Finale from the Altamonte Springs Fireworks
The night didn’t start well
I love photographing fireworks. They are fairly straightforward to shoot and hardly require any editing – providing you’ve had time to scout out your location, are in a good spot, and all your equipment is functioning properly. None of which was true Wednesday night in Altamonte Springs.
I got to Altamonte fairly late due to traffic (about 10 minutes before the show was to start) and had the toughest time finding a parking spot. After finally finding a spot (a dark unlit area surrounded by trees I’m sure was from a Hitchcock movie), I decided to make up time by getting the camera on the tripod while I walked). That worked out great for 17 seconds (give or take) when the sky opened up and every angel in heaven poured water down on Altamonte Springs.
Ok, I got wet, but I had an umbrella and someone lent me a hand as I put the rain cover on my bag. After I got situated, I ran out in the rain to find a place plant the tripod and setup. The rain was really a blessing: the fireworks were now delayed and I had time to try to find a place to park my tripod.
I decided to go up high on the amphitheater behind the crowd. The spot was decent: high up and roughly centered to the middle of the lake. To my left was a palm tree, to my right was an arch. I thought perhaps I can incorporate the palm tree into my photos as I like to have elements in the foreground. I got the tripod down, hooked up the wireless remote and tried to fire an exposure…nothing…another attempt: nothing. It worked sporadically, but not reliably (1 out of 20 attempts). Great: wireless is out, but I was able to use it as a wired remote so no worries: not as convenient and a bit disconcerting, but ok.
And then things got worse before they got better
I framed up, focused and waited. It was another 30 minutes or so of people bumping into the tripod and saying sorry before the show started- it happens and you can’t get upset about that kind of thing. It’s tough for folks to see a tripod especially at night with a lot of people. If you get mad, it’s because you’re impatient.
After several good jostles the show started and….the fireworks were just behind the palm tree! Sigh.. Now it’s a mad scramble to move the camera, reframe and refocus. I ended up moving twice during the show, but things worked out. Here are a few shots from the night. You can see more of them at the end of the post.
One of my favorite bursts from the night at Red, Hot & Boom
I love the red-green christmas colors here
After the show, I managed to forget where my car parked (arrgh), but I found it eventually (I’m so glad I had a flashlight as it was no fun navigating around in the dark). All’s well that ends well eh? It’s tough to have shoots like this. But, I got the shots and that’s what I went there for. No one sees any of my troubles in the images.
Then Came Winter Garden
Altamonte was July 3rd. July 4th was in Winter Garden and that night was awesome! I got there a bit earlier and had the perfect spot. I didn’t have to worry about the remote because I knew it was dead and, I didn’t have to worry about parking as I got dropped-off.
Plus, I ran into some good friends, it was just awesome awesome. Here are a few shots from that night:
Bouquet burst from Winter Garden’s Fireworks at Lake Apopka
I call this one “The Flag Burst” because of the Red White & Blue
I laughed my way through this show (some would say giggle, but no. I laughed heartily and manly like). It was just awesome getting shot-after-useable-shot this night without having to scramble to a different spot and reframe.
Below are the rest of the shots form the two nights. Hope you had a great 4th of July!
Who says the generations can’t get together, have an outing and just get along? I wish I could tell you more about the hot rod in front. The owner wasn’t there and all I know is the grill says “International” on it.
I ran across this fire ravaged home in South Carolina not too far from Boone Hall Plantation in Mount Pleasant.
When you see something like this you wonder: did everyone make out ok? What happened? What time of day did it happen?
I know the fire happened around Christmas as there were clearly signs of christmas gifts and decorations. I also know the family had children because of the myriad of toys in the house (not in this frame). I also know it looked like the home was left in a hurry. But, that is all I know.
Hopefully everyone made it out ok.
Why this matters
Choosing a 35mm lens used to be easy for Canon shooters. If you needed to freeze action, you bought the Canon 35 f/1.4L. If you could afford to lose a stop, you bought the Canon 35 f/2L IS and saved a significant amount of money. The 35 f/2 isn’t as fast as the 1.4L but you’d have IS.
Life couldn’t stay simple forever though; the release of the Sigma 35 f/1.4 DG HSM complicated things. It’s as fast as the 35L but doesn’t cost too much more than the 35 F/2 IS. If you’re strictly looking for a 35mm f/1.4 the decision just isn’t clear anymore. You may be thinking about the Sigma but let’s face it, it’s a Sigma and it is weighed down by the history of Sigma lenses. Will it focus? How durable is it? What’s the image quality like? Can it be as good as good a lens as the 35L? On the other hand, is the Canon L that much better than you shouldn’t even look at the Sigma?
To answer these questions I pitted the Canon 35L against the Sigma 35 f/1.4 DG HSM and looked at their strengths and weaknesses to help others make the decision.
Construction
Both lenses are well-constructed and neither feels “cheap”, though the Canon’s construction feels more robust than the Sigma’s. The Canon also has the magical L red ring that lets lets every photographer in the immediate vicinity know you’re sporting a “pro” lens. It won’t make your photos any better, but they don’t know that. Kidding aside, if your lens choice depends greatly on survivability, go with the Canon. The build quality is what you’d expect from an L Lens: solid. Another thing to factor-in here is Canon’s reputation for repairs vs. Sigma’s. Sigma has made strides to improve service, but it’s hard to beat Canon’s factory repair (especially if you’re a Canon Professional Services member)
Notwithstanding, the Sigma 35 does not come across as a cheap second-rate lens as Sigmas tend to. The lens is very well-made and its metal-plastic exterior with satin finish is well-executed. It looks, and feels, like a high-end product.
Weight
The Canon 35L is the lighter of the two weighing in at 580g or 1.28lbs. The Sigma clocks in at 665g or 23.5oz. I don’t think the weight difference is perceptible – though some may disagree. I should note I was not aware of a weight difference until I looked up the specs for this review.
Weather Sealing
Neither lens is weather sealed. If this is important to you, you may want to take a look at the 16-35 f/2.8LII. I encountered a couple of rainstorms during the testing period and I was frustrated by not being able to reach for the 35s. Luckily the 24-105 f/4L is weather sealed and I was able to reach for that.
Image Quality & Sharpness
Wide open the Sigma is significantly sharper. Take a look at the 100% RAW crop below (Canon left, Sigma right) and note the eye definition. Both images were captured with a 5DMKII at ISO 800 and imported into Lightroom without any noise reduction or sharpening.
Canon-Sigma Side-by-Side Comparison at f/1.4
RAW comparison @ 100% at f1.4 Canon (left), Sigma (right)
The Sigma remains sharper until about f/2.8. At this point, both lenses are almost identical. In terms of vignetting, and chromatic aberrations, both lenses perform very well. Chromatic aberrations are well-controlled and barely noticeable. While vignetting is apparent at 1.4, it does subside (but does not completely disappear) at about f/2.8. Speaking of aperture, the Canon’s minimum aperture is f/22 while the Sigma’s is f/16.
Focus
Focusing speed was similar and I didn’t note a difference between the two lenses. I do think focus on both lenses is slower than typical Canon L lenses (like the 24-105 f/4L or 70-200 2.8L).
The focus rings on both lenses have a nice weighty feel. They’re both smooth enough to move but solid enough to prevent accidental movement. I was worried about slack in the Sigma, but there was none to be found.
In terms of focus lock, while focus lock is largely driven by the camera’s autofocus system, I tested it nonetheless as there is always concern with 3rd party lenses. Low-light focus was tested under two real-world conditions: a dark room similar to a wedding reception banquet hall and outdoors under dim city street lights. I performed the tests twice making sure to use both lenses each time. There was no difference between the two – neither hunted while the other locked. Low-light focus should not be considered a factor when deciding between the two lenses.
Bokeh
35mm lenses are not the bokeh machines 85mm lenses are. Nonetheless, one should have some idea of what bokeh is like when buying an f/1.4 lens. Below are two images shot wide open. As in the earlier comparison, the Canon is on the left while the Sigma is on the right. I believe the Canon’s Bokeh is the creamier, smoother, “butterier” (this shouldn’t be a word), (insert adjective here) of the two – especially in the shape of the “bokeh balls”. Keep in mind, I wasn’t on a tripod here and the test wasn’t completely controlled, however, I did note that bokeh was more pleasing in the canon overall on multiple occasions.
The Gestalt aka: the “living with it test”
Both lenses are top performers, but the Sigma is markedly sharper. When I wanted the shot, I reached for the Sigma. In the end, it was that simple for me. I liked the Canon L but I just couldn’t reach for it to shoot wide open. That said, the Canon is no slouch especially at f/2.8 and up. If you’re rough on your gear or are working in an environment where you need an a robust body the 35L is the way to go.
In the end, the Sigma 35 remained in my bag. Below are some of the recent shots I’ve taken with it. It’s a fantastic performer that’s hard to match wide open.
Buy:
The Canon 35 f/1.4L and the Sigma 35 f/1.4 DG HSM are both currently available from B&H.
Rent:
If you’re the type to try before you buy (or just want to double check this review), you can rent Canon 35 f/1.4L and the Sigma 35 f/1.4 DG HSM from BorrowLenses.com.
Sunsets produced by tropical storms and hurricanes are paradoxically serene. This sunset, photographed in Winter Garden just outside of Orlando, came as Tropical Storm Andrea made her way over to the Carolinas last week.
How it is was Made
This is a six-exposure HDR created with photomatix pro. The blended image was then processed through in photoshop with the original images for tonal adjustment and color correction.
Noise reduction was done with Topaz Denoise and minor touch up and cropping was done with Lightroom.
Canon 5DMKII Canon 17-40 F/4L at f/16 ISO 100.
1955 Chevy Bel Air – created with Photomatix, Lightroom, Photoshop & Topaz Clarity
What Is It?
Topaz Clarity is a plugin that allows photographers to make color, contrast, and clarity definition adjustments without halos or artifacts.
Does it do it well?
Topaz is no stranger to controlling halos. Their Detail plugin is one of my favorite sharpening tools because it does not create halos at edge boundaries. But that’s Detail, what about Clarity?
In short, the technology does a great job. I have some reservations about some bugs in the user interace I hope Topaz will address in the future, but those are minor issues; the technology itself works, and it works well. Take a look at the before (left) and after (right) below:
Topaz Clarity Before & After
Is it perfect? I do see a bit of haloing, but it is so slight that it’s easily addressed with the masking brush Topaz makes available. That’s a real nice feature allowing you to brush-in/brush-out the effect as desired.
For HDR
Tonemapped images always need a contrast boost. I like the fine tune control over Micro, Low, Medium and High Contrast. Clarity is like a contrast scalpel providing you with control when you want it.
Features
In addition to clarity and contrast, you also get Hue Saturation and Luminance controls, as well as, a good list of presets to get you started. The presets themselves are broken down into collections like Documentary, Landscape, Fashion, Wedding and so-on to give you a head start depending on the type of photography you do. You can also create your own as is expected.
Another nice feature with the masking brush is a preview showing you where the brush has been applied. Think layer masks in photoshop, but large enough for you to see where the brush was applied. I’d like to see something like that get incorporated into Lightroom & Photoshop.
Is it worth it?
Topaz will be selling Clarity for $49.99 but has it discounted to $29.99 until May 31st. That’s not a bad deal for the kind of fine tuned control it gives you. Skip a few cups of coffee and give it a whirl. If you can skip coffee for a while, the Topaz Bundle has a great set of tools like Adjust, Denoise, and Detail (to name a few). By the way, if you’re interested in Denoise, checkout my video tutorial here.
Ok, it’s new software, are there any bugs?
There are a few bugs with the UI. If you’ve used Lightroom, you’ll notice similarities between it and Clarity. The layout of the HSL sliders for example is definitely an homage to Lightroom, but some of the UI functionality is a bit buggy (at last in the Mac version at release). The brush, for example, doesn’t repsond to the a two-finger drag to resize and the “[” and “]” keys don’t always the resize brush when clicked. Also, Command-Z doesn’t seem to undo brush strokes.
These are minor issues I’m sure will be addressed in time, but they’re there. The core functionality does work well, and if you’re looking for fine grain clarity control Topaz Clarity is a good one.
Anything else?
You can try it for free for 30 days, give it a shot and let me know what you think in the comments.
(This article was contributed by Kevin Graham, owner of DSWfoto. Kevin is an Orlando based Wedding, Event, and Portrait Photographer.)
Yesterday, Adobe made an announcement at the Adobe MAX event – Adobe Photoshop Creative Cloud (CC) is replacing Adobe Photoshop Creative Suite (CS). They demoed a bunch of new fun features, most of which I’ll never use, and then slipped in a piece of information – Adobe Creative Cloud will be available in a subscription-only plan.
Like a bad circus magician, Adobe moved on to the next act, “Look at this shiny new hardware pen where you can”…. Woah. Wait a second, rewind. Did you just say that Photoshop can’t be purchased anymore?
The Internet erupted, as it loves to do when any cheese is moved. And, then the rumors and misinformation began to flow, which also the Internet is so great at.
So, let me state the facts first:
There’s a lot of spin both ways on pricing. Adobe says it’s cheaper with their fuzzy math. End users are saying it’s extremely expensive with their equally fuzzy math.
So, what does it mean to me? These charts are done on some grounded facts:
So, let’s let the charts speak for themselves.
Chart 1 – Buying Adobe Photoshop Today.
This chart shows what the costs would be to someone who purchased Photoshop brand new today. It’s assuming the purchase and subscription models continued to live in parallel.
If you aren’t upgrading every 18 months, it’ll take 3 years before the price of the subscription would have bought you Photoshop.
If you are upgrading every 18 months, at the 5 year mark, Creative Cloud is still cheaper. So, maybe Adobe is correct?
Chart 2 – For those (such as myself) that already own Photoshop
This chart tells a much different story. This pertains to all of those that have already invested in Photoshop. Later this year would have marked the 18 month mark for CS6. So, it’s assuming we would have been shelling out the $199 for the upgrade. But, long term Creative Cloud is going to be costing us more money from today forward.
What this chart doesn’t show is the person who already purchased Photoshop and has no plans on upgrading. Their ongoing cost will be $0.
Oh, these charts don’t show one “minor” other thing.. At month 61, you still own Photoshop CS. You don’t have to spend a dime to use it.
The fact is, Photoshop hasn’t had competitors for years. They could have doubled their prices and people would have screamed, but we would have still bought it. Adobe Photoshop is $699 today not because of the “ingenuity” of the product, but because of the lack of competition.
The only time we could tell Adobe that we weren’t awe-inspired was when they would release a new version of CS. We would look at the features and decide if it was worth upgrading, or save the money. It was a good relationship in that Adobe was pressured to innovate to appeal to us. CS4 offered nothing for Photographers, and many spoke out by not upgrading.
Switching to a subscription model takes that choice away from consumers. What if Photoshop lays stagnant for the next few years? People will still be forced to pay that money to get the already existing features.
I wouldn’t be surprised honestly if Photoshop does become stagnant. A recent episode of the The Grid listed features we want to see in Photoshop and the best that Scott Kelby and company could come up with is a “Do it again” option.
The options Adobe has been “Teasing us” with are more so centered on what they can do on a mobile solution than the bread and butter Photoshop. That is further proof that even Adobe is running out of innovative ideas.
Did I need CS7? CS8? CS9? Possibly not. Adobe may have known that, which makes today the perfect time to take that choice away from me.
The only thing I do know that I need future Photoshops for is their support with newer camera models. Every day, I read comments like, “Why doesn’t CS3 read my D800 raw files”. If I stick with CS6, I know I won’t be able to open RAW files from the 5dmk4 or the D900.
Face it. Photoshop is now just like your utility company. When was the last time you looked to your water company for some great ingenuity? But, you still continue to pay that bill each month.
The core issue to me is stability. I bought my home instead of renting one. I bought my car instead of leasing one. I prefer to buy my software instead of renting it.
Nobody knows our future and what it may bring. If my bank account suddenly read $0 tomorrow, I at least own my home, my car and my copy of Photoshop.
I have a hard time understanding Adobe. It almost seems to me that they are scurrying. They’ve never been upfront about their roadmap and it makes it very hard to make a decision investing in them ($699 is an investment. So is paying $20 a month in perpetuity).
When Photoshop CS6 was announced, I had an option. I could have upgraded from CS5 to CS6 or I could have jumped on the cloud. I chose to upgrade to CS6 for many reasons. But, one of those reasons was knowing that I’ll be able to upgrade to CS7 someday. How little did I know. Perhaps if Adobe had been more forthcoming at that time, my decision would have been different.
Adobe Creative Cloud is Adobe’s roadmap/future (for now….). Could they change direction again in a couple years? Quite possibly. Would knowing their 5 year vision help me make better decisions? Absolutely.
The big elephant in the room here is Adobe Lightroom. It’s a tool I use 10x more than Photoshop, and the two go together like peas and carrots.
Since its’ inception, Adobe has not known what to do with Photographers. We use Photoshop and Lightroom. Adobe offered all sorts of bundles, but never a Photoshop/Lightroom bundle. Why not? It would have made sense. Heck, they even had a Photoshop/Premiere bundle.
Adobe still doesn’t know what to do with this. Tom Hogarty, product manager for Photoshop, was on the Grid just last Wednesday asking for help. I viewed it as Adobe’s way of saying, “We really don’t know what to do”. Now that I know a little more facts, Tom knew what was going to be announced and knew he didn’t have answers.
Could Adobe come up with some Photoshop CC bundle for Photographers? Perhaps. But, right now they aren’t offering that. In the meantime they are putting pressure on us to upgrade to CC by July 31st at a reduced rate. Again, how can I make these decisions when Adobe is holding back on options?
It was announced that Lightroom will continue to exist as a retail purchase. Aside from the Creative Cloud suite, there is no other way to rent Lightroom.
That’s with good reason. See, unlike many of the other Adobe tools, Lightroom doesn’t have the market cornered. There are plenty of other Digital Asset Management and basic photo editing tools out there – Photo Mechanic, Capture One, On One Photo Suite, iPhoto, Aperture, etc.
Lightroom hasn’t matured yet. There are countless improvements that they need to still make to this tool in order to compete. This gives a compelling argument to continue the “Oooh! I gotta buy the latest version of Lightroom” mentality that we used to have with Photoshop.
It’s hard for me to make a conclusion since even the Adobe Product Manager and the NAPP president have come out saying that there isn’t a cloud option that makes sense for photographers.
I do know that Creative Cloud, as it exists today does not appeal to me. I don’t want to be paying $20/month for the less than exciting features announced.
The best thing about Lightroom is that it is the true bridge to Photoshop. My one definite need for having the latest Photoshop is support for new camera models. Thankfully, Lightroom can continue to be that tool.
So, I’ll continue to use Adobe Photoshop CS6 and upgrade to Lightroom 5, Lightroom 6, etc.
Of course, as soon as I make that decision, Adobe will change their direction again.
One of the privileges of being near Downtown Winter Gaden is the opportunity to photograph the many events the city hosts. Specifically, every 3rd Saturday of the month the streets are blocked off for a classic car show.
I wish I could tell you what the year, make or model of this car, but the owner wasn’t nearby so I have no idea. One thing I can tell you is that air scoop makes this car look very intimidating. Luckily, the “smiley” grill and the headlights make the car look cute.
By the way, this was edited Topaz Black & White Effects 2 and Lightroom.
I picked the Sigma 35 F1.4 DG HSM for Canon at Photoshop World earlier today. I posted about it on Google+ and was asked how its autofocus performed in various situations.
Now, I plan on putting the lens through its paces in the next couple of days so I can’t yet give a definitive answer, but for now here are some first impressions with an album of some images I captured today. Other than some cropping, and maybe a white balance adjustment, the images are not touched/edit in any way at all.
Overall the Sigma’s AF performs well. It does focus slower than my canon Ls, but it is not so slow that I feel I’m waiting on the lens. It’s just a bit slower.
In terms of hunting in low-light, I can’t say it hunts more than my canons do. The lead image in the album is from the floor of Photoshop World. As you can see, several of the images were from the expo floor at Photoshop World. Light wasn’t great, but the lens had no issues focusing.
I also have an image later on in the album of my son sitting in a dark room. I didn’t notice the lens hunting more than my other lenses.
As for build quality, it’s excellent. The lens sports an all metal barrel and a matte finish. It feels weighty but not heavy and the focus ring is smooth. It’s a 3rd party lens that doesn’t feel 2nd rate in any way.
Finally, in terms of sharpness. It is sharp, very sharp, and I love seeing the images it captures.
More to come soon. I’m planning a head-to-head with the canon 35L in a few weeks. I’ll write more in the next couple of days after I use the lens regularly for a good amount of time.
Checkout this lens at B&H or Amazon if you’re thinking of picking it up.
This shot of bull riders lining up for introductions prior to their rides at the Silver Spurs Rodeo in Orlando, Florida was a tough one to get. The details on this one are: 5DMKII with Canon 70-200 2.8L @200mm f/2.8 1/80 ISO 4000.
I took a few exposures but settled on this one because I felt the looks on their face communicated everything from apprehension to confidence.
© Copyright Ali Elhajj 2014-2020
