremely high in situations where you generally can't shoot at all (plus, they offer some artistic capabilities that cannot be achieved with anything else). They really stress the bank account, but once you get over the cost you have a near-constant smile on your face. :^)

Regarding zooms vs primes: the quality of primes is generally far higher, and you get aperture flexibility that you don't get with the zooms (at the expense of focal length flexibility). They both have their place, but except in the case of the wide end I generally prefer to go with the primes.

There are situations when you are better served by a telephoto zoom, of course, and the 70-200 is a very special lens. I was looking for a medium-telephoto zoom that met my criteria for quality for nearly two years, and tried everything... that was the first one that I kept, and it was good enough that I finally sold my 300/4 AFS when I discovered that the VR zoom gave a higher shot yield with nearly the same quality at various apertures even with the TC-14e mounted.

The 200-400 is without a doubt THE finest zoom lens I've ever seen. It gets better results stopped down a little, but it is most certainly usable wide open (which is a first for a zoom in my experience). There are times when I wish I had one, but I think I'm going to replace the 300/2.8 AFS-II that Frank talked me out of with the 300/2.8 VR instead, as the 300mm offers an extra stop (which is necessary when shooting at dawn and dusk, or when additional isolation is desired). That extra stop, combined with the extreme quality at the first two stops, offsets the necessity to use the TCs for reach, and the flexibility of the zoom (in my opinion).

I do, however, think that if you are certain that you want to get ONE lens for wildlife, the 200-400 should be that lens. It offers the best compromise of speed, focal length flexibility, aperture flexibility and quality. To achieve better results and more overall flexibility requires two expensive primes (the 300mm and 500mm) with a greater cost and higher carrying weight.

Anyway, selecting primes or zooms is all about convenience and focal length flexibility vs. aperture flexibility and ultimate quality at wide apertures. It's a tough decision sometimes, but only you know what is right for your shooting style, needs and budget.

Ron

Thanks Ron,
Yeah! the RRS-BH55Pro is the ones I've been waiting long for ordering, and got it before Xmas, what can I say about its design and engineering, very precisely and beauti, I 'll do more research on the gimbal prior to make the decision in between it and the Wimberley sidekick.

Well said! I'm totally agreed with you on the 70-200VR and I have one, mostly mount on one of my 3 camera bodies (D70/D100/D2h), that's the first zoom lens in my inventory with the words "never leave home without it". I love it dearly with the TC 1.4 & 1.7.

The 28 + 85/1.4 are also in my bag everywhere I travel and I can see what you means about these and zoom lens(es).

I ordered the 300AF-S/2.8 last year in June but cancelled it due to the release and availibility of the 200-400VR and am proud of it, it's heavy but I ferry it in my times outing.

My name on the waiting list of 300/ VR, ETA is early March, I'm counting down now.

I'd say that this is a no-brainer. You should just get it. It will make a tremendous difference in your ability to acquire and track wildlife, most esp. birds in flight. It turns a heavy lens into a weightless wonder.

Ron

Hi Ron,
Please direct me to the Gimbal website.
Thanks

Have just found it.
Is this the ones:
http://www.pro-gpi.com/gimbals.htm

Hi Ron,
Did you have your set up with the Gimbal yet?
If yes, please post a pics for our ref.
TIA

If you already have a ball head, this is probably what you want to consider:



http://tripodhead.com/products/sidekick-main.cfm

Ron

Ron Reznick wrote:If you already have a ball head, this is probably what you want to consider:



http://tripodhead.com/products/sidekick-main.cfm

Ron

Ron,
Yes, that's exactly what I'm going to order and talked about.

Birddog,

Going to hang the 200-440VR off the Wimberley Sidekick 'SK-100'

Looks like a good setup .


Cheers,

fozzie wrote:Birddog,

Going to hang the 200-440VR off the Wimberley Sidekick 'SK-100'

Looks like a good setup .


Cheers,

fozzie,
That what I posted before, the RRS-BH55Pro won do justice in fast action shooting of birds and planes, I have lot of plays in the last two weeks and decided to get the Sidekick for improvemnet in quick action shooting
VR helps for handholding but not long with this beast and my future 300/VR.
That make me think on some zoom lenses as Bigma on the tri or monopod
and other VR series lenses like 80-400VR or 70-200VR, you don't need the legs for it if you want shooting fast and flexi.

Hi guys,

I thought you might want to check out some shots I have up in the blind -- these are my temp directories, which I use for posting images on DPreview.

http://www.trapagon.com/temp/

http://www.digital-images.net/temp/

a few sample shots:

The bridge photo, 28mm at F1.4, sharpness is very impressive.

ron
this is A1 stuff. your website and postings that is. can you help me with a lens selection? im buying a nikon 80-200 f2.8 zoom how do they rate for sport phoyography?and do they suit a manfrotto monopod OK. B&H say that a lens collar is included in the deal is this OK?
your comments would be greatly appreciated

jethro

Thanks, Philip. The 28/1.4D is an absolutely exquisite lens. It's sharp at f/1.4 at distance, but it improves until you hit the sweet spot between f/2.8 and f/5.6, where it's essentially perfect. This was shot at f/5.6 as I needed the extra depth of field due to the oblique angle, and I wanted the light rays to be more sharply defined and longer.

Jethro, I assume you're referring to the 80-200 AF-D. This is really a very good lens for midrange-to-distance work. It focuses about 70% as fast as the AFS and tracks quite well (it does transfer some torque when focusing though, so if you're shooting long-ish exposures, let the lens lock before firing). It will work well on a monopod. Consider rigging a strap on the pod that will allow you to sling it to your shoulder as a third tension spot for even more stability.

Ron

I have had the chance to borrow the 28/1.4... mmmm that was nice..

Stunning photos Ron... The colours in your two cityscapes are just awesome...

How did they look out of camera? Any special settings (curves?)

Very nice indeed.

Oh and I should add: Thanks VERY much for posting up your poses... I had been using the portrait pose for a while, but had not yet had a go at the landscape one... Very generous of you.

I don't use custom curves -- the only time those are even remotely useful is when the light is constantly the same (e.g. in a specific studio setup).

I detail my workflow exhaustively in the processing sections of the eBook, if you have one, and if not, there are a large number of samples of all sorts of image types for you to work with, and a ton of information showing you how to process rapidly and consistently in a wide variety of typical (as well as some very difficult) situations.

Essentially, a general description of the workflow is:

1. EV and WB adjustments;
2. Shadow balancing along with individual channel gamma adjustments;
3. Global shadow and gamma adjustments (if necessary)

Other than that the only thing done in the processing phase is apply a USM calculated to offset the anti-aliasing filter, and save as a master file. That master file is then post-processed for touch-up, rotation, cropping, and resizing as necessary.

Ron

Ron Reznick wrote:I don't use custom curves -- the only time those are even remotely useful is when the light is constantly the same (e.g. in a specific studio setup).

I detail my workflow exhaustively in the processing sections of the eBook, if you have one, and if not, there are a large number of samples of all sorts of image types for you to work with, and a ton of information showing you how to process rapidly and consistently in a wide variety of typical (as well as some very difficult) situations.

Essentially, a general description of the workflow is:

1. EV and WB adjustments;
2. Shadow balancing along with individual channel gamma adjustments;
3. Global shadow and gamma adjustments (if necessary)

Other than that the only thing done in the processing phase is apply a USM calculated to offset the anti-aliasing filter, and save as a master file. That master file is then post-processed for touch-up, rotation, cropping, and resizing as necessary.

Ron

I'm with Ron and as spoken with Geoff + Bel yesterday same as few discussion with other members previously, I always shoot RAW/ NO CUSTOM CURVE/ and with EV & WB.
Are my important part of my digital photo knowledgeable, I 'll have heap of room to play around in NC and PSCS after if needed.

Great, that is exactly what I wanted to know... I agree entierly and get very amused seeing people discuss which CC is best etc...

What makes those photos stand out is the composition... apeals to my taste

Ron - a further questionre: curves. Do you strictly use the normal tone curve or are there times you use other in-camera preset curves?

MHD: I find the colour response & saturation output by the sensor changes depeding upon the exposure. As I predominantly shoot Jpeg, the latitude for incorrect exposure recovery is slim. This is where the custom curves help for me. I prefer the lower contrast curves that lift exposures in shadows and render colour saturation closer to that of middle grey exposures, which helps depict in the overall scene closer to what the eye sees.
If you consistently nail your exposures, there's less need to worry about curves, but having one eg. (fotogenic's P&S v4) provides extra lattitude for recovery of highlight details that may have inadvertantly blown and unrecoverable otherwise.

Bottom line: with all due respect, the Reznick way is not the only correct way for image acquisition and processing.

hehe... there is no one way...

Actually... I jumped a bit there... (engage brain before mouth!)

I agree entirely Onyx...

I never said there is only one way.

I use Less Contrast as my Tone Compensation setting to reduce the blocking of shadows and blowing of highlights (except in situations where highlights should reach full saturation and dynamic range is greater than the camera can accept). A custom curve can reach right out and bite you, but of course you are the best judge of what is right for your needs.

If you shoot JPG, you must hit the WB very closely (miss low), and you have to nail the exposure too -- any errors are either difficult or impossible to recover. RAW offers you far more latitude as well as fine tuning capabilities. Your call there though.

Ron

Had a very quick try of these grips and noticed that the camera was much steadier instantly. Thanks for sharing.

Glad to be of assistance, Pippin.

I'd like some advice on the vertical camera grip - I just can't seem to do it - I think my arms are too short. Has anyone else reported the same problem, or do you think I must just not be doing it correctly?

If others have had the same problem, any "short arm" alternatives that might also work?

Get into position for the landscape grip, then without changing the location of your left hand (braced around your right forearm), just raise your right elbow and shoulder until you are in portrait position. Your left hand/arm will follow. They're attached...

Voila.

Hey! It works!

Thanks very much Ron.