Why We Switched to Nikon

Braineack

Been spending a lot of time on here!
Joined
Jun 17, 2013
Messages
13,214
Reaction score
5,613
Location
NoVA
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
Interesting blog post I happened upon today:

The 3 Reasons Why We Switched to Nikon Hoffer Photography Modern Philadelphia Wedding Photographers

This particular link was what really astounded me:

Then, a few weeks ago I saw my friend Joel post THIS comparison.
Somehow it was different seeing it from someone I know. It confirmed what I had suspected about the crazy dynamic range difference between Nikon and Canon. We have always pushed our files pretty hard since we tend to underexpose and recover. That was the first time I really started to wonder.
 
Not disagreeing with you posting this Braineack, but this could be an add done by Nikon fanboys who were somewhat familiar with Canon gear.
 
Yeah, but what does Hoffer really think ??
LMAO

very interesting blog
but he has to find the double and triple (and more) exposure features of the Nikon as of yet.
 
@jaomul - So what you're saying is you didn't read it?

OR are you suggesting "Nikon Fanboys" all have over $25K in Canon equipment?

I mean I own the first Canon Digital Rebel, but I don't think I can get $25,000 out of it.
 
@jaomul - So what you're saying is you didn't read it?

OR are you suggesting "Nikon Fanboys" all have over $25K in Canon equipment?

I mean I own the first Canon Digital Rebel, but I don't think I can get $25,000 out of it.

I did read it. I do shoot Nikon. I would a lot of what they say is spot on. But it reads like a promo, throwing in a small "Canon is better here" for stuff that's probably not overly important.

They talk about underexoposing to save highlights and they are wedding shooters, but how much are they underexposing by, a stop or 4 stops. Any raw file can be pushed a stop or so if shot correctly at lowish iso. Anything more required is bad practice, understandable in landscape.

As I said, not disagreeing with it being put up, but it's a popcorn read
 
So because they have a good tool with great recovery abilities, they shouldn't utilize it because it's considered bad practice?
 
They talk about underexoposing to save highlights and they are wedding shooters, but how much are they underexposing by, a stop or 4 stops. Any raw file can be pushed a stop or so if shot correctly at lowish iso. Anything more required is bad practice, understandable in landscape.

DR helps when you shoot a wedding ceremony at sunset where the sun is directly behind the subject. That only happen at like almost every outdoor wedding that I've shot. :D I'd say that's at least 3 stops in pushing shadows and still retain details in highlights to make a dramatic sky.
 
They talk about underexoposing to save highlights and they are wedding shooters, but how much are they underexposing by, a stop or 4 stops. Any raw file can be pushed a stop or so if shot correctly at lowish iso. Anything more required is bad practice, understandable in landscape.

DR helps when you shoot a wedding ceremony at sunset where the sun is directly behind the subject. That only happen like almost at every outdoor wedding that I've shot. :D

I agree, but are you underexposed by more than a stop, or do you do what 95% of pro shooters do and use a flash, or do you sell 25 grand worth of gear so you don't need a flash for 2 shots each wedding
 

Most reactions

Back
Top