5D3 + 40mm shot, any good?

Started Jul 5, 2012 | Discussions thread
wallybarthman
Regular MemberPosts: 360Gear list
Like?
Re: 5D3 + 40mm shot, any good?
In reply to bobby1781, Jul 6, 2012

You deserve major credit for this post - most people would have gone into hyper-defensive mode and you didn't.

bobby1781 wrote:

bjdbjd wrote:

Wrong. I own the 1dx too. And most of the glass. I just don't have much of the experience.

Actually, I am not wrong. You still own the 5DIII. Owning this too just really shows you have a lot of disposable income which, honestly, props to you.

Ya, I was a little hypersensative, I guess it's like watching a 16 year-old get a race car and then they wrap it around a pole because they aren't suddenly a race-car driver.

To shed a bit of light on my rudeness...

JPEG images are going to have processing done to them. You can adjust to what degree to some extent, but it will still be compromising. The RAW file, actually isn't an image at all, and when you view them you are looking at a "preview" that has been compiled from a lot of data. The JPEG is basically the result of taking that data keeping only what you see and deleting the rest (this is a rough rough attempt at an explanation) If you image is over-exposed and your highlights are blown, you basically have solid white pixels. You can do all you want to try and lower the highlights, but there is no data left to recover. When you edit the RAW the version you see, is not the final word. Highlights that are not severely over-exposed, actually contain enough data that there is detail in there.

A lens is the best in the center and most lenses, especially primes, are going to be quite sharp in the center. The extreme edges and borders are one of the biggest differences as far as sharpness that separates some of these lenses. It is why you might here someone say that a crop camera is using the "sweet-spot" and a cheaper lens will perform seemingly better on a crop sensor because the edges are sharper, when really you just chopped off the part that shows its weakness.

You can make relatively soft photos look pretty damn sharp for screen viewing and you basically have done that.

At first if you compare out-of-camera RAW images with out-of-camera JPEGs, the JPEGS usually appear better, but that's until you go through the post where RAW will leave them in the dirt.

Sorry, for being a jerk.

Your lens looks just fine, I would go take some pictures and enjoy it.

 wallybarthman's gear list:wallybarthman's gear list
Canon EOS-1D Mark II Canon EOS 7D Canon EF 35mm f/2.0 Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM +10 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow