fft2000

Joined on Nov 8, 2016

Comments

Total: 194, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

cxsparc: One close look at the "two horses being lassoed" picture at ISO320 was enough. The fur is smudged all over beyond recognition. There are a lot of people apparently for whom this IQ is enough, but I really like the ability to crop and still have satisfying pictures.
At least for me, APSC is still the way to go. M43 continues to be hyped but the IQ consistently does not hold up in my personal view.
P.S. And that shot is taken with a 1K tele lens. Maybe it is the JPG engine of this camera that lets the picture down. But then again, we live in 2019 and this is a brand new camera (processor). Shame on Olympus either way :-)

To view Original you have to be logged in.
And RawTherapee has no problems with processing. It's available for Win, Mac and Linux.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2019 at 19:34 UTC
In reply to:

cxsparc: One close look at the "two horses being lassoed" picture at ISO320 was enough. The fur is smudged all over beyond recognition. There are a lot of people apparently for whom this IQ is enough, but I really like the ability to crop and still have satisfying pictures.
At least for me, APSC is still the way to go. M43 continues to be hyped but the IQ consistently does not hold up in my personal view.
P.S. And that shot is taken with a 1K tele lens. Maybe it is the JPG engine of this camera that lets the picture down. But then again, we live in 2019 and this is a brand new camera (processor). Shame on Olympus either way :-)

cxsparc: Under the image Click "Available Sizes -> Original"

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2019 at 10:48 UTC
In reply to:

cxsparc: One close look at the "two horses being lassoed" picture at ISO320 was enough. The fur is smudged all over beyond recognition. There are a lot of people apparently for whom this IQ is enough, but I really like the ability to crop and still have satisfying pictures.
At least for me, APSC is still the way to go. M43 continues to be hyped but the IQ consistently does not hold up in my personal view.
P.S. And that shot is taken with a 1K tele lens. Maybe it is the JPG engine of this camera that lets the picture down. But then again, we live in 2019 and this is a brand new camera (processor). Shame on Olympus either way :-)

There is the RAW file, download it and have a look!
Processed it just for you:
https://www.dpreview.com/galleries/2152374249/photos/3984210/e-m5-iii-107
Happy with that?

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2019 at 09:55 UTC
On a photo in the Sony a7R IV sample gallery sample gallery (12 comments in total)
In reply to:

piccolbo: The mountains in the distance look very sharp. The trees in the front, soft (I am looking at 100%). I thought maybe a windy day (motion blur) but even the railing at the bottom looks blurred. Is DOF such an issue at 240Mp?

There is more detail in the grass and blossoms right at the bottom edge than some of the trees in the middle of the shot. Also resolution is best right in the center and falls off quite quickly, look at the most distant trees with sunset sky behind them. Is it the expected quality of the lens? Or did you get some rotation when pressing the shutter?

Link | Posted on Sep 25, 2019 at 08:24 UTC
On article Laowa 100mm F2.8 2x Ultra Macro APO sample gallery (100 comments in total)
In reply to:

fft2000: Weird.
Gallery says all samples taken with "EOS R" but for the 18MP shots EXIF thinks it was an EOS 1DX. So who is right? ;)

I get that :)
But the "Camera" info under "Details" should reflect that - it says "EOS R" even for the shots taken with the 1DX. I first thought it was kinda "crop" mode of the EOS R but when developing a RAW file I discovered that it's a different camera.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2019 at 09:20 UTC
On a photo in the Laowa 100mm F2.8 2x Ultra Macro APO sample gallery sample gallery (5 comments in total)
In reply to:

AKPhotoArt: f/32 is way beyond the diffraction limited aperture of f/8.6 of the EOS R!
If you need more DoF in a macro shot only stacking will help to get a decent image... but f/32 (or even f/22) will ruin the resolution.

"If you would have experience" -- and there we are. Makes further replies pointless, Mr "PhotoArt".

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2019 at 07:22 UTC
On a photo in the Laowa 100mm F2.8 2x Ultra Macro APO sample gallery sample gallery (2 comments in total)
In reply to:

Manoel Moraes: Using ISO 6400 has ruined the image quality and resolution.

Probably using anything slower than 1/320s would have ruined the shot, too? Because that thing was still alive and moving. Or this photo was shot handheld.
Besides that this image is nowhere ruined by the high ISO. It shows great detail and with better software you can enhance it even more and get rid of the noise.

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2019 at 08:44 UTC
On a photo in the Laowa 100mm F2.8 2x Ultra Macro APO sample gallery sample gallery (5 comments in total)
In reply to:

AKPhotoArt: f/32 is way beyond the diffraction limited aperture of f/8.6 of the EOS R!
If you need more DoF in a macro shot only stacking will help to get a decent image... but f/32 (or even f/22) will ruin the resolution.

BTW: This shot (like all others with 18MP) was taken with the EOS 1DX, so any softness might as well be due to its optical low pass filter.

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2019 at 04:24 UTC
On article Laowa 100mm F2.8 2x Ultra Macro APO sample gallery (100 comments in total)

Weird.
Gallery says all samples taken with "EOS R" but for the 18MP shots EXIF thinks it was an EOS 1DX. So who is right? ;)

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2019 at 18:10 UTC as 13th comment | 2 replies
On a photo in the Laowa 100mm F2.8 2x Ultra Macro APO sample gallery sample gallery (5 comments in total)
In reply to:

AKPhotoArt: f/32 is way beyond the diffraction limited aperture of f/8.6 of the EOS R!
If you need more DoF in a macro shot only stacking will help to get a decent image... but f/32 (or even f/22) will ruin the resolution.

I can't see where diffraction ruined this photo. From RAW also looks better:
https://www.dpreview.com/galleries/2152374249/photos/3975022/_kte9870

Link | Posted on Sep 17, 2019 at 13:52 UTC
On article Sony a6600 sample gallery (207 comments in total)
In reply to:

fft2000: A suspiciously high number of shots around 1/100s are unsharp, especially with the 16-55, the sigma seems to do better sometimes. Same as with the A6100. Could that be shutter shock? Subject was still enough to get sharp image.

Shutter shock often is lens dependent. E.G. it was especially visible with the 14-140 and the 100-400 on the Panasonic GX8 while most other lenses didn't suffer at all.
But yeah, we have to see. Need to be tested out.

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2019 at 13:55 UTC
On article Sony a6600 sample gallery (207 comments in total)
In reply to:

fft2000: A suspiciously high number of shots around 1/100s are unsharp, especially with the 16-55, the sigma seems to do better sometimes. Same as with the A6100. Could that be shutter shock? Subject was still enough to get sharp image.

IamJF both linked images shot with the sigma lens and not the 16-55.

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2019 at 12:29 UTC
On article Sony a6600 sample gallery (207 comments in total)
In reply to:

fft2000: A suspiciously high number of shots around 1/100s are unsharp, especially with the 16-55, the sigma seems to do better sometimes. Same as with the A6100. Could that be shutter shock? Subject was still enough to get sharp image.

duchamp, IamJF: The best EyeAF doesn't help when the camera shutter introduces visible softness that IMO results in quite less than reasonably sharp images. I wouldn't have posted my comment if I thought the images all were sharp. There are already enough comments in this gallery praising Sony's intergalactic AF and how these images just proofe that Sony is the best.

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2019 at 10:23 UTC
On article Sony a6600 sample gallery (207 comments in total)

A suspiciously high number of shots around 1/100s are unsharp, especially with the 16-55, the sigma seems to do better sometimes. Same as with the A6100. Could that be shutter shock? Subject was still enough to get sharp image.

Link | Posted on Aug 30, 2019 at 06:35 UTC as 31st comment | 10 replies
On challenge Tyndall effect in nature (3 comments in total)
In reply to:

fft2000: Unfortunately some shots show just sunstars and block other photos with real Tyndall effect. Also some non-nature shots are around. obvious indoor but also city shots - which might be OK as the effect takes place in the clouds/mist.
Could you please either raise the maximum number of entries or clean up the entries?
THX!

Thank you! 77 looks plenty.

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2019 at 10:03 UTC
On challenge Tyndall effect in nature (3 comments in total)

Unfortunately some shots show just sunstars and block other photos with real Tyndall effect. Also some non-nature shots are around. obvious indoor but also city shots - which might be OK as the effect takes place in the clouds/mist.
Could you please either raise the maximum number of entries or clean up the entries?
THX!

Link | Posted on Aug 27, 2019 at 06:51 UTC as 1st comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

entoman: Hmmm... I note that the captions describe almost everyone of these winners as a "photographer", but that the caption to the shot of kangaroos in snow by Charles Davis describes him as the "artist". I wonder whose idea that was?

Bob, I just went to the competition home page. It really isn't just that single photo:
https://naturephotographeroftheyear.com.au/gallery/?year=2019&category=Portfolio%20Prize&iswinneronly=false
As I thought it is a portfolio with several shots.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2019 at 04:36 UTC
In reply to:

entoman: Hmmm... I note that the captions describe almost everyone of these winners as a "photographer", but that the caption to the shot of kangaroos in snow by Charles Davis describes him as the "artist". I wonder whose idea that was?

I saw that, too. I think it's because it's about a "Portfolio", read: several images. I didn't look how that category is described. But such portfolio prices often need a theme that every single photo fits into. Having or producing such a portfolio requires more skill and thought. Categories can be won with a single lucky stunning shot that didn't require much skill or thought. (Everyone of us has at least one such a photo at home, I'm sure ;)) Hence artist and not just photographer.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2019 at 10:24 UTC
In reply to:

LoneTree1: The fungus shot is interesting, but would have been better shot closer-in. The trees and defocussed stars are just distracting.

entoman: It was shot in a forest. You see trees creep in from all sides. While I see what you mean with messy background I think it was rather difficult. And the samyang 14mm has a max aperture of 2.8 which was used for this shot. So no option for less DoF.
In the end I don't find it that distracting.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2019 at 13:05 UTC
In reply to:

pro photo 2011: DPR should seriously revise the organization of its website user interface which is long overdue.

I cannot see the picture AND its accompanying text on the same screen.

You first see the picture, then you must scroll down to see the text. Upon reading the text, you'd have to scroll up again to see the picture.

Why not use a picture on the left and text on the right orientation?

The current interface is just very unwieldy and unfriendly.

Hover the image to see the overlay buttons: Right/Left/square with arrows in the corners.
That weird square button sits in the top right corner and brings you in "slideshow/gallery/whatever" mode where you have the large image on the left and on the right the desciptive text.

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2019 at 12:40 UTC
Total: 194, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »