My first - and pretty much only - shot with the new ZF.2 50/f1.4... on the way home from the store after picking it up. First signs of fall colors coming in around here. Sigh... I miss summer already.
denoir wrote:
It's the lens. The 85/1.4 has a much less contrasty rendering and a bit more nuanced colors. It would have been much more in line with his rendering style had I for instance used the 100 MP.
thank you very much for the explanations
philber wrote:
Walking around a one-day flea market with LUL
Philippe, I liked the 2nd shot, it's presenting Planar 50 rendering and colors just very well (thou some people "like" Planar 50 photos to have ugly bokeh and poor sharpness...)
Samuli: PS. this photo shows 3 bad mistakes often done with HDR, can you find them all
Akul: 1 Moving foreground - grass in foreground may be in motion ? 2 Rain drops leaving constant ripples on water ?
Lotusm50: Hmm. How about an apparent dark halo around the branch in the upper right-hand corner...
desinteresadam: one thing i see is the variation in the bokeh, it's different in the upper left zone and it smoothens going towards the upper right zone
"correct" answer, there actually are 4 bad faults on the HDR image:
1. Dark halo on top right corner branch and leaves on top
2. Due to water moving and rain drop hitting on random places there is unnatural vertically repeating pattern on the water reflection
3. Reflection of sky is lighter than the sky itself
4. Red channel (and to some extend green) are blown on sky reflected from water giving the reflection blue/cyan cast
The bokeh differences are because on left side the background is about 25 meters away while on right it's 300 meters away => blur disc size increases smoothing the bokeh. Same can be seen on original RAW files so this is not HDR fault.
---
Carl Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 2/100 @ f/5.6, 1/13s, ISO 100
Philippe, I liked the 2nd shot, it's presenting Planar 50 rendering and colors just very well (thou some people "like" Planar 50 photos to have ugly bokeh and poor sharpness...)
Samuli: PS. this photo shows 3 bad mistakes often done with HDR, can you find them all
Akul: 1 Moving foreground - grass in foreground may be in motion ? 2 Rain drops leaving constant ripples on water ?
Lotusm50: Hmm. How about an apparent dark halo around the branch in the upper right-hand corner...
desinteresadam: one thing i see is the variation in the bokeh, it's different in the upper left zone and it smoothens going towards the upper right zone
"correct" answer, there actually are 4 bad faults on the HDR image:
1. Dark halo on top right corner branch and leaves on top
2. Due to water moving and rain drop hitting on random places there is unnatural vertically repeating pattern on the water reflection
3. Reflection of sky is lighter than the sky itself
4. Red channel (and to some extend green) are blown on sky reflected from water giving the reflection blue/cyan cast
The bokeh differences are because on left side the background is about 25 meters away while on right it's 300 meters away => blur disc size increases smoothing the bokeh. Same can be seen on original RAW files so this is not HDR fault.
---
Carl Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 2/100 @ f/5.6, 1/13s, ISO 100
Samuli ...Show more →
Thank you very much for your explanations i didn't know this bokeh issue.
By the way awesome image, the clarity, the sharpness, and the comp.
I like your pp techniques a lot. (the 100 mp qualities always impress me)
Rodrigo
Paul Yi wrote:
Is it just me that the color and saturation of ZE lenses resemble those of Voigtlander lenses, especially the Apo 90/3.5 and Apo 125/2.5?
It's just you. No, the 90/3.5 has very good colors, but perhaps not up there with Zeiss. I only owned it for a couple of weeks, and I wasn't too pleased. That said, I liked it better than any Nikkor I've tried, maybe except for the 24-70.
I can't explain the Zeiss colors. They aren't bold or so, but "true". I seldom or never do anything to enhance colors in PP with the Zeiss lenses, but I always did it with the Nikkors.
Barisaxer, nice color shot! I like the B&W conversion too.
Philippe, love your shots with the 50 Planar. Excellent planar rendering.
Bob, great series of shots!
Sami, really nice set of urban shots.
Samuli, awesome example of HDR, and your detailed knowledge on PP.
Ryan, really nice shots. My fav, is #2,4 & 5. I love the last shot
Call me a sucker for your style, Robert!
Brilliant Big Sur, Ryan!
Samuli, now I know why I must never get into HDR. Basically, I am just a P&S guy. Take a look, see what could be a nice picture, raise the camera, and fire way, after a modest tweaking of settings. You, on the other hand, have such incredibly high standards that I cannot hope to ever get there, even if only because I don't even see the stuff that you talk about. As HDR only increases the number of parameters one needs to take into consideration, it would only show my lack of in-depth refinement even more.
philber wrote:
Samuli, now I know why I must never get into HDR. Basically, I am just a P&S guy. Take a look, see what could be a nice picture, raise the camera, and fire way, after a modest tweaking of settings. You, on the other hand, have such incredibly high standards that I cannot hope to ever get there, even if only because I don't even see the stuff that you talk about. As HDR only increases the number of parameters one needs to take into consideration, it would only show my lack of in-depth refinement even more.
I think this is matter of photography subject. I act more or less the same as you when shooting similar subjects as you do. However when I have time and calmness of Finnish nature x surrounding me I don't mind the extra effort. I only worry about the extra time need to be spent on digital darkroom, which I really hate. However I have now pretty well optimized to be less than 40-50 seconds/photo extra vs. non-HDR.
x Finland's nature is rather safe place; we have one poisonous animal, viper snake "Vipera berus" which is not leathal to adults, and only dangerous predator is bear which is much smaller than North American version and really tries to avoids people = so you can only get killed by your own stupidity...
Lately I have had to shoot HDR way more than I would have wanted since the conditions have not been that good. For reason or another I have not had motivation and mindset to go shooting when we have had good or even OK conditions for that, so I ended up shooting on crappy conditions for past months.
----
Seems that Makro-Planar 50 has field curvature at infinity, I was quite surprised to find this when I shot landscape with f/2 to get the nice vignetting from lens and to minimize the cloud movement. This may also be the reason why I have noticed 50MP to have crappy corners and edges compared to 50 planar at distance. This is not shown on test since testers test lenses on short distance e.g. 1 meter with small targets. I shoot the same scene with f/4 and f/5.6, and this was strongly present at f/4 and clearly visible at f/5.6. This means that this is not the lens for future landscape shooting when we have 40-50Mpix, since then we are diffraction limited at f/4...
"Light pollution" - Carl Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 2/50 @ f/2, 8s, ISO 100
barisaxer - Nice lighting and color. Contrast with the watery dark background is very effective.
digitalthump - Beautiful Rocky mountain images.
philber- I like the first one for the drama, third one for color
Samuli - Thank you very much for the explanation and sharing your knowledge. I admit I did not see most of it ( For the 'halo' I can blame the crappy monitor initially I viewed image).
Regarding field curvature of 50MP you mentioned, that is very interesting. Do you have any idea what is causing it?
rji2goleez - My favorite was door frame shot and the concrete structure on water with 100MP.
Sami - Really nice subtle tone on the second series.
rsolti13 - Love the Chinatown series, including the b/w version from the previous set.
No, the 90/3.5 has very good colors, but perhaps not up there with Zeiss. I only owned it for a couple of weeks, and I wasn't too pleased. That said, I liked it better than any Nikkor I've tried, maybe except for the 24-70.
