Mattoid

I think I get what's happening. This is my guess: In the preview you are seeing the 25% downscale of the original image sharpened: (Original image--downscale--sharpened). After you click...

I agree with this. The colours and everything look great. I would have guessed that it must have already had pp done to it for it to look so vibrant.

Shoot at something like 800 iso and use a slow shutter speed. They didn't have crazy ISOs back then so it was the only way to get exposure in a dark place. So the blur is motion blur. Ironically...

Absolutely. Those additions would make the q a very appealing system. An f1 prime would be extremely welcome too. For telephoto it would be interesting to try c mount lenses I think also, but the...

I have removed the image from my gallery and also from my computer. I completely understand your reasoning. I guess I am too used to the digital darkroom forum where people post with the direct...

Cool. I think you did right exposing to preserve the highlights. The customer and the dog work in silhouette so I actually like this better than the first version you posted. The name of the...

Nice picture. Is this with the 9mm wide open? The noise performance seems pretty decent. Also, have you increased the contrast at all? It seems to be lacking in dynamic range with the dog...

Thanks. looks really cool. looks like it took a lot of effort.

The 5dmk3 720p image will probably be a lot better quality than the 720p on the 7d etc. It may even be as detailed as 1080p on the nex. So If you absolutely need a slow motion shot it think it...

How did you do this?

Thanks. Any Idea what model or film type?

Many thanks for the link. It's interesting that quite a few of these look staged, or more appropriately: directed. Does anyone have an idea what camera was used for these shots?

These have been altered to make them more vibrant. Nothing wrong with that. These look fantastic. But I thought it was worth mentioning that the original prints wouldn't have looked exactly...

Thanks a lot. Just thinking about it myself it makes sense: Each output pixel is calculated not only by its corresponding photosite but also the photosites around it. If there were exactly the...

It could be a typo yes. Although interestingly it is a similar case with the specs of the D800: Max resolution is 7360*4912 = 36,152,320 whereas the effective pixels is listed as 36.3...

As I already said Its a technical interest. It might be something to do with how the bayer pattern interpolates for example. Or it could just be nothing. I don't know, which is why I'am asking.

Its more an interest on a technical level rather than qualms about image quality.

On the specification page the max resolution is listed as 5760* 3840 = 22,118,400 or 22.1 megapixels rounded off correctly. However, the effective pixels are listed as 22.3 megapixels. Can...

The Xpro1 is not a rangefinder. It is rangefinder styled but doesn't have the rangefinder method of acquiring focus. The only digital rangefinders are leicas.

That's the first time you'e used the word inflammatory. I never said they weren't that. So what If they are? How can the words 'stop being' followed by a negative quality be considered an...