I appreciate your comments, they are very valid.  I can't wait until I can afford to upgrade.  I got these lenses (along with a couple others) for a steal, and think I can make a profit selling just a couple of them.  Hopefully in a few months I can make some upgrades.  I'd like a couple primes, maybe the Canon 35mm 2.0 or 50mm 1.4 to begin with.  And then maybe the 70-200 f/4L like you recommend.  Any others you'd recommend?  I appreciate the advice, being somewhat of a photography novice anyway, and having only very recently switched to Canon from Nikon, I have much to learn about Canon gear.

I recently got both of these lenses as part of stash of lenses I bought off of Craigslist.org recently.  I don't see why I need both, so I decided to run some comparison tests using my new 7D.  Here are the first sets of results: http://newells4.blogspot.com/

Does anyone have any advice regarding these lenses?  Do you have and/or recommend one over the other based on your own experience?  The Sigma seems warmer and softer.  It also has Macro, which I haven't had much experience with.  I'd appreciate any thoughts.  I know they are both fairly cheap and are both older models, but I intend to keep one of them for the time being.

I am interested in uploading more video to each of these sites in the near future, but notice that each of these sites have their own specific releases (SS has one for video, and another for stills).  Has anyone used a generic release (such as the Getty one? or a generic version of either of the releases available from these sites?) wit success at both sites?  I a hoping not to need to create multiple releases for each model at each shoot.

Thanks!

BC

Thanks for your thoughts everyone.  The discussion is helpful. I am fully aware of the limitations of using a DSLR for real video work.  I have extensive experience with Panasonic's HVX200 and DVX100 series camcorders, as well as some JVC and Sony HDV prosumer models, and I realize the rolling shutter will be an issue.  I am interested in the 7D/5DM2 or D300s for simple stock video purposes - because of their low price tags and decent video quality, and either would be a good upgrade to my D50 for still photos as well.

Also, I think it's inevitable that Nikon will jump into the 1080p market sometime fairly soon.  Maybe I should wait until that point to keep my limited lens collection relevant.

New question: do any of you who submit video see any buyer preference for 1080p over 720p?  Do you sell enough 1080p to justify the need to get a camera that shoots it, or would 720p be enough?

Hey everybody,  I am seriously considering a camera upgrade soon (i currently have a Nikon D50), partly to take advantage of the video features of these newer cameras.  I would like to focus on creating video for stock, in addition to my still submissions.  If you were in my position, with a Nikon and only a couple of lenses, would you upgrade to one of the Nikons or make the leap for 1080 on the 7D?  For those of you with any of these cameras, is the video output good enough for submission to the microstock agencies with video (ie iStock, ShutterStock, Pond5)?

I am seriously considering converting to the 7D, but am anxious to figure out if the additional price (for camera and a lens or two to start) is worth it.  Any thoughts would be very helpful.  Thanks in advance.

bcnewell
284
------------------
43874

1. when did you started with microstock?  I uploaded my first photos in April 2006, but didn't spend much time until summer of 2007.
2. how experienced in photography were you when started with MS?  Not very.  I'd taken a few photography classes in college (digital and film), and had taken hobby photos for a few years.
3. is photography your only source of revenue? If so, how much of your income is microstock earnings?  Well, how shall I say this?  I'm a full time grad student (law), so microstock makes up most of my [meager] income.
4. are you working alone? If not, how many employees?  I work alone, unless you can count my two toddlers that hang on my legs when i try to work
5. how many photos a week do you upload?  Sadly, i don't get time to upload weekly, mostly on longer breaks in the academic year.
6. on how many sites do you have your portfolio?  the big six + alamy, and i have a few shots on a couple others to test the waters but don't see myself uploading to many of them.
7. do you upload to macrostock? If so, how much of your stock photography earnings are coming from macro?  Alamy only.  About 1/6 of my 2008 income came from a small segment of my portfolio on that site - i hope to get more up when i have the time.  (i know, i know.  I have the time to write this post but not upload.  it's more of a stress relief mechanism than anything else.)

Sort of a related question along the lines of the OP. Are you able to sell images that you have purchased say through an estate auction? I have seen some beautiful medium format negatives go up for sale at estate auctions and have often wondered if they did scan well enough would I be able to sell them (landscapes only of course) or would I only have them for personal use?

No, you cannot  sell these because you do not have a copyright interest in them.  Owning a physical item and obtaining the intellectual property for that item are two discrete and very different things.  Even if the item were in the public domain (because copyright had expired) you still could not claim that your were the copyright owner - which is what most agencies require.  In order to sell the image you would need to have the image licensed to you for that purpose or, preferably, have the copyright assigned or granted to you.

I haven't done much for quite some time, but i used the HVX200 and DVX100A back when i had the time.

As a very part time microstocker myself, i appreciate the sites that payout the most money to me on a monthly basis.  Since last May FT has consistently outperformed DT and IS (by a multiplier of greater than 4X most months) as far as my earnings go.  Only SS has been better or at the same level.  I have a similar portfolio on all but IS - which is a little smaller due to their upload restrictions/process.  I have been with FT almost three years, and they have definitely made some quick gains these last 6 months.  I hope they continue.

I understand the concerns about FT's contributor relations problems, but they have been sending lots of money my way (comparably anyway  when some of the sites that pay higher percentages have been awfully slow and have earned me far less.

I appreciate all of your thoughts.  These threads are interesting.

I liked the IStock poll like this, and since my Fotolia sales have been rising like crazy since May, i wondered how everyone else was doing?

**i just realized this is in the wrong forum, can an admin please move it to the Fotolia section?  Sorry!***

Here's one of my most recent:

http://stockxpert.com/browse_image/view/26135301