MedicineMan404 wrote:
Beautiful colors and light Douglas.
Kinda wish I could get my 24-105 back. Poof snatched it up on the trip and never took it off her Rii. I took the Tam17-28 and 28-75 and found myself switching lenses when the 24-105 would have negated the process. Convenience or 2.8 is my situation
She also plundered the 100400. That must be remedied.
Thank you Robert. For this short trip, I brought the A7RIV, RII, CV 12, 21, 40, Sony 90mm Macro, 24-105 and the 100-400. Never touched the CV15, used the CV 21 and 40 only once or twice, forgot to use the 90mm macro for some frost on leaves in the morning. I would say I used the 24-105 and the 100-400 equally. Here are a couple more with the IV:
kdrk888 wrote:
Thank you Peter. I am not sure about the 3-D thing. It may have a lot to do with the light.
I'm wondering if the added definition and detail in the background areas make those areas of the image more vivid in a way that adds to the perception of overall depth.
While sitting and waiting for the J this guy flew over.
First shot SOOC.
Second the crop.
I did run the cropped image through Topax AI Clear.
My first time using all 61 mpxs.
The boy decided to let me get a shot or two before scouts last night in some good golden light (85GM, I need to figure out why photoshop is stripping some EXIF data)
Seriously though, something about the image processing tweaks + the extra res has pushed the R cam into a different category...almost film MF. I almost prefer the JPGs with DRO sometimes.
ftllens wrote:
Seriously though, something about the image processing tweaks + the extra res has pushed the R cam into a different category...almost film MF. I almost prefer the JPGs with DRO sometimes.
Wait, you're talking about the a7r iii and iv with DRO turned on? I saw in another thread that someone felt the in camera NR with the A9 was producing better low light photos (jpeg) than addressing NR in post for RAW images.
saxguy wrote:
Wait, you're talking about the a7r iii and iv with DRO turned on? I saw in another thread that someone felt the in camera NR with the A9 was producing better low light photos (jpeg) than addressing NR in post for RAW images.
I noticed it in the R3 too, maybe just something about the baked in processing looked more pleasant to me for the highlight roll off. I'm sure you can simulate it in RAW, before I would just shoot RAW (and still would), but now I also use the JPG as well (RAW+JPG).
A few shots from this morning, first two with the CV 21 f1.4, last two (hand held) with the Sony 100-400. I can't believe how much I use the 100-400 GM for many things other than wildlife, for which I now have the 200-600. The 100-400 is not going anywhere.
kdrk888 wrote:
A few shots from this morning, first two with the CV 21 f1.4, last two (hand held) with the Sony 100-400. I can't believe how much I use the 100-400 GM for many things other than wildlife, for which I now have the 200-600. The 100-400 is not going anywhere.
Here's the above's better-half.
Finally sat the 200600 down and westled the 100400 from her (soon enough the 70-350mm will be here for her and I'll not have to fight over the 100400)
With the 1.4TC and in crop mode for an effective 840.
For space and weight hard for a wildlifer to do better.
garyrn wrote:
taken last saturday during a photo charter on the strasburg railroad, roslyn with her great grandfathers 1943 oliver model 60 row crop tractor
