low325 wrote:
as promised.. MFD with the 58G WO. My boy is even bobbling around and my Df managed to catch him. Did an Auto Tone and added a vignette...left default sharpening to w/e LR sets it too.
Hardcore wrote:
Very nice shot Lowell! I like it big too!
thanks Corey...yah, I'm about to give up on FM's compression or whatever the secret formula is to upload correctly...comes out kinda fuzzy than what I see in preview..Its really sharp..oh well.
Elijah wrote:
About time you start posting, Lowell
yah man, you can bust my balls on that. since switching mbp's i feel so lazy to go back to the other computer and look through the pics...dont have the patience to export them out to my raid server.
low325 wrote:
yah man, you can bust my balls on that. since switching mbp's i feel so lazy to go back to the other computer and look through the pics...dont have the patience to export them out to my raid server.
yah man, you can bust my balls on that. since switching mbp's i feel so lazy to go back to the other computer and look through the pics...dont have the patience to export them out to my raid server.
Hardcore wrote:
Thanks Rob. I should have stated that not all the images from the trip are taken with the 58mm. I took my 14-24mm, 35mm, 58mm and 70-200mm 2.8 with 2x extender.
That said, the 58mm is a great travel lens. If I had to only take one lens though, it would likely be my Sigma 35mm F1.4.
Jason_Brook wrote:
I mean the dynamic range, it seems impossible.
It’s more than possible. I shot this wedding in DR and it was raining during the ceremony so the sky was like crap, big time. But I did recover the luminance of the ocean. You just need to play with the sliders. His D800 has an insane DR too, unlike my D3s.
Jason_Brook wrote:
Dude bro guy, that picture has about as much dynamic range as a D200. Bad example
The one Corey posted just blows my mind since the sun is damn near straight overhead.
That image seems to have that interesting separation of subject and background, that 3 d pop I think they call it? do you think this is enhanced by the dynamic range?
It's called using my camera! It's going to nikon before warranty is up. I knew I had a ton of bunnies and spots in there. You should see my other photos with MFNG right into the sun...so much lol!
Rob UK wrote:
That image seems to have that interesting separation of subject and background, that 3 d pop I think they call it? do you think this is enhanced by the dynamic range?
No, I'm talking strictly dynamic range. The sky should not be that deep blue, the skin tones should be blown, and the faces in shadows should be much darker. I knew the D800 had a ton of DR, but didn't think it was that much. Maybe the sun was partially behind a cloud or something, or bouncing like hell off the sand.
Jason_Brook wrote:
No, I'm talking strictly dynamic range. The sky should not be that deep blue, the skin tones should be blown, and the faces in shadows should be much darker. I knew the D800 had a ton of DR, but didn't think it was that much. Maybe the sun was partially behind a cloud or something, or bouncing like hell off the sand.
The histogram is contained nicely in the range of the d800 on this photo. I do pull the luminescence down on the blue channel to give the sky a darker appearance. I think I used -25 on this photo. (too much and the edges of foreground objects starts to look funky) The d800 does have a lot of dynamic range, but I can't see any nikon full frame camera not being able to capture that scene exactly the way my D800 did. On some of my landscape shots, I push the image to the max. I always bracket just in case, but have rarely needed to use 2 images or HDR since upgrading to the D800 from my Canon Full frames.
Here is a photo of the before and after RAW conversion in Lightroom.
