Thank you for the article! Of course there are quite a few methods to make an HDR image in PS.I'm still searching for the best technique for me so I'll certainly give it a try. There are some bracketed shots of mine waiting for post for a long time..Special thanks for presenting a more realistic (not overcooked) style in this category :)
role_of_72: What is your opinion on the color rendition of the lens?
I'm asking it because I have the previous model (17-70 OS HSM on Canon) and although I like the Sigma colors sometimes I have to face with some very strong yellow cast on my pictures.. Is it any better this time? (Same question for the 18-35 :) )Thanks!
Thank you, Andy! Neutral is great :)Actually I have yellow color shift on outdoor daylight images (both with the daylight and auto WB settings).Back in the days my Sigma 55-200 had very pleasing colors (it was a bit yellowish but I liked it) so was my Sigma 10-20 EX. They were about the same in color rendition but the 17-70 OS (not the 'C' version)' is a bit on a heavy side in this regard. I mean it shows the color of grass to be way too yellowish compared to my Canon lenses - and reality.
What is your opinion on the color rendition of the lens?
OK, at least now I know I still don't understand 'art'.. :D
role_of_72: I'm thinking of astrophotography: imagine this lens on a Pentax K-5 with an O-GPS1 unit..!
Hmm.. I have plans now.. :)
Yep: lenstip.com. They call it 'medium'.
Anyway, for me a bit of coma is better some ultra-short unintended star trails.
I'm thinking of astrophotography: imagine this lens on a Pentax K-5 with an O-GPS1 unit..!
role_of_72: The NX10/20 is my favourite design for mirrorless so far regarding ergonomics (yeah, sorry EM-5 and Nex line :) ).
If somebody is interested in it he/she can buy this thing but I DO hope that this won't be the main direction at Samsung.
My exact thoughts anyway. :)Samsung has some quite good lenses for the NX system, however what I don't particularly like about it (I mean the 'box' not the lens) it's that former Samsung models simply failed to deliver the per pixel sharpness/clarity I was used to on my 450d (forget about resolution differences here for a bit).Maybe there will be some differences this time.. let's hope. ((Regardless, I'll stay with the C brand btw :) ))
The NX10/20 is my favourite design for mirrorless so far regarding ergonomics (yeah, sorry EM-5 and Nex line :) ).
I too think this is the 'sharpest' real world sample so far. :)
role_of_72: Apart from the AA battery thing this is what I call value for money!Now let's see some good lens to come, Pentax ;)
The K-500 comes with 4AAs and the LI109 is the option, that was my main concern.
As they say 'One man's meat is another man's poison'. Some people like AA batteries but I prefer the proprietary ones. You get one with the camera and buy another from ebay almost for free.With that two batteries you're all set and there's no need to invest in an expensive charger, sets of AA batteries (1.2V vs. 1.5V in most cases so they run out very soon). I have some bad experience with them. Still, it can be an option for some.An other disadvantage of AAs is weight (charger + battery sets)
You can use AAs with a battery grip as well, but unfortunately as I know the K-30 and alikes don't have this option..
Apart from the AA battery thing this is what I call value for money!Now let's see some good lens to come, Pentax ;)
ZAnton: pentax makes great cameras, they need to make good lenses. At the moment they have only a few. Second, I would still make optical IS on some lenses, as it is way better than in-body IS.
Maybe they need to add optical IS on some of their tele lenses but not to the wide angle ones.My experience is that with wide angle lenses in-body IS worked way better than optical IS. On the other hand the latter can help af in low light, that's true.For wide angle pick a Sigma or Tamron on Pentax and you're done. ;)
role_of_72: My first thought is that this Nikon could have been a perfect camera in the Canon Pro1 era!But today I'm not sure. It depends on the use of the individual.I don't need shallow dof that much but print up to a3 size so it's certainly not for me.Anyway I suppose the future Canon 'pro' M model will have similar ergonomics. Now that would be a hit! :)
Sure I can print up to that size but I won't be satisfied with the result. :) And yeah, I checked the official samples. Maybe I could do something with them up to iso200 but anything above is a bit of a compromise. As I've said it depends on the individual and this was only from the iq point of view.All in all I know my needs exactly and this time I'm not the target but it can be really good for other hobbists.
My first thought is that this Nikon could have been a perfect camera in the Canon Pro1 era!But today I'm not sure. It depends on the use of the individual.I don't need shallow dof that much but print up to a3 size so it's certainly not for me.Anyway I suppose the future Canon 'pro' M model will have similar ergonomics. Now that would be a hit! :)
A great shot with an interesting angle and composition! Congrats!
I'm not sure if this is called photography because photographic tools were used only for getting the raw material to his work but anyway I like it.
Works like this need much more imagination than most of us have and this cannot be compensated with million dollar gear. Thanks for the video it was really refreshing!
role_of_72: The APS-C - 43 gap is now closed. And everyone lives happily ever after :)Good job, Oly!
As I know DPR studio samples were seldom about depth of field comparison so obviously I was referring to iso performace.
About depth of field: DOF advantage (large vs. shallow) depends mainly on the purpose of your photography so it is quite relative.
The APS-C - 43 gap is now closed. And everyone lives happily ever after :)Good job, Oly!
A long-awaited addition. Thank you and keep up the good work!
Get a weekly update of all that's new in the digital
photography world by subscribing to the Digital Photography Review