Wondering if my 16-55 is decentred
Re: Wondering if my 16-55 is decentred
oscarvdvelde wrote:
Cliff Fujii wrote:
oscarvdvelde wrote:
Cliff Fujii wrote:
Nice contrasty pastoral scene. You said that you started with LR and finished with On1. I take that to mean is that you used LR as a DAM and did the conversion with On1. I'm not sure why you didn't use LR to convert the image. The latest version of LR CC does a great job of converting the image from RAF to DNG (my storage format) and then to JPG for printing. I have to admit I don't do a lot of landscape but this weekend I want to Valley of Fire and I have to say that the 16-55 and the X-T2 did a great job of capturing details of the scene.
Now at the risk I may be perceived as trolling in this thread, I opened your image and found a rock as smooth as a baby face, where I am sure there must be finer, grainy details. Maybe removed by noise reduction? How does it look in RawTherapee?
This is an out of camera JPG. The geology of the locality where the Valley of Fire State Park is located is an ancient sea bed. The older rock formations are pretty smooth where the newer formations are more crusty. I assumed that you looked at it with 100% magnification. If there was a conversion issue, the details would look waxy rather than just smooth. The winds were terrible in the valley and I decided to pack it in early. Fortunately with the exception for surface dust, it seems that the weather seals did work on the 16-55 and the X-T2.
The Bee Hives are also affected by hydroscopic activity but the texture is more pronounced than at Rainbow Vista. I haven't had the X-T2 for very long so I don't have a lot of images collected yet.
For RAW conversion, I use Adobe Lightroom CC or Photoshop CC. I generally take RAW+JPG (fine) and save them on different cards.
Do try RawTherapee, it's free after all:
http://rawtherapee.com/downloads
Use RL Deconvolution sharpening and the Wavelets tab for local contrast. You will see what detail is really there. Especially night and day if you would like a 100% crop of a shot for a web image.
Unfortunately RawTherapee is not part of my workflow. If they had a plug-in for Lightroom, I would probably try it out but as I said, I'm satisfied with the detail I get from LR 's Fuji RAW conversion. The images I showed are OOC JPGs which RawTherapee would not be able to do anything about.
Nikon Df
Nikon D810
Fujifilm X-T20
Fujifilm X-H1
Nikon Z7
+52 more
|
Post
(hide subjects)
|
Posted by
|
When
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 17, 2016
|
1 |
|
|
|
Oct 17, 2016
|
1 |
|
|
|
Oct 17, 2016
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 17, 2016
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 17, 2016
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 17, 2016
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 17, 2016
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 17, 2016
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 19, 2016
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 19, 2016
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 19, 2016
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 19, 2016
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 18, 2016
|
|
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum
PPrevious
NNext
WNext unread
UUpvote
SSubscribe
RReply
QQuote
BBookmark
MMy threads
Color scheme?
Blue /
Yellow
We're Noct messing around with this review.
Adobe Photoshop and Lightroom impress in a lot of ways, but their noise reduction lags the competition and their lens corrections lack a real-world basis. DxO PureRAW 3 aims to come to their rescue without totally reinventing your workflow!
The Sony ZV-E1 is the company's latest vlogging-focused camera: a full-frame mirrorless camera based the FX3/a7S III sensor, aimed at YouTubers and 'creators' looking to go pro.
The Sony ZV-E1 is a full frame camera targeting YouTubers. Chris and Jordan are Youtubers, what do they think?
Fujifilm's X-H2 is a high-resolution stills and video camera, that sits alongside the high-speed X-H2S at the pinnacle of the company's range of X-mount APS-C mirrorless cameras. We dug into what it does and what it means.
Above $2500 cameras tend to become increasingly specialized, making it difficult to select a 'best' option. We case our eye over the options costing more than $2500 but less than $4000, to find the best all-rounder.
There are a lot of photo/video cameras that have found a role as B-cameras on professional film productions or even A-cameras for amateur and independent productions. We've combed through the options and selected our two favorite cameras in this class.
What’s the best camera for around $2000? These capable cameras should be solid and well-built, have both the speed and focus to capture fast action and offer professional-level image quality. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing around $2000 and recommended the best.
Family moments are precious and sometimes you want to capture that time spent with loved ones or friends in better quality than your phone can manage. We've selected a group of cameras that are easy to keep with you, and that can adapt to take photos wherever and whenever something memorable happens.
What's the best camera for shooting sports and action? Fast continuous shooting, reliable autofocus and great battery life are just three of the most important factors. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting sports and action, and recommended the best.
