-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Who needs FF anyway.
- Thread starter Adventsam
- Start date
Beautiful picture Sam, vibrant colors and well composed!
--
Cheers,
Frederic
http://azurphoto.com/blog/
--
Cheers,
Frederic
http://azurphoto.com/blog/
NoelVerhoeven
New member
Agree with you! Made a similar handheld exposure this summer vacation. Turned out pretty good.
Adventsam
Senior Member
Thanks,
Its so much easier without a tripod ;-)
Its so much easier without a tripod ;-)
Adventsam
Senior Member
Nice, but try and push the colours?
eg
eg
Adventsam
Senior Member
A breeze
AndyMulhearn
Leading Member
- Messages
- 715
- Reaction score
- 406
How about cropping out that section of sky? it looks awfully blown out...
Edit: I do very much like the sections of flowing and still water and how they contrast
Edit: I do very much like the sections of flowing and still water and how they contrast
Triggr Happy
Forum Enthusiast
What happened to that huge DR of EM5 Sam?
This picture could have been easily done with...with GH2
This picture could have been easily done with...with GH2
Adventsam
Senior Member
Gut feeling is not, GH2 has less dr, colour is not as deep in tone and could never hand-hold GH2 at that speed?
Detail Man
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 17,490
- Solutions
- 11
- Reaction score
- 2,745
Looks like the contrast-ratio of these scenes overwhelmed the EM5's Dynamic Range, and overwhelmed the "highlight recovery" abilities of Lightroom 4.x. It seems to me that having the additional Signal/Noise Ratio of a FF sensor sure would have helped. Thanks for the demonstration.
Adventsam
Senior Member
Welcome DM, 5dmk3 would be so much better, not ;-)
Adventsam
Senior Member
Just for you DM, as you can see the DR is real, may even be 13.5 ev ;-0
Looks like the contrast-ratio of these scenes overwhelmed the EM5's Dynamic Range, and overwhelmed the "highlight recovery" abilities of Lightroom 4.x. It seems to me that having the additional Signal/Noise Ratio of a FF sensor sure would have helped. Thanks for the demonstration.
foxley12
Forum Enthusiast
fabulous pictures guys, I enjoyed each and every one of them.
Triggr Happy
Forum Enthusiast
I am not sure about that Sam, and you know it. Ask former yourself
Here is one from yesterday, hand held 1/20 sec, not so shabby DR either.
Here is one from yesterday, hand held 1/20 sec, not so shabby DR either.
Gut feeling is not, GH2 has less dr, colour is not as deep in tone and could never hand-hold GH2 at that speed?
Detail Man
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 17,490
- Solutions
- 11
- Reaction score
- 2,745
Not with the linear data encoding that is used in 12-bit E-M5 ORFs. That is more than a "gut feel".
What's blown is blown, Sam - and Lightroom 4.x is limited in it's ability to perform miracles. Dimming down your images down says nothing about the camera's Dynamic Range or it's Signal/Noise Ratio.
Bobo Hodls
Forum Pro
That's a wonderful scene, admiringly framed, but I'd have taken a few AEB exposures for the DR this scene presents, on a tripod. I know it's nice to see how far the camera will flex for one, but in the end no one appreciates what it took to get the shot, as long as it's 'got'. Not that I think HDR or blending should render every shadow and highlight visible, mind you.
This interpretation is very nice, but if I took it I'd feel I short changed myself, ultimately. Different strokes?
--
...Bob, NYC
http://www.bobtullis.com
"Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't." - Little Big Man
.
Tack
Forum Enthusiast
I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to demonstrate with this series of photos in comparison to FF, the dynamic range of the E-M5, the benefits of IBIS, noise levels, the ease of shooting without a tripod, what?
I'd like to see you push the shadows and the resulting noise levels that are now hidden under the blocked up darks.
I think a FF camera and tripod would indeed have done a better job.
I'd like to see you push the shadows and the resulting noise levels that are now hidden under the blocked up darks.
I think a FF camera and tripod would indeed have done a better job.
Adventsam
Senior Member
I forgot to take my tripod(s) treckpod etc and a lot of other things on holiday/vacation lol. We packed the car and on arrival at our destination half my stuff was missing I'd left it ready to be loaded, I got distracted for a second and before I knew it I thought I'd packed it but I hadn't. OK, by one when we got there? well where we were staying ccouldnt of been more remote and in the end I decided to dispense with the tripod and just see, so I couldnt bracket anything and the IBIS became the saviour, it also allowed me to put it through its paces and I quickly realised 0.4 sec was the limit, but I also observed that I preferred these images around 0.5 sec too, so I am pleased and satisfied in equal measure
All of the above as it happens
Bob thinks so too, originally I liked the dark and moody but maybe bright and vibrant is even better. One thing for sure I wouldnt of been shooting these images with FF and no tripod lol. No excuse I know, but anyway thats the background.
jim stirling
Veteran Member
Well whether you need or want FF is pretty irrelevant. The shot has blown highlights in several locations, you shot at F11 which is in diffraction land, and if you posted a larger sample I suspect that the nothing in the image is actually sharp. There are FF IS lenses covering everything from 16mm-800mm {8mm -400mm in mFT } if one needs them so this shot would present no challenge for any system
Jim
Jim
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum