AAK
Forum Pro
Hi, R2.
Won't be the first time you've got me confused!
Great shot, BTW. Expression, composition, skin tone. Just marvelous. You seem to have captured "roguish innocence" perfectly! He looks like butter would melt in his mouth, but that he wouldn't be beyond a little high-spirited fun!!
But this 100% crop baffled me enough that I had to go back and see if it was from the same picture as the one in the original post!
Some thoughts:
1) Glad you didn't do any NR in post-processing. According to your 100% crop, it appears that the camera has already noise-reduced this image to the limit! Any more NR will turn this thing into a watercolor.
2) Which brings up my confusion, which may actually prove a point many have been saying for a long time. The image in your first post is so sharp and beautifully-contrasted, I have to assume you added a lot of that in PP.
The 100% crop shows a fairly serious loss of detail: the eyelashes are almost gone, the eyebrows almost blend with the skin above the eyes, the edge of the irises have been "chewed" by noise and the skin texture is pretty much washed out! (Have I missed anything?)
I don't mean to throw a wet blanket here, R2, or even to pixel-peep. You know what I'm referring to and I'm wondering how you overcame the lost information in your beautiful shot?
In this area, I think I'm still a skeptic. But I -can- be convinced!!
It seems to me that this camera, at ISO 800 can produce a wonderful low-res Web-Snap or a small print without too much difficulty. Which is a wonderful accomplishment for any camera with a sensor this dense and small.
But have you blown it up to, for example, to an 8X10 print? How does it look, esp. vis-a-vis detail.
So far, from my very brief experience with ISO 800 on the H5, I would be reluctant to recommend that people try it when they need to stop the motion of a child -- unless it's the only way they can get the picture.
Imagine the same stunning picture with each perfect eyelash, each strand of hair luminous and individual.... and if you could stop the action, wouldn't the IQ be positively brilliant at ISO 200 or even 400?
I've yet to figure out the effect of in-camera NR (that Clear-Raw technology seems to be pretty impressive) over the different ISO ranges and exposures. Sony seems to be getting much better (and less-destructive) results working on the data-stream than I would ever get working on the .jpg.
Your thoughts?
--
=~ AAK - http://www.aakatz.com
=~ Author of the H-Series White Paper
=~ http://www.aakatz.com/h1whitepaper
Won't be the first time you've got me confused!
Great shot, BTW. Expression, composition, skin tone. Just marvelous. You seem to have captured "roguish innocence" perfectly! He looks like butter would melt in his mouth, but that he wouldn't be beyond a little high-spirited fun!!
But this 100% crop baffled me enough that I had to go back and see if it was from the same picture as the one in the original post!
Some thoughts:
1) Glad you didn't do any NR in post-processing. According to your 100% crop, it appears that the camera has already noise-reduced this image to the limit! Any more NR will turn this thing into a watercolor.
2) Which brings up my confusion, which may actually prove a point many have been saying for a long time. The image in your first post is so sharp and beautifully-contrasted, I have to assume you added a lot of that in PP.
The 100% crop shows a fairly serious loss of detail: the eyelashes are almost gone, the eyebrows almost blend with the skin above the eyes, the edge of the irises have been "chewed" by noise and the skin texture is pretty much washed out! (Have I missed anything?)
I don't mean to throw a wet blanket here, R2, or even to pixel-peep. You know what I'm referring to and I'm wondering how you overcame the lost information in your beautiful shot?
In this area, I think I'm still a skeptic. But I -can- be convinced!!
It seems to me that this camera, at ISO 800 can produce a wonderful low-res Web-Snap or a small print without too much difficulty. Which is a wonderful accomplishment for any camera with a sensor this dense and small.
But have you blown it up to, for example, to an 8X10 print? How does it look, esp. vis-a-vis detail.
So far, from my very brief experience with ISO 800 on the H5, I would be reluctant to recommend that people try it when they need to stop the motion of a child -- unless it's the only way they can get the picture.
Imagine the same stunning picture with each perfect eyelash, each strand of hair luminous and individual.... and if you could stop the action, wouldn't the IQ be positively brilliant at ISO 200 or even 400?
I've yet to figure out the effect of in-camera NR (that Clear-Raw technology seems to be pretty impressive) over the different ISO ranges and exposures. Sony seems to be getting much better (and less-destructive) results working on the data-stream than I would ever get working on the .jpg.
Your thoughts?
--
=~ AAK - http://www.aakatz.com
=~ Author of the H-Series White Paper
=~ http://www.aakatz.com/h1whitepaper
)
