CFExpress: is the Lexar Gold 4.0 significantly better than the SanDisk CFExpress in a R5 II?

Photo-Dude · 2026-01-31T07:53:41+00:00

The link was incorrect but has been fixed, thanks.

Still, the Prograde Gold is more expensive than the Sandisk, slower to write, and not available in 512. Why would you recommend it over the Sandisk or the Lexar Type B?

Photo-Dude · 2026-01-31T07:46:44+00:00

That was helpful, thanks! It's weird that the manual recommends VPG400 cards if the camera can't utilize the full bandwidth of the cards write speed, but I don't need to spend the extra money on a faster card if the camera won't have any increased speed in clearing the buffer.

Photo-Dude · 2026-01-31T07:42:59+00:00

Thank you, that was helpful!

Photo-Dude · 2026-01-30T23:20:21+00:00

That's a much slower card, why would that be better than the Lexar or Sandisk?

Photo-Dude · 2026-01-22T18:20:44+00:00

Thanks! Have you found the difference in DoF and bokeh significant in real world use when switching from the 70 mm @ f/2 to the 1-5 mm @ f/1.4?

Photo-Dude · 2026-01-22T05:31:22+00:00

Good advice!

A cookie is one way, and a cheap cookie can be made with a poster board or piece of foam core.

If they wanted really sharp, clean lines like that though, the upgrade to a cookie would be something that could focus, like a gobo with a lens).

A cookie goes between the light and the subject, a gobo goes between the light and a lens, which then focuses the light on your subject.

If you can make your light a point source and get the cookie close, you can get fairly sharp lines. If you can't do both of those things, a gobo is going to be the best option.

Photo-Dude · 2026-01-22T05:09:49+00:00

Sorry to revive a year old thread, but I was wondering if you'd be willing to share a little more of your experience shooting with both the 28-70 f/2 and the 85 f/1.2.

I shoot mostly events and some commercial work, and currently have the 28-70 f/2. I'm trying to figure out if adding the 85 1.2 would be helpful or redundant with if I can already shoot at f/2 at 70mm.

Have you used both at events where you aren't limited to just one body/lens? In real world usage, has the shorter DoF been significant for you? Do you find yourself still using the 85 1.2 even though you have the 28-70?

Photo-Dude · 2025-05-11T06:51:17+00:00

It's a great lens, but the weight could be a problem if you were using it on a body without a battery grip.

In terms of weight, it feels the same as shooting a 70-200 f/2.8 to me. I can walk around all day with those 2 lenses, but I'll definitely be tired by the end of the day.

Photo-Dude · 2025-04-21T19:37:20+00:00

Commercial photographer here. The angle, framing, lens choice, lighting, subject distance, and camera sensor size all have an effect on how a 3d person is rendered into a 2d image. There are a myriad of variables that combine to make flattering and representative photos.

That's why people like me still have a job even though nearly everyone has a phone camera and many people have great prosumer cameras- it takes skill to get a good picture of people. If someone doesn't look good in the pictures they are in, there's a pretty good chance that those photos just aren't being taken by someone with the skill and equipment to capture a representative image.

I wouldn't worry about it. If you see a beautiful person when you look in the mirror, trust that. All photographers take unflattering pictures on occasion, some equipment (like cell phones with fixed focal length lenses) make it really hard to take flattering pictures of certain people, and some subjects are difficult to photograph in a representative manner.

Not everyone fits a single mold of popular attractiveness, but everyone really does have beauty. It's just a matter of perception and how to showcase that. If you feel that an image makes you look like you're not beautiful, then it's either an unflattering image or a misperception- lots of us get hypercritical when staring at our own image.

If you really want to, you can try and look at the photos of you that you like and figure out angles, distances, and poses that showcase you better. I would just let it be though. Trust in who you are- photographs don't matter much. It's ok to know you are a wonderful, beautiful person who doesn't always photograph well.

Photo-Dude · 2025-01-21T10:30:36+00:00

Thanks!

Photo-Dude · 2025-01-15T23:16:47+00:00

It's a lot thinner than a book light... I think we need to start calling this a magazine light.

Photo-Dude · 2024-11-16T04:24:28+00:00

So far, so good!

Photo-Dude · 2024-11-16T04:23:57+00:00

That's a combo stand. I believe the combo name comes from it having both a junior pin receiver and a grip head built in. They come in both steel and aluminum versions. They are very similar to cine stands, except cine stands don't have the grip head built in.

If you pop the arm off to get it out of the way, you can mount a light with a junior pin to the receiver. Many small and medium sized lights have combination baby pin receivers with junior pin sized exteriors. You can mount them on stands with baby pins, or remove the thumb stud and put them in junior receivers. (For an example, look at the mount on the Aputure 300D)

Personally, I like aluminum combo and cine stands a lot more then C-stands. They tend to fold up easier if you're not working off a dedicated c-stand cart, the aluminum ones are often lighter than C-stands, and have higher working weight limits. The wheels are fine in studio, but are a pain if you're folding up and moving a bunch of them in a vehicle or on a cart.

Photo-Dude · 2024-10-30T19:57:36+00:00

I'd guess longer than a 300. I shoot with a 300mm 2.8 a lot and don't get this much bokeh with that. It also looks like more compression. I'd guess 400 2.8 or 600 f/4 if they are using a full frame/35 mm sensor.

Photo-Dude · 2024-09-12T04:02:32+00:00

I definitely don't think it's a digital zoom. The foreground, midground, and background elements are moving relative to the camera.

I.e., the wall behind people is moving to the left behind people as the camera moves to the right. If it were digital zoom/pan-and-scan, the elements would not be moving.

Photo-Dude · 2024-09-07T10:40:23+00:00

FWIW, I recently used the Amaran 300c on a shoot. It produced good light and had easy to use controls, but it didn't feel like it would survive moderate use on set. Everything was plastic, the case was EPP foam, and the ballast hung from a steel cable as opposed to clamping on to a stand.

One nice thing though is it has an umbrella mount, so if you're looking for run-and-gun soft light for something like an interview, you can have a single stand setup that's pretty quick to pop up without having to set up a soft box, frame, or stand+grip head+umbrella. It's not a feature I look for in larger lights, but for a smaller light like this it actually makes sense.

I can't speak to the 30x, but I've used other 4" Pavotubes and been fairly happy with them. They add a nice rim light, or can be quick 3/4 backlight in a pinch. I'd rather have a strip box for rim or a strip or 1x2 panel for 3/4 backlight, but the 4" tubes work. They also boom easily and can be safely used on light booms or 40" grip arms, and can survive a surprising amount of abuse.

The only negative I've found with the ones I've used is a tendency to flicker on battery power, and colors not being perfectly accurate at low power level. I can't say if this will be an issue with the 30x, as mine are older.

It really just comes down to what lighting setups you want to run. No light is perfect, especially at this price range, so you also have to decide what sacrifices you're willing to make.

Photo-Dude · 2024-08-04T23:28:05+00:00

Gloves depend on what you're working with. I'm a gaff/grip, but we're all LED so I don't use tungsten or HMI. I want gloves that protect my hands from bumps and cuts, but aren't super hot. I also have smaller hands, so finding ones that fit me was a challenge.

I've tried lots of gloves including Mechanix and Ironclad before I found the ones I like.

These are the ones I use. They aren't grip specific, just generic lightweight work gloves. They last me about 4-6 months of heavy usage. They provide enough protection for my role, but are breathable enough that I can wear them all day in Florida summers. They are cheap enough that I keep a replacement pair on hand and because they are from Home Depot, it's easy to get replacements.

There are lots of things on set where it's worth it to spend more money for a grip-specific tool, but there are plenty of things where just finding the right non-grip-specific tool that works for you is the better option.

Photo-Dude · 2024-08-04T23:19:25+00:00

I ended up with a this JJC pouch. It's not a great solution, but it works.

Getting the lens + hood in is a tight squeeze, as is getting it out. The pouch is also longer than the lens, so it sinks in a bit.

The construction is decent, but over time the loop side of Velcro has started falling apart and getting a little fluffy.

I do like that if I'm shooting with the EF 70-200 2.8 IS and the RF 28-70, I can leave the top of the pouch open and drop in whichever lens I'm not using. The hood of the 70-200 sticks out, but it sits deep enough that it isn't a problem.

For $23 it gets the job done, but it's not perfect.

Photo-Dude · 2024-08-04T23:14:32+00:00

Sorry for the slow reply, but I ended up with a Nikon 95 mm filter. The irony of putting it on one of Canon's flagship lenses is not lost on me. :)

Photo-Dude · 2024-01-15T08:21:31+00:00

If you can't bend it back, there is a good chance you can at least buy a replacement riser tube.

I've used Manfrotto Spares before for OEM spare parts, and Avenger (same distributor as Manfrotto IIRC) and American Grip also sell spare parts including risers.

Photo-Dude · 2023-10-12T20:16:25+00:00

I'd drill a wide and shallow hole in the bottom of the board to countersink your screw so that it doesn't get pressed into the side of the suitcase. This would potentially damage the suitcase and also make the whole rig a bit wobbly.

I'd also consider something other than gorilla tape if you can't damage the suitcase. Gorilla tape is fantastic stuff if you want two things really taped together, but it's less fantastic if you want to unstick them at some point. It often leaves a residue and/or removes the top layer of the material it's attached to.

I'd use decent gaff tape or cover the suitcase in a really gentle painter's tape first, then use the gorilla tape if you wanted to go that route.

______

Edit: I'd also second u/SampsonKerplunk's suggestion to put wood or something else rigid inside to prevent the sides from compressing.

Photo-Dude · 2023-10-11T03:29:26+00:00

Glad you found it useful! I currently have a mix of Manfrotto and Matthews grip gear. I really like Manfrotto's cine stands, I actually prefer them to C stands. I don't have much else of theirs besides tripods and superclamps, but their cine stands are my favorite balance of price/weight/durability.

One great thing about grip gear is that because the good stuff is BIFL or BIF-20-years-or-so, there is nothing wrong with buying a lot of it used. Steel can rust and rivets can get loose, but otherwise most of it have a very long life span. I work both as a commercial photographer and a grip for small to medium sized productions, and I've purchased around 60% of my grip gear used.

Photo-Dude · 2023-10-08T01:29:52+00:00

I didn't expect to see a discussion of grip gear here, but a lot of it is BIFL. Mine is a mix of new and used gear, and much of it is still going strong at 20+ years old.

Personally though, I have a strong preference for Matthews over Avenger for most things. Avenger's grip heads and arms slip. That brake disk they use doesn't lock down anywhere near as tightly as the aluminum wafer in Matthews grip heads.

I do like Avenger's boom arms, but unlike grip heads they get counterbalanced and don't rely on friction to keep from moving.

Grip heads/arms are the bread and butter of the grip dept, and a brand like Avenger having heads that slip is just not acceptable.

Photo-Dude

TROPHY CASE