DSLRUsers.com

Flew down to Melbourne to check out the 'Gorgeous' fashion event it included Fashion Eisteddfod 2005, works mostly from the talented students at RMIT. I organized a press pass to cover the event for Cream magazine. I love Melbourne it's the fashion and design captial of Australia and generally everyone is very pleasant.
I rented a 70-200VR f2.8 lens and used it on my d2x with sb800

I got a good position on a raised paltform 5 metres away from the end of the catwalk , there were many other photographers so i got a lot of overexposed shots from their flashes, i decided to take pics mid runway at 200mm but due to the short distance of the runway and me I took most at 80-105mm, VR on active 'full', shutter ranging from 250 to 400 ISO 400 f2.8 and flash on ttl fp
The lighting dynamically changed and the main spot illuminating the end of the runway where the models posed got blown out and never got fixed. However there was a good lighting sweetspot midway and at each corner of the catwalk.

Funny bits first, for entertainment event staff got involved in a zoolander style walkoff, showing off their 'Magnum' a Grunged out Spunky girl from Rokk Ebony spat a cheeky reprise to established fashionable attitudes.


This guy won with his slapstick portrayal of a crossdressed fashion victim.
I think he was trying to make a statement about the effects of globalisation on consumerism, but it was lost when he revealed his fake boobs.


Because of the lighting prob this dress didn't look as nice on the catwalk so i took it again with the designer, I think it's really innovative. It was part of the fashion Eisteddfod segment.


These shots are the featured parades from some of the sponsors, Kookai, Mazi and other young up start designer labels
Standard shot at 80mm, thought i should get full body shot in


I like the tight crop of 200mm and the more exentuated differential focus in the background






at 200mm midway




first pic on the left starting to get tired holding the heavy camera and lens
framing starting to fall off, a monopod is essential.


The fashion Eisteddfod segment was much more innovative in terms of fashion and presentation as student work is, I will post images later.

there were over 20 shows so i got a fair amount of practice on the 70-200VR and now i want one.
I also used the single servo 'S' mode on the D2x so it would take the picture only when in focus, previously i always used 'C' mode dynamic tracking focus which screwed up quite a few images

Thanks to Glen again for recomending Borge imaging in Crows Nest, Syd I got the 70-200VR for $66 a day

Wendellt,
VR on active is not a "full VR" that may caused you not having a lot of keeper, VR on active is only used when you're on moving as sitting in a car or boat, not standing or sitting on the ground or on the tripod.

If you shot with the 70-200VR and quality same as the colour came out like the above pics, more yellowish IMHO, what are you expecting your 80-400VR will do for you?

Pls. note: wide open on the 70-200VR is not its sweet spot, and the 80-400VR required more lighting than these, it's at f.4.

Birddog114 wrote:If you shot with the 70-200VR and quality same as the colour came out like the above pics, more yellowish IMHO, what are you expecting your 80-400VR will do for you?

Pls. note: wide open on the 70-200VR is not its sweet spot, and the 80-400VR required more lighting than these, it's at f.4.

VR on active mode yeah I got some bad shots, well it's an ongoing learning experience

I am not going to shoot fashion with the 80-400 i will use that lens for general telephoto work out in daylight
For fashion i will save up for an 85 f/1.4 or a 70-200Vr f/2.8, 85.1.4 buy this year 70-200 buy next year when they become readily available, i can just rent it for now per event.

The lighting at the show was horrible even with flash i got a dark image which is which is the style i like, but in this case just a bit too dark and inconsistent lighting.

Nice shots Wendell, Thanks for sharing and I'm glad you had a sucessful trip.

wendellt wrote:
For fashion i will save up for an 85 f/1.4 or a 70-200Vr f/2.8, 85.1.4 buy this year 70-200 buy next year when they become readily available, i can just rent it for now per event.

Rental is $66.00/ day x 3 days.
I think the amount of money you paid for rental is better buying yourself a brand new one at AU$2650.00, for few times of paying for a rental lens, the total sum will pay off your new 70-200VR.

Price of the Nikkor 85/1.4 is increased lately and will become rare soon.
So far, no indication of the returning of the 70-200VR's production is scheduled for this last quarter and first quarter of the 06.

US market may get some but still not available worldwide as before.

Some very nice keepers there! I would be happy!

Birddog114 wrote:

wendellt wrote:
For fashion i will save up for an 85 f/1.4 or a 70-200Vr f/2.8, 85.1.4 buy this year 70-200 buy next year when they become readily available, i can just rent it for now per event.

Rental is $66.00/ day x 3 days.
I think the amount of money you paid for rental is better buying yourself a brand new one at AU$2650.00, for few times of paying for a rental lens, the total sum will pay off your new 70-200VR.

Price of the Nikkor 85/1.4 is increased lately and will become rare soon.
So far, no indication of the returning of the 70-200VR's production is scheduled for this last quarter and first quarter of the 06.

US market may get some but still not available worldwide as before.

Well at AU$2650 i would buy one but from where? there is a waiting list as long as a squished turkey. I'd better get my 85 f1.4 soon!
thanks birddog you always know how to apply the pressure at just the right time.

Looks like you had a great weekend Wendell.
Is that confetti in the 2nd last bunch of pictures? or do you have a lot of dust bunnies
You've done well with a lens you've never used before plus the dodgy lighting set up!

No criticism of your shots but in my view they seemed to lack punch and the colours seem a bit yellowy and washed out. Maybe they could do with a bit of curve surgery and WB correction?

wendellt wrote:

Birddog114 wrote:

wendellt wrote:
For fashion i will save up for an 85 f/1.4 or a 70-200Vr f/2.8, 85.1.4 buy this year 70-200 buy next year when they become readily available, i can just rent it for now per event.

Rental is $66.00/ day x 3 days.
I think the amount of money you paid for rental is better buying yourself a brand new one at AU$2650.00, for few times of paying for a rental lens, the total sum will pay off your new 70-200VR.

Price of the Nikkor 85/1.4 is increased lately and will become rare soon.
So far, no indication of the returning of the 70-200VR's production is scheduled for this last quarter and first quarter of the 06.

US market may get some but still not available worldwide as before.

Well at AU$2650 i would buy one but from where? there is a waiting list as long as a squished turkey. I'd better get my 85 f1.4 soon!
thanks birddog you always know how to apply the pressure at just the right time.

There's one, but you never notice and you don't care to notice coz you're chasing all those young models around the runway

Wendell. These are great, you're really developing a nice feel for the images. They are a it on the yellow side, but I'd say that's in large part due to the weird lighting you'd have dealt with. My pick is the fashion Eisteddfod segment shot with the designer since it's such a lovely natural moment in amongst all the stilted things around it.

Wendell
Good tight images shot under trying conditions. Well done! A couple of comments...the lighting is obviously tricky and the images could do with a little more critical colour balancing.....or make them B&W...they would still hold up. You say that some of your images were over-exposed because of the flashes from other photographers? No way!...consider that the SB800 fires at around 1/8000 of a second...if you had a hundred photographers firing flash then what are the chances that your shutter would be open when one of their flashguns was firing? Almost nil. I think your images have the potential to be P/processed to a state where they would be supurb by any measure. Thank you for posting them.

Matt. K wrote:Wendell
Good tight images shot under trying conditions. Well done! A couple of comments...the lighting is obviously tricky and the images could do with a little more critical colour balancing.....or make them B&W...they would still hold up. You say that some of your images were over-exposed because of the flashes from other photographers? No way!...consider that the SB800 fires at around 1/8000 of a second...if you had a hundred photographers firing flash then what are the chances that your shutter would be open when one of their flashguns was firing? Almost nil. I think your images have the potential to be P/processed to a state where they would be supurb by any measure. Thank you for posting them.

Great shots Wendell - I can see you are improving.

Matt K - I have always wondered about that, thanks for the info. I don't quite get high speed flash sync then. If the camera can shoot at 1/8000th with high speed mode then surely the max flash sync should be higher than 1/250 or 1/500? I have heard that you lose light - does that mean the photo and flash aren't completely lined up?

Wendell,

Nice of you to visit Melbourne and well done. But I can't see any pictures. Is your host currently down?

Alex

I can't see them for some reason! Sounds like some good lessons learnt though Wendell, look forward to seeing them

Can see the photos now. Excellent shots. I wish I was there. Well done.

Alex

Matt you sure about that? I'm pretty sure I was shooting flash switched off in manual mode with a few people from this forum, and I swear their flash was playing havoc with my exposure. Or am I missing something hear.

Heath Bennett wrote:

Matt. K wrote:Wendell
Good tight images shot under trying conditions. Well done! A couple of comments...the lighting is obviously tricky and the images could do with a little more critical colour balancing.....or make them B&W...they would still hold up. You say that some of your images were over-exposed because of the flashes from other photographers? No way!...consider that the SB800 fires at around 1/8000 of a second...if you had a hundred photographers firing flash then what are the chances that your shutter would be open when one of their flashguns was firing? Almost nil. I think your images have the potential to be P/processed to a state where they would be supurb by any measure. Thank you for posting them.

Great shots Wendell - I can see you are improving.

Matt K - I have always wondered about that, thanks for the info. I don't quite get high speed flash sync then. If the camera can shoot at 1/8000th with high speed mode then surely the max flash sync should be higher than 1/250 or 1/500? I have heard that you lose light - does that mean the photo and flash aren't completely lined up?

I appears so Heath I was shooting at 1/250-1/400 at some stages and I am sure even with high shutter flash sync mode set on the on the camera, the camera took the shot before the flash could go off, hence my dark images even with the sb800 firing. Most times i was shooting at 1/250 the flash should of fired in sync with the shutter but the results show.

matt K your right maybe my overexposed images are due to the flash being on ttl auto mode, the metering may have been confussed from the dynamic lighting and the flash settings changed accordingly

I do however have many pics where it looks like they are really bright even when i was shooting at 1/400 so maybe the camera is capturing several afterglows from several bright flashes, i will post on a general discussion thread, then you can comment on them.

Hi Wendell,

great photos in very challenging
light conditions.
Some photos appear to be a bit yellowish.
I have just recently changed my WB setting in AUTO to -3.
I believe this gave me great colours outdoors and indoors.

Cheers,
CD

Wendell,
Some excellent images here and some great advice from our fellow members. If you get to go to any other 'meets' I can share my 70-200VR, so long as I can come along too

Geoff wrote:Wendell,
Some excellent images here and some great advice from our fellow members. If you get to go to any other 'meets' I can share my 70-200VR, so long as I can come along too

Geoff,
Next one he'll be off to Tasmania this weekend and Paris fashion show next week and New York next month.

Matt. K wrote:You say that some of your images were over-exposed because of the flashes from other photographers? No way!...consider that the SB800 fires at around 1/8000 of a second...if you had a hundred photographers firing flash then what are the chances that your shutter would be open when one of their flashguns was firing? Almost nil.

If only the world was that simple!

I don't know about the Nikon hi-speed sync, but the Canon E-TTL system could cause this:
As long as the camera's shutter speed is at or below the X-Sync speed the flash fires a single flash. Obviously the length of this flash is only dependent on the power output (less power means a shorter flash) but unless you're trying to stop hi-speed motion you don't have to worry about this detail.
Once you go above the camera's X-sync speed (and have HS/FP sync enabled on your flash) the flash fires a stroboscopic burst. For a single flash the shutter will not be fully open, but by starting the burst before the 1st curtain starts opening and stopping it after the 2nd curtain closes the camera can guarantee even illumination across the frame. The tradeoff is that effective flash power drops off, but being able to use fast shutter can be worth it.

The next question is whether there were Canon shooters there using speeds above X-sync (on the digital bodies this ranges from 1/200 to 1/500s, on film bodies it's typically slower). Unless high shutter speeds were called for, most people would keep their shutter speed at the X-sync speed (or below to bring in more ambient light). But if E-TTL FP sync *was* being used the flash bursts would definitely be longer than 1/8000s!

But even with 1/8000s flash bursts, Wendell indicated his shutter speeds ranged from 1/250s to 1/400s. 1/250s is 32x longer than 1/8000s, so with "hundreds" of photographers all looking for similar poses/actions I would have to say the chances of getting someone else's flash were definitely NON-zero.

Hi Dave

There were 4 canon DSLR users using flash, I was on the pressbox with 1 of them from what i remember I could see the flash go off for about half a second they were long flashes, the initial highpoint of the flash burst may of been hundreds of a second fast but the afterglow from them was definately hanging around for about half a second, the room lit up!

I am not technically proficient yet so i can't really comment but what Matt.K and you are saying I have to agree in theory, but the results tell a different story:


and i can assure you i was shooting at 1/250 at this time

wendellt wrote:Hi Dave

There were 4 canon DSLR users using flash, I was on the pressbox with 1 of them from what i remember I could see the flash go off for about half a second they were long flashes, the initial highpoint of the flash burst may of been hundreds of a second fast but the afterglow from them was definately hanging around for about half a second, the room lit up!

I am not technically proficient yet so i can't really comment but what Matt.K and you are saying I have to agree in theory, but the results tell a different story

Hang on, I'm agreeing with you!
If a Canon camera/flash is being used above the camera's nominal sync speed, the light put out by the flash is a burst rather than a single flash (this can be used all the way up to 1/4000s or whatever the camera's top speed is). Also if anyone was using slave flashes the master communicates to it via a pre-shot burst of flash light (with a signal encoded in it). All of this can increase the total length of time illumination is being generated (vs. the 1/8000s figure Matt mentioned).

I'm saying the results you found are quite believable.

Dave - a bit OT, but thanks for your detailed discussion of Canon flash. Must make it an interesting proposition when all the Canon paparazzi get together at a major event.

Often I think the cameras are not used above the sync speed in those situations, so it's really not much worse than Nikon.

With a theoretical shutter speed of 1/250s, a theoretical flash speed of 1/8000s, and lots of photographers trying to catch the peak instant of action I would say that there's still an appreciable chance of getting someone else's flash in your shot as well as your own.

wendellt wrote:it included Fashion Eisteddfod 2005,

Fashion Eisteddford?

OMFG.

What will they come up with next?

Barista Eisteddford?

Dog Food Eisteddford?

I love Melbourne it's the fashion and design captial of Australia

You say this as if it's a good thing.

I too love Melbourne; it's a vibrant, culturally rich and diverse city, and they've done wonders in terms of retaining their older streetscapes. Something Syndey authorities need to learn and understand, instead of just cow-towing to Westfield's every whim.

there were many other photographers so i got a lot of overexposed shots from their flashes,

Actually, this is most unlikely, unless you're using ridiculously slow shutter speeds, which, if you're using the SB800, you shouldn't be.

Keep in mind the duration of the flash; you're actually saying that, for the poofteenth of a second that your shutter is open, other photographers' flash units didn't simply go off, they went off and synched themselves with your shutter's front and rear curtains.

Again, all within that poofteenth of a second during which your shutter was fully open and synchronisable.

No, not really likely; I'd be re-checking exposure and flash settings.

Heath Bennett wrote:Matt K - I have always wondered about that, thanks for the info. I don't quite get high speed flash sync then. If the camera can shoot at 1/8000th with high speed mode then surely the max flash sync should be higher than 1/250 or 1/500? I have heard that you lose light - does that mean the photo and flash aren't completely lined up?

There's a few issues to be considered here.

First of all is the speed of the flash, and even at its maximum power output, it's f-f-f-fast. We're talking thousandths of a second. Milliseconds.

Clicking your fingers is far slower than even a very powerful studio strobe. Just thinking about how fast this is is far slower than the reality.

The next issue to be considered is the flash synchronistaion speed. To make an exposure, your camera has, and mostly uses, a mechanical shutter. There's also an electronic shutter, but we'll deal with that later; let's keep to the basics for now.

In making the exposure, there's a number of steps that the camera needs to undertake. First of all, the mirror needs to be kicked up and out of the way. That's why your viewfinder blacks out during an exposure.

With the mirror out of the way, the shutter is now in the light path behind your lens, and behind the shutter, your camera's sensor, or in the case of a film camera, the unexposed film.

To make the exposure, there are now three key steps: (1) the shuitter opens - for a precise, measured period of time, during which (2) the exposure is made. The shutter then (3) closes, terminating the exposure.

There are two curtains used in a typical SLR camera, a front and a rear one, and these respectively open, and close, the shutter, as described in (1) and (3) above.

Here's where the fun begins: at speeds greater than, on a D70, 1/500 sec, the second curtain has already started closing (and terminating the exposure) before the first curtain has fully opened.

You need to fully understand the importance of this simple fact; at these sorts of speeds, the sensor is never, ever, fully and wholly exposed to the light path; there is only ever a moving strip between the two curtains. That moving strip exposes the sensor for the desired exposure duration, but it happens serialy, rather than all-at-once.

Because of this situation, trying to make a flash exposure at these fast speeds will only result in a partial exposure of the image, with, typically, a black strip somewhere along one of the edges, indicating the area where the curtains were not fully open at the moment of exposure.

Thus, in order to make a flash exposure, you need to use a shutter speed slow enough that it ensures that the shutter is completely and fully open at the time that the exposure is made, and you need to delay the time at which the flash discharges so that this only occurs once the shutter is fully open.

Have I lost you yet?

Ok ....

I mentioned that the D70 also has an electronic shutter; this is a part of the sensor, and is used for extremely fast shutter speeds: the mechanical shutter opens, then the electronic shutter fires. Ordinarily, this is not used for flash synch, but by covering up one of the rear flash hotshoe contacts, you can enable high speed flash synch with trhe electronic shutter.

Dave,

DaveB wrote:I don't know about the Nikon hi-speed sync, but the Canon E-TTL system could cause this:

Actually, this is still not all that likely.

As you've noted, the multiple flash scenario operates on reduced power output. Significantly so, actually, in order to ensure enough flash power in reserve to make the required image with the desired exposure.

While there may be some build-up of exposure through the compounding of the flashes expended, these will still be a reduced power output in comparison to what's actually required, and while these might theoretically be capable of occurring within the timeframe of Wendell's expoosure, the likelihood of that occurring, and building up a composite EV that creates significant over-exposure using reduced power output is extremely unlikely.

gstark wrote:

Heath Bennett wrote:Matt K - I have always wondered about that, thanks for the info. I don't quite get high speed flash sync then. If the camera can shoot at 1/8000th with high speed mode then surely the max flash sync should be higher than 1/250 or 1/500? I have heard that you lose light - does that mean the photo and flash aren't completely lined up?

There's a few issues to be considered here.

First of all is the speed of the flash, and even at its maximum power output, it's f-f-f-fast. We're talking thousandths of a second. Milliseconds.

Clicking your fingers is far slower than even a very powerful studio strobe. Just thinking about how fast this is is far slower than the reality.

The next issue to be considered is the flash synchronistaion speed. To make an exposure, your camera has, and mostly uses, a mechanical shutter. There's also an electronic shutter, but we'll deal with that later; let's keep to the basics for now.

In making the exposure, there's a number of steps that the camera needs to undertake. First of all, the mirror needs to be kicked up and out of the way. That's why your viewfinder blacks out during an exposure.

With the mirror out of the way, the shutter is now in the light path behind your lens, and behind the shutter, your camera's sensor, or in the case of a film camera, the unexposed film.

To make the exposure, there are now three key steps: (1) the shuitter opens - for a precise, measured period of time, during which (2) the exposure is made. The shutter then (3) closes, terminating the exposure.

There are two curtains used in a typical SLR camera, a front and a rear one, and these respectively open, and close, the shutter, as described in (1) and (3) above.

Here's where the fun begins: at speeds greater than, on a D70, 1/500 sec, the second curtain has already started closing (and terminating the exposure) before the first curtain has fully opened.

You need to fully understand the importance of this simple fact; at these sorts of speeds, the sensor is never, ever, fully and wholly exposed to the light path; there is only ever a moving strip between the two curtains. That moving strip exposes the sensor for the desired exposure duration, but it happens serialy, rather than all-at-once.

Because of this situation, trying to make a flash exposure at these fast speeds will only result in a partial exposure of the image, with, typically, a black strip somewhere along one of the edges, indicating the area where the curtains were not fully open at the moment of exposure.

Thus, in order to make a flash exposure, you need to use a shutter speed slow enough that it ensures that the shutter is completely and fully open at the time that the exposure is made, and you need to delay the time at which the flash discharges so that this only occurs once the shutter is fully open.

Have I lost you yet?

Ok ....

I mentioned that the D70 also has an electronic shutter; this is a part of the sensor, and is used for extremely fast shutter speeds: the mechanical shutter opens, then the electronic shutter fires. Ordinarily, this is not used for flash synch, but by covering up one of the rear flash hotshoe contacts, you can enable high speed flash synch with trhe electronic shutter.

Thanks for the effort. I know about a few things you have said, but there are also some things that are now clarified, and some things that are new to me. Cheers

Am I the only perverted deviant here or did someone else notice the well positioned shadow in the background of photo 5 (brunette in red dress) ... nice timing Wendell

Nice call The shadow got lucky.

Wendellt,
Very impressed
Can I go with you for model shooting next time I visit Australia?
My dream is to be a fashion photographer -- can see beautiful girls and earn living.
----------------
Regards
Poon

agriffiths wrote:did someone else notice the well positioned shadow

I rarely have a use for this term, but ROTFLMAO!

A quick google confirmed that one as being "Rolls On The Floor Laughing My Ass Off"
Jeez I gotta get with this internet/sms lingo. I like that one!!

agriffiths wrote::lol:

Am I the only perverted deviant here or did someone else notice the well positioned shadow in the background of photo 5 (brunette in red dress) ... nice timing Wendell

Just lending a helping hand

agriffiths wrote:A quick google confirmed that one as being "Rolls On The Floor Laughing My Ass Off"

Except here in Orstraylia we have arses and not donkeys.