ShootingOnABudget: Quick, Simple, Cheap DIY Window Simulator

I definitely love DIY projects, especially those that help me out with a project in a niche way. I had a story planned and I wanted the opening and closing shots to be of sunlight / moonlight streaming through a window, illuminating a girl who had fallen asleep reading. How the hell was I going to do that?

DIY Window Simulator Snoot to the rescue!

I’ve used snoots in the past, though usually of the rounded variety. Great for accents, and bringing focus to where you want it. What I needed here was a rectangular spot with hard edges, such as you would see if the sun or moon were streaming into a window at night.

To do this, I took a piece of foamcore I got from the dollar store, and made the contraption above. The distance from the flash head to the rectangular opening creates the sharp edge, the further the shape is from the flash head, the sharper the edge.

It was super easy to make as well. Cut two shapes with 2″ on one end, and 9″ on the other, 18″ long down the center for the sides. Do the same with 3″ and 12″ for the top and bottom. The front is just a 9″x12″ rectangle with a cutout for a mock window. Tape it all up, tape it to your flash head, and you’ve got a window. Change your WB to make it blue and you’ve got a fake moonlight.

Autumn – Canon T1i – Canon EF 24/2.8 – Neewer TT850 – Original here [NSFW].

Quick, easy, cheap, and helps me stretch my creative muscles. The front cutout can be changed at will too. Since the distance makes the edge hard, you can experiment with the shapes. Heart shaped gelled for a valentine’s day studio shot?  Try it out, let me know what you do!

Details for featured image: Autumn – Canon 5D – YongNuo 35/2 – Neewer TT850

The post Quick, Simple, Cheap DIY Window Simulator appeared first on Shooting on a Budget.

from Shooting on a Budget http://ift.tt/2ebbV9v
via IFTTT

Read More

ShootingOnABudget: DIY 36″ Ring Flash

I’ve been wanting a high powered ring flash for a while now, but don’t want to plop down $500 or so for an ABR800 and moon unit -So I’ve made my own. It’s 36″ across, 6″ deep, with a generally parabolic / umbrella shaped – The original plan was 16 ribs with 4 segments, but eight ribs with two segments will work well enough. The math made my brain hurt, but I got the general shape right to point the light forward rather than just out in general.

It’s powered by 4 speedlites positioned around the center hole. There’s a shiny pie tin on the inside to diffuse and spread the beams, so it should be soft without problematic hotspots.

I know i can get the same effect by standing in front of a large softbox/plm but with the light in front and so much closer, i have more control over light falloff, and if I want the portrait to fade to black, it’ll be a bit easier this way with the flash closer to your subject (google Matthew Jordan Smith shooting Tyra Banks) – more control is always better.

Let’s talk about getting it set up.

Note: USPS boxes were used, not new. I didn’t take the free flat rate boxes and use those, lol.

I’ll discuss my methods in case you’d like to make one of your own a different size. The first step was to cut out the various bits.For the central hub, I needed space enough for a hole to shoot through and four speedlites, so I made an octagon that was 12″ across. I plugged that into an octagon calculator I found online, and found that each edge would be just about 5″ – so I cut out a 12″ square, and made a mark 2.5″ from center on all sides. Cutting across the corners at those marks gave an octagon with 5″ sides. Perfect.

Now I had to get it into a curved shape. I wanted this middle section to go out about a foot on either end, so I did some more math, and found that an inside edge of 5″ and an outside edge of 15″ would lay flat with no curve. Any size smaller, and once paired up with its neighbors would cause it to curve into a bowl shape. I didn’t want too much curve for this segment, and decided on an outside edge of 12″ – so I ended up with a trapezoid (took me a while to remember that word from 3rd grade) that was 5″ on the short end, 12″ on the long, 12″ apart.

The outer rim I wanted to curve more than the previous one, so I shortened the width, and made the inside and outside edges closer. This outer rim ended up being 12″ inner edge, 15″ outer, 6″ apart. This curved nicely, and ended up giving me a bowl about 6″ deep and 36″ across.

The hole to shoot through was made up of a can of cashews, with a pie dish around it like a skirt. The flashes would hit the pie skirt and bonce around the interior, reducing hot spots and diffusing the light fairly well.

 

I took a bracket I had lying around from some 24″ pop up softboxes I never use (they’re not that great, I prefer the umbrella softboxes) to reinforce the center, and as a way to mount the contraption on a stand.

Four holes were cut for the flashes, spaced evenly around the hole. I used velcro straps to keep them in place, and they held in place pretty well. Another 4 small holes were cut so that the optical triggers could see the flash occurring, even with the heads inside, and the bodies out.

I traced the finished shape on a larger piece of cardboard to attach the ripstop nylon to. I cut a circle that ended up being about 2″ from each edge, and stretched the nylon across this frame, with a hole cut to fit the cashew can. The face piece stabilizes the rest of the dish. This was then attached to the main bowl et voilà – I had a super ghetto-rigged Moon Unit. While not as powerful as the AlienBee ABR800 that goes along with that modifier, four speedlites is pretty damn powerful for headshots and beauty.

It gets some weird looks when I take it out for shoots, but once the model sees the shots, they don’t care – results are all that matter, and if you’re looking for a big, soft, wrap-around light, something like this can deliver that.

If you’ve got a few flashes, give it a shot! It can probably be done with fewer speedlites, but that might necessitate some work-arounds to get the light even, but I’d love to see your results.

The post DIY 36″ Ring Flash appeared first on Shooting on a Budget.

from Shooting on a Budget http://ift.tt/1Plxq7D
via IFTTT

Read More

ShootingOnABudget: Pawn Shops are hit and miss… but when they’re a hit, they’re a freaking HIT.

The image above greeted me at a local pawn shop during one of my bimonthly visits to all the pawn shops in town. It was listed with an “as-is” tag, and listed at $99.99… A hundred bucks, even for a broken 24-70L is a great deal, since they can be sold for parts on eBay for $200-$500.

So I ask to see it, noticing that it only looks like the filter was cracked, not the front element. The employee says it’s been popular, and a few people have looked at it so far that day. I asked if they had any Canon cameras on hand to test it out, but she says it’s “completely broken, doesn’t work at all.” Unable to test it, and it being an “as-is” product, I ask if she can do $50 cash.

She says Okay, and I go home to test it out.

Step 1: I removed the broken filter (It was a nice B&W one too!) – lo and behold, the glass is in great condition. There’s some scuffs on the filter ring, but it’s overall in great cosmetic condition.

Step 2: Confirm the “it’s completely broken, doesn’t work at all” – Oh hey, the MF/AF switch is set to Manual Focus, let’s put it on Auto and see what happens?

Zip, whirr, beep. Autofocus works like a champ.

So, did I just get a fully working Canon 24-70/2.8L for fifty bucks? It seems so! This is why I visit pawn shops as often as I do. There are rarely any good deals there. Literally right next to this lens there was a Nikon D3000 for the low low price of $549.99, and the shop I visited prior to this had a Canon 20D with an 18-55 lens for $1,199.

But there are often some great great finds. I usually buy camera gear at pawn shops to flip for a profit, and have found some really amazing deals. Got two Speedotron Black kits (a 2403cx and 4803cx) with (2) 102 heads each for a couple hundred. A Nikon 16mm f/2.8D fisheye for $60. Three Profoto ComPact monolights (a 600ws and two 300ws) for four hundred. And many countless other great deals.

“But wait,” many people say, “all that shit’s probably stolen! No way these pawn shops are selling these high priced items so cheap!” – While this may be true, and some may shy away from buying something they may find shady. However, pawn shops are supposed to register high value items with serial numbers into various databases that sync with police. This has worked in my favor after a racing bike of mine was stolen. So I don’t worry about how or why the items are priced the way they are, I just take advantage of the situation when it works in my favor. I check online “stolen camera” sites when I get a great deal, and after tens of thousands of dollars, and hundreds of items, never had a hit.

I’ve become friendly with a few employees at these stores, and know why some of these items were priced low. The Speedotron kit was sold by someone who had acquired it from an estate sale, sold it to the pawn shop cheaply, they marked it up a little and put it on the floor. The ProFotos were used in-house to photograph high end purses and such, and they decided iphones were good enough now. And the new Canon lens I just got? It was part of a kit they bought, an employee fumbled it while taking it out of a bag, and they decided to eat the loss and sell it “broken”.

It’s pretty rare, but great deals are out there at pawn shops. Sure I’ve got to pass by two dozen DSLRs that are marked up 8x what they’re worth, and a ton of useless junk… but occasionally you’ll find those AlienBees for a hundred bucks, a Canon 70D for $350, A Norman pack and head for $40, or a ton of other great deals like I have recently. Another great find was a T3i (this was right when the T4i had come out) for $229.99 – talked them down to $150… it was sitting next to an XSi for $449.99.

If you’ve got pawn shops along your commute, or nearby, hit them up occasionally. I have 4 along my daily ride home, and changing my route just a little I can hit 5 more another day. I may go weeks and weeks without finding anything nice, but it doesn’t take much time out of my day, and on a good day I make a couple hundred bucks, or get a new toy.

The post Pawn Shops are hit and miss… but when they’re a hit, they’re a freaking HIT. appeared first on Shooting on a Budget.

from Shooting on a Budget http://ift.tt/1huVh5R
via IFTTT

Read More

ShootingOnABudget: How much does a scratch affect the quality of a lens?

I’m sure we’ve all heard the horror stories. “ONOZ! My lens got a scratch, it’s ruined!!” someone screams, then goes to quietly cry in a corner. “Welp, shoulda used a UV filter, if those get scratched you can just replace them, now you have to sell that lens for half what its worth on eBay”

People thinking this isn’t a bad thing though. This means that great lenses, those with maybe a scuff here and there, can be had inexpensively if you’re lucky enough to find one. I recently sold a Nikon 24-70/2.8G with two small scuffs, see below, that ended up being a great deal for its new owner. The scuffs were small, and had no impact on image quality that I ever noticed.

Now the main image above, the Canon 50mm f/1.8 is a little bit more scratched than this one was. Surely that much marring would have an impact. In fact, my main goal was to scratch it far past the point where an observer would think “yup, that’s going to be terrible” which was actually really difficult to do.

Damage to the the front element of a lens should manifest in two different areas, sharpness and contrast. You would think that damage would lead to the lens being less sharp since there’s junk in the way. With the scratches changing the direction of the light coming in, it should be less contrasty since the light isn’t coming in as it was intended to. Let’s see how this lens performs in these departments.

SHARPNESS

The 50/1.8 is known to be quite a sharp little lens, especially when shot past f/2.8 or so. The below, shot at f/4 is still quite sharp. Shooting that wide, and that close, you still need to nail focus. The in focus areas are quite nice, and definitely sharper than I expected. In fact, compared to the 5D with an 85/1.8 I shot side by side, there’s not really any discernible difference in sharpness.

Halie – Canon T5 – EF 50/1.8 II – Neewer TT850 – Cowboy Studio 22″ Beauty Dish

All in all, I was surprised just how little that much damage had on sharpness. It was a great conversation piece as well. I told Halie, and the MUA Lindsey what I was doing, and both agreed, “yeah, there’s no way that much damage won’t affect things” – though when they saw the LCD screen after a few test shots, they were as surprised as me, and the shoot went on as planned, everyone confident in what we would get.

CONTRAST

I was pretty sure that contrast would take a hit, and it did, but quite a bit less than I had anticipated. It makes sense that the grooves of these scratches (some rather deep) would scatter incoming light quite a bit, causing the resulting images to lose out on being able to discern highlights from shadows. Shadows would get more light than they should, highlights get less, and the overall result would be just a bit muddier.

Contrast is lower, but not terribly so. In this first example, I’ve got a Canon T5 with the scratched lens on the left, 5D with 85/1.8 on the right for similar framing. Lit with a Neewer TT850 in an 86″ shoot through umbrella to my left at about 8′ – images are unretouched aside from white balance.

You can see in the background, there’s less of a transition from left to right. There’s less depth to Halie’s hair, the pants are less defined, and the image is overall less “punchy” than its 5D counterpart. However, in post, with very minor tweaks, the T5 on the left can be brought up to the same levels as the one on the right. This is so slight to be no big deal.

A second example is one where contrast was the look I was going for. Using a parabolic umbrella typically results in a nice poppy image with nice contrast due to the focusing nature of the umbrella. Highlights transition nicely to shadows and your subject stands out nicely. Again, we’ve got the T5 with broken 50/1.8 on the left, 5D with 85mm on the right. 86″ parabolic umbrella to my right about 8′ from Halie – images are unretouched aside from white balance.

The loss of contrast here is a lot more pronounced and noticeable. With that loss of contrast, we’re also experiencing loss of detail. I can bring up the detail for the shot on the left, though that will further lose detail. As the darker areas just get darker, her hair and hat will just fade to black. The image on the right, I’d honestly tone down the contrast, but that would not end up losing detail, we would actually gain some in the darker areas, and more flexibility and options is never a bad thing.

A third element that would be affected is flaring, which I was unable to test at this time other than anecdotal hands on, taking random shots around the yard. Yes it flared more, with some odd shapes here and there, but it didn’t flare any easier than an unscuffed lens, just that when it did, the flaring was a little harsher. Ideally, you would eliminate flaring with positioning and hoods, so fairly moot. I have an outdoor session planned and will be testing further, keep an eye out.

FINAL THOUGHTS

I took this further than necessary to really try and showcase what kind of an impact damage to a front element has on overall image quality. Long story short, not much at all. A small scratch or two will have no noticeable impact at all, and long time shooters will agree, a scuff here and there is no real big deal. Many even use sharpies over scratches, which helps eliminate the contrast issue (since light’s not bouncing around).  As the scuffs get worse and worse, yes the differences will grow, but I like the bikini and hat shot on the left… it’s not always the aesthetic details of the lens, or sensor that makes an image.

There are many more elements to what makes a lens good than sharpness and contrast… I want a 135L for the compression, shallow DOF, and to a lesser degree, contrast and sharpness. If a scuff here and there make little difference, I’m keeping my eyes out for a cheap one with a scratch or two.

The post How much does a scratch affect the quality of a lens? appeared first on Shooting on a Budget.

from Shooting on a Budget http://ift.tt/1T8ns8K
via IFTTT

Read More

ShootingOnABudget: YongNuo 35mm f/2 – Round 2: Outdoor Portraits.

I was such a big fan of the YongNuo 50mm f/1.8 and so I was super stoked when they announced the YongNuo 35mm f/2 (Amazon). I love my Sigma 30/1.4 and was happy to find a similar, more affordable option. Sure it’s got a 5mm and a stop difference, but aside from the discontinued Canon 35mm f/2 there’s not much in the way of affordable 30/35mm primes at the moment for Canon.

Nikon has the amazing 35mm f/1.8G for APS-C cameras, but to date Canon doesn’t have much of an alternative. The 24/2.8 STM and 40/2.8 STM are nice and affordable, but IMO there’s a world of difference between an f/1.8 or f/2 lens, and 2.8

So I went out with Aleey this weekend, took a nice hike into the wilderness, and took some pictures to test the lens out.

Aleey – Canon T5 – YongNuo 35/2 – Neewer TT850 – 86″ PLM

Original image here.

FIRST IMPRESSION

I found out in the clinical tests that the lens was quite a bit softer than its Canon counterpart. I went into the portrait session knowing and anticipating this. Since most of the stuff I shoot gets printed at double truck at best (though print is about 5%, the other 95% is web) overall sharpness isn’t a big concern of mine for environmental portraits. If it is ‘adequately sharp’ at f/2, I’m happy. It picks up sharpness at f/2.8, but I’ve got a sharp 17-50/2.8 I could use instead if I can live with 2.8.

I don’t shoot in the 35mm range often though. I prefer tighter lenses, and in the shot immediately above, I’d prefer to use 100mm or longer for compression. In the main image above, though, fitting in the environment makes 35mm quite nice.

Aleey – Canon T5 – YongNuo 35/2 – Neewer TT850 – 86″ PLM

SHARPNESS

It is soft at f/2. Though all the shots I have taken with it in this session, it was adequate for general use. With all lenses there are tradeoffs. In this shoot, I wanted the extra shallow depth of field f/2 gives over f/2.8 (22″ vs 33″ at ten feet) for a little more background blur. Had 35mm been a requirement, I’d have to live with a softer image if I needed f/2 within this pricerange.

Shot to shot, the lens performed as I had expected from the aesthetics test. Softer than the Canon, though in a practical setting it was firmly in the ‘good enough’ range wide open, I think. I like these images, Aleey loves them, and they’re getting a lot of love on social media where we’ve shared them. I think that’s what counts sometimes. Not “is it a super sharp image where every eyelash is discernable?” but “is it a picture that you like?”

Aleey – Canon T5 – YongNuo 35/2 – Neewer TT850 – 86″ Shoot through
Wardrobe: La Perla

COLOR, CONTRAST, AND OTHER AESTHETICS

This is a big win area for the YongNuo. Color and contrast are very nice. Colors are punchy, the contrast transition from highlight to shadow is smooth. I’ve got nothing to complain about in this area, and love the images. I’ve been shooting a lot of HSS lately, so keeping colors vibrant in the background when I push down ambient is pretty important.

For general aesthetics, the YongNuo is a solid performer. Its better than the Canon, which was a little washed out when compared side by side.

OUT OF FOCUS / BOKEH

Being a wider lens, the DOF is not as shallow as the longer lenses that are more popular with portraits. As such, backgrounds stay more in focus, and bokeh, general out of focus details are less pronounced, and considered less. Take the two above water shots. The bikini one, cropped as such, I was maybe ten feet from Aleey. The background blurs a bit, and isn’t as harsh as I expected, it’s fairly nice. But in the green skirt shot above, even 5 feet further away, the background becomes much less blurred.

That having been said, when the lens is used in such a way to allow for background blur, it’s pretty nice. Nothing to call home about, but not haggard like the Canon and Nikon 50/1.8s can be. Decently soft and blurred, without any distracting elements. Similar to the Canon when shot wide open.

Aleey – Canon T5 – YongNuo 35/2 – Neewer TT850 – 86″ PLM

FINAL THOUGHTS

They’re still in the new-hype phase, so prices are jumping around wildly. When they do even out, and supplies are more readily available, it will be a solid “recommended” for those who need a 30/35mm lens wider than f/2.8. There are better options available for wider and tighter focal lengths, and better options if you can manage with f/2.8 – but even so, all of those are either slightly more expensive (40/2.8 and 28/2.8) to double or more the price (Tamron 17-50/2.8).

If 35mm-ish range with wider aperture than f/2.8 is what you need, there aren’t many options at the moment. The Canon 35/2 at double the price with marginal improvements in some IQ elements, or the 35/2 IS at 4-5x, or the Sigma 30/1.4 (which is amazing, save up for it if you shoot crop) at about triple… It all boils down to price vs performance. And in that regards, the lens is adequate to more than adequate for a lot of outdoor portrait use, at a very affordable price.

The post YongNuo 35mm f/2 – Round 2: Outdoor Portraits. appeared first on Shooting on a Budget.

from Shooting on a Budget http://ift.tt/1InHjM8
via IFTTT

Read More

ShootingOnABudget: YongNuo 35mm f/2 – Round 1: Aesthetics

There’s only so much that can be tested in home without fancy gear (MTF charts and the like) so I did a few tests that gauge common aesthetic qualities, using techniques that are often recommended for testing at home.

It’s not super scientific, but it does give some further input on the lens and what you might expect. And all tests were done as compared to the Canon 50/1.8 II – each shot was taken on a sturdy tripod, and all settings were kept the same, with the lenses switched out for each shot.

Tests:

• Sharpness (center, corner, edge)
• Flare (not a great test, I admit, but its something to consider
• Bokeh (spoiler: the YongNuo wins)
• Chromatic Aberration

Today’s tests aren’t anything fancy, and not the “hands-on, on set scenario” that I like, but they do give some input, so I thought I’d share. And I will go so far as to say the YongNuo is aesthetically the better lens.

SHARPNESS

Canon Sharpness – Center

All sharpness tests shot at f/2 – f/4 – f/8

YongNuo Center

Fairly a tossup, with Canon winning out due to microcrontrast wide open contributing to a sharper image. f/4 and f/8 seem to match up nicely.

Canon Top Left Corner

YongNuo Top Left Corner

Canon is the hands-down winner. This was shot in a studio environment, with zero ambient contribution, so I don’t know what the issue is with Canon’s f/8 being worse than f/4, and YN doing great at f/8 – this was repeatable though, I’d assume Canon would typically be better at f/8 than 4, even with diffraction coming into play around there with an 18MP sensor.

Canon Center Right

YongNuo Center Right

Again, Canon is the clear winner. If you’re looking for a super sharp wide prime, the YongNuo seems to fail vs its Canon counterpart. All in all when it comes to sharpness, I think the YongNuo is less than I had anticipated, considering the comparable sharpness of the 50mm comparison.

FLARING

I tried to test out flaring when shooting against open sun, but being as wide as it is, anything shot at f/2 in a situation where you’d expect flare when shot at f/2 ends up just being a general wash with no distinct difference between the two. Even stopped down to f/16 there’s little difference (please excuse the mess, I’m building a fire pit, this corner of the yard is messy).

Canon

YongNuo

I think the YongNuo gets washed out a little less (and that’s my experience with the wider apertures too, overall) – again, not a fancy test, it’s a wider lens, so flaring is expected when shooting in the general direction of the sun, I wanted to include a shot that shows the characteristics of sun flares for those who like to involve those in shots (as I am wont to do).

BOKEH

The Canon 50/1.8 II had some pretty harsh bokeh stopped down, with its 5 bladed aperture it was pretty ugly. The Canon 35/2 also has a 5 bladed aperture setup, does it suffer the same?

Canon – Again f/2 – f/4 – f/8

Pretty damn dreamy at f/2, nice and round from the center to the edge. But ouch, the pentagonal shape is harsh and pretty ugly, even as wide as f/4.

YongNuo

Hands down the winner. Larger, rounder, smoother, prettier. Seven bladed aperture vs five really shows here.

CHROMATIC ABERRATION

Next up is Chromatic Aberration… something any budget-friendly fast prime will fight to control. I took a scenario that should cause some distinct CA, black on backlit white. Here’s what I got for f/2 and f/4 on both lenses.

Canon (f/2 on top, f/4 below)

YongNuo

In both cases, CA is well controlled and not much of an issue in this scenario at f/4. The YongNuo seems to be the better performer at f/2, though both lenses handle CA pretty damn well.

There are some distinct differences between the two… The YongNuo (at least the two copies I have to test) are not as sharp as the Canon, especially outside of the center, though is a strong competitor in all other elements. I shoot portraits, so sharp enough in the center, and soft in the corners is a nonissue, this shouldn’t affect me much, if at all, softer, more bokeh’ed corners could be a good thing. You have to determine yourself if this impacts you. Read more reviews, see if future copies improve, etc. I’ll be doing more testing over the next couple weeks.

All in all… it’s a good lens so far. Soft (badly) in the corners, but decent all around.

The post YongNuo 35mm f/2 – Round 1: Aesthetics appeared first on Shooting on a Budget.

from Shooting on a Budget http://ift.tt/1AR1X7w
via IFTTT

Read More

ShootingOnABudget: Wardrobe on a Budget

While fashion photography relies heavily upon what’s coming next season, and legit fashion photographers get pull letters to get upcoming designs from top brands, those of us with smaller budgets, or little to none still have options for some kick-ass looks.

In my early days, working with models for portraits and such I tended to just say “bring whatever you’ve got” and deal with that. This led to the occasional lackluster session with boring wardrobe, or a general lack of options. A few years ago, I started picking up bits and pieces at thrift stores, and haven’t looked back since. I have built up a wardrobe on a budget.

I tend to schedule shoots about a week or two in advance, and have a general idea of what kinds of looks I want to go for. As you can probably tell from viewing my other articles, and seeing sample images there, I like an overall bohemian style. Loose, flowey, sheer, off the shoulder, etc in white, black, beige (generally neutral colors) is a look I really like for outdoor portraits.

Marisa – Canon XSi – Canon 50mm f/1.4 – YongNuo 560 II 

So when I have a shoot planned, I stop by Goodwill, Savers, etc and spend a little bit of time perusing the aisles for a few things that fit the look the model and I are planning. I usually end up with 3-5 pieces of wardrobe, which fit what we want. The shot of Marisa above was a $1.99 bolero and $2.99 skirt (both blue tags which were 50% off that day) so for $2.50 I had an outfit that worked well. We both loved how the black fit in with her hair, and the skin showing through the sheer bolero (and her skintone in general) meshed with the colors of the canyon.

I have since accumulated an entire closet full of wardrobe for shoots, as well as a few storage totes. Any time I have a shoot planned, all I have to do is go through my closet, find things that work for the model, look, and location, and bring it along to either be the wardrobe, or supplement what she brings. I’ve spent a bit of money on it all at this point, but it’s $5 here, $15 there so it makes things easy.

The below shot of Breanna cost a grand total of $7 for the top, skirt, and boots; she brought the hat. The skirt and boots have been used a few times, and I think the top will be a good fit for an upcoming shoot. All in all, it’s a low cost way to really add flexibility and options to your shoots.

Breanna – Canon T4i – Sigma 30/1.4 – Neewer TT-850 – 86″ shoot through umbrella

When I first started doing this, I felt kinda awkward – a 30 year old bearded man browsing through sleeveless ladies’ shirts, blouses, and skirts. I definitely got some weird looks, but have long since stopped caring. It’s cheap.

Once I started getting more into doing this, I got better and better at styling. Most of my recent shoots have been 100% styled by myself, with maybe a piece or two of the model’s wardrobe being used. I’m learning to dress people better, how to find and half my wife’s closet is made up from shoot wardrobe that she has stolen.

Give it a try. Grab $20 and see what you can put together!

The post Wardrobe on a Budget appeared first on Shooting on a Budget.

from Shooting on a Budget http://ift.tt/1dQ8JQO
via IFTTT

Read More

ShootingOnABudget: YongNuo 35mm f/2

First and foremost a hands-on comparison of the lens itself – how does it fare against the Canon 35mm f/2 – there will be more image-based comparisons to come. While discontinued and a few decades old, the Canon still costs more than double the YongNuo (YN 35mm runs $125 from YN themselves on Amazon, the Canon 35mm f/2 tends to be around $250 used – note, when not sold directly from YN, it’ll have the same hype that the 50 had when it first came out and 200% overpriced, the two I bought were $125)

WEIGHT AND CONSTRUCTION

The yongnuo is taller and wider, yet at the same time, about 20% lighter (155g vs 192g). The plastic feels a bit thinner compared to the Canon, but that’s not necessarily a bad thing. Light as it is, it still feels solid – something between a Canon 50/1.8 II and a Canon 50/1.4 feel-wise.

It is lacking a distance scale (something I honestly don’t think too many people, outside of particular niches like IR) get much use out of. The manual focus ring is placed in front, rather than in the middle, which some may not like, but it spins smoothly, and is larger than some front focusing rings that are often complained about (Canon 50/1.8 II for example) and more rubberized for a nice grip. The front element sticks out a little more than the Canon does, about half an inch or so.

All in all, nice yet unremarkable. Not amazing, but nothing really to complain about.

 

 AUTOFOCUS

It’s a rather loud screwy sounding motor, but many lenses in this generation were (since this lens seems to mimic early 90’s, expired patent tech). The Canon is noisy as well, but a softer, higher pitched noise vs the deeper whirring of the YongNuo. In practical testing, the YongNuo seemed to catch focus faster than its Canon counterpart across all test cameras (5D, 50D, and T5)

Below is a video of the autofocus, showing speed and noise. Tested on a Canon 50D which has a pretty reliable AF system. Shot with a white sheet in front with nothing to catch on to showcase speed from min to max. Filmed with a Canon G11, audio recorded with a Tascam DR-100.

 OTHER CONCERNS

The YongNuo 50/1.8 had a few concerns about draining battery and live view autofocus that I wanted to test out and see if those same issues crept up. I only have a sample size of 2 (ordered from 2 vendors) so it’s not definitive, but it’s at least some input on the matters.

There are stories of the YongNuo 50/1.8 draining a camera’s battery, even when powered off. I have had one copy on a Canon T5, and the other on a 5D coming up on 72 hours now. They’ve both been put through maybe 100 shots since then, and still show full battery. I’ll keep an eye out and see if anyone brings the issue up, but it seems like these may not have the same problem.

The autofocus in video has improved since the YongNuo 50/1.8. With that lens, the autofocus would hunt, but fail to catch. In this, it’s slower than the Canon, but it works somewhat. It will zip close pretty quickly, but then takes a handful of zips back and forth to finally catch, about 2 seconds worth. I am of a mind that thinks autofocus in video (aside from STM and touchscreen, that’s a cool feature) is fairly useless. Manual focus with peaking, follow focus, etc are the better method while in live view.

The post YongNuo 35mm f/2 appeared first on Shooting on a Budget.

from Shooting on a Budget http://ift.tt/1Jn99cM
via IFTTT

Read More