I love Canon but I won’t be making excuses for them anymore.

Started Jul 19, 2012 | Discussions thread
Great Bustard
Forum ProPosts: 21,933
Response for all.
In reply to gdanmitchell, Jul 19, 2012

gdanmitchell wrote:

A competent photographer would not have underexposed so grossly - to the point that even the highlights are probably not remotely close to pushing the bright end of the histogram.

But a competent photographer would "underexpose" to the point that the highlights were near the clipping point, and then apply the appropriate tone curve to the file, if the sensor could produce a file that could handle it.

I have no idea what these images mean or how to regard them, having seen quite a few examples of supposed photographic proof of this or that thing that turned out to be stacked one way or the other.

I've seen quite a few examples where they weren't stacked, and the IQ was easily "good enough" for web display (but not a 40x60 inch print).

This is not meant as disrespect to Nikon or their fine D800, but really?

Yes, really. Even assuming the size of the print is such that merging multiple exposures is the best way about it, the D800 will get away with fewer exposures to merge. And if it doesn't matter how many exposures you're merging, then wtf are you doing with a FF DSLR in the first place -- get a compact and tripod and stitch and merge until you get what you need.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow