[awscreo]

I've been hired to help take photos for the prom at the local school. I thought it'd be a good learning experience, and relatively easy due to the size of the class (quite small).
What I've learned:

1. Studio setup (2 large softboxes with Pentax 540 and 360 on standard triggers) - went relatively well, image quality is spectacular (as expected), however I did have trouble focusing with my Tamron 70-200. Thankfully I was checking every shot at 100% and did not miss the images that were out of focus, but it did add to stress levels. Switching to f3.5 helped a lot with clarity, and getting things into focus. I would be happy to swap out my Tamron to a more modern lens in the upcoming years, hopefully to a 70-200 f4 whenever that comes out

2. Event photos with DFA 15-30 - it was quite challenging. AF just didn't want to help me at all, and it wasn't even that dark inside the tent that school has set up for the dance. AF didn't want to lock on subjects I'd place the focusing area on, would focus on things in the back more often than not. I've then switched to manually focusing with the distance scale which landed me with better shots. 12" fstoppers disc knock off helped a ton with lighting subjects with a single flash (540fgz).

3. Crowning was a bit of a mess - I decided to use the DFA 28-105 for the indoor crowning, thinking that newer lens with the modern focusing mechanism would land me more keepers, but unfortunately it just wasn't effective enough getting things in focus. It was pretty dark, I definitely understand that was part of the problem, but I still was kind of expecting better results from it. I think I lost few shots because of it, hopefully I'd be able to work around it in post. Setup was not perfect, people kept flashing me and throwing the metering off as well. I see that I need more practice with using flash indoors before taking any other gigs for sure.

4. I used a single set of batteries for all my flashes, I brought like 24 batteries with me

5. I think maybe next time I'll just rent 24-70 and don't bring any other lenses with me, reducing the clutter. It was pretty challenging to keep all the gear in check while switching lenses, flashes, softboxes etc in tight spaces.

This is it so far, I'll be editing pics this week and hopefully I took enough images to make everyone happy in the end of the day.
But I'll be cautious taking another event gig for now, somehow my gear just doesn't give me enough confidence for that particular field yet

---

Last edited by awscreo; 05-14-2018 at 09:36 AM.

[gerardbaron]

How did you avoid the 360 to not turn off every so minutes?

[awscreo]

How did you avoid the 360 to not turn off every so minutes?

It did turn off once, but I packed my schedule tight enough to have people coming in for portraits as soon as previous couple was done. Also, when I thought pause was too long, I just pressed the "Test" button on the transmitter to shoot the flashes and restart the timer. Not ideal, but worked out ok in the end.

[gerardbaron]

It did turn off once, but I packed my schedule tight enough to have people coming in for portraits as soon as previous couple was done. Also, when I thought pause was too long, I just pressed the "Test" button on the transmitter to shoot the flashes and restart the timer. Not ideal, but worked out ok in the end.

Which transmitter did you used?

[pentageek]

Event photos with DFA 15-30

UWA lens in general are known for quite problematic AF, Have you used mostly wider or narrower end?

[awscreo]

UWA lens in general are known for quite problematic AF, Have you used mostly wider or narrower end?

Both ends. I remember my buddy few years back shooting with the Canon 11-24 at the events, and was having better luck (with 5DSr). Before that I think he was using the 16-35 as well.

I'd imagine 24-70 would be a better focusing lens in this situation?

---------- Post added 05-14-18 at 11:00 AM ----------

Which transmitter did you used?

I bought Cowboy Studios simple transmitters, nothing fancy. I was thinking to get the Cactus ones, but honestly just figured it'd be more expensive than what I'd get out of this gig

[pentageek]

I'd imagine 24-70 would be a better focusing lens in this situation?

It depends on shooting situation - I think a comparison of 28-105@28 and 15-30@30 would be a good starting point, as you have got both lenses, and 28-105, albeit slower than 24-70, offers decent AF performance. The other option (which I use with Irix 15mm), is hyperfocal distance. Manual focusing has already landed you more keepers, so with little preparation hyperfocal method could solve the problem.

[awscreo]

It depends on shooting situation - I think a comparison of 28-105@28 and 15-30@30 would be a good starting point, as you have got both lenses, and 28-105, albeit slower than 24-70, offers decent AF performance. The other option (which I use with Irix 15mm), is hyperfocal distance. Manual focusing has already landed you more keepers, so with little preparation hyperfocal method could solve the problem.

The DFA 28-105 didn't nail a lot of shots from the indoor stuff. It often missed by like half of an inch (as it seems), and eyes aren't in full focus. It might be user error, I was shooting in pretty brisky pace, but I still felt it under performed even compared to what I felt my older MFT system could do. If 24-70 is better for event stuff, I'd consider renting it or buying one to replace the 28-105.

[Dericali]

The DFA 28-105 didn't nail a lot of shots from the indoor stuff. It often missed by like half of an inch (as it seems), and eyes aren't in full focus. It might be user error, I was shooting in pretty brisky pace, but I still felt it under performed even compared to what I felt my older MFT system could do. If 24-70 is better for event stuff, I'd consider renting it or buying one to replace the 28-105.

24-70 is way better than the 28-105, the autofocus is more accurate, and constant f2.8 makes a huge difference when shooting at the longer focal lengths. IMO, If you're shooting at f5.6 in poor lighting you have very little chance of nailing shots (unless you've push up the ISO almost unusably very high), which I'm guessing might be the situation you described with the crowning. Constant aperture is also much more efficient since your exposure settings don't have to be changed when you zoom. 24mm is also probably about as wide as you will ever need 99.8% of shots at a normal event.

[BarryE]

It depends on shooting situation - I think a comparison of 28-105@28 and 15-30@30 would be a good starting point, as you have got both lenses, and 28-105, albeit slower than 24-70, offers decent AF performance. The other option (which I use with Irix 15mm), is hyperfocal distance. Manual focusing has already landed you more keepers, so with little preparation hyperfocal method could solve the problem.

Strangely since getting an Irix, I'm beginning to re-learn how good manual focusing is, especially with LV, magnified view and a loupe. I've been using it, recently, for different lenses and situations. I've occasionally been disappointed with AF in the past. Now I wonder if I generally expect too much of it and manual focusing is sometimes (often ?) likely to be more sucessful... Next I'll be using plates and a black cape over my head ;-)

[awscreo]

24-70 is way better than the 28-105, the autofocus is more accurate, and constant f2.8 makes a huge difference when shooting at the longer focal lengths. IMO, If you're shooting at f5.6 in poor lighting you have very little chance of nailing shots (unless you've push up the ISO almost unusably very high), which I'm guessing might be the situation you described with the crowning. Constant aperture is also much more efficient since your exposure settings don't have to be changed when you zoom. 24mm is also probably about as wide as you will ever need 99.8% of shots at a normal event.

I was using 28mm at 3.5 though, mostly. I know 2.8 is still faster, so there should be an advantage there. I'd be interested to rent the 24-70 just to compare focus speed between two lenses. But I'm a bit concerned with reports of soft-ish edges, don't know how much of a problem they are. 28-105 seems to be pretty sharp in that regard.

[pentageek]

I was using 28mm at 3.5 though, mostly. I know 2.8 is still faster, so there should be an advantage there.

At 28mm the advantage is minimal, but it changes when FL gets longer. In low light 24-70 will always win because it can provide more light to AF sensor. I think we have two issues here: inadequate performance of 15-30, where hyperfocal distance could be of help, and inadequate performance of 28-105, where faster lens would be useful, especially when the site is dark. If you can rent 24-70, simply do this and test the lens, this is the best way to find out whether it suits your needs.

Strangely since getting an Irix, I'm beginning to re-learn how good manual focusing is

I use 12-24 on APS-C. It has AF, but I think that at wider end there is no significant advantage over MF of Irix. Quite surprisingly, manual focusing is not the thing of the past