Bob, I like your night shots. The color one gets at evening/night is cool.
Luka, no issues on my laptop, but it's a 1600x900 display... I've thought about upping the res, but I think for just regular posting, 1024 is ok. For a trip like Bobu's (which I unfortunately haven't been able to see yet due to sucky internet connection...) I think it makes more sense.
------------
I went out to the forests again today. It has been raining a lot the last period, and combined with fall and falling temperatures, there's a really special mood and atmosphere there now. Falling leaves, changing colors, the smell, the mist... Great experience, and so soothing...
Today I wanted to use the 100MP on my A900 to see how it would work without LV. It was hard at times, and not until today have I realized how razor-thin DOF is wide open with the 100MP. Trying to nail a tree 8 meters away took 5-6-7 shots with very small adjustments each time until it was there. I also simply gave up on some photo-ops completely. I just couldn't get the shot. I would have with the 5D2. Much better high iso and LV would have made me get them. A little downer. Anyways, I there's so much I enjoy with the A900 --> important for my motivation to go out and shoot --> more photos. LV would have been a very welcome addition, but I'll manage. With the 21 and 35 it hasn't been a problem at all. I may bring the 5D2 and the C/Y 100 Planar next time, just to see what an experience it would be.
Lots of words, here are some of the photos from today. All shot with the A900 + ZF100MP.
---------------
BTW, I think someone asked what processing I do. Not much, really. I shoot raw, develop in ACR 6.2: Lens correction (the Zeiss ones from Adobe), a camera profile I got from theSuede a while ago (makes colors much better than Adobe's standard), adjust WB and exposure by eye, maybe a little vibrancy sometimes, all other standard values. Then I resize and sharpen using one of Samuli's very basic scripts. Then I save with jpg quality 10 or 11. That's it.
mortyb,
do you have the type M screen? once i got that I found MF accuracy was a cinch to perfect on my lenses (Leica 50/2, Minolta 58/1.2, Minolta AF 85).
yep... our neighbor, the andromeda galaxy (M31)... that's 3 million year-old light you just caught there .... happens to be the most distant object you can see without a telescope if your skies are dark enough ... great framing in that pic... make me want to get out under the fall stars myself (I think the draconid meteor shower is tonight)
pdmphoto wrote:
Thanks guys. One reason I like the trees in the shot is so that others can see it actually stars - and not noise.
Anyone know what is the (star, quasar, universe) in the upper center-right of the pic
Congratulations on your new lens, mwalrod!
Martin, you really know how to make that 50 sing. I plan to go out shooting tomorrow morning early in the hope of breaking my stale spell (3 shoots, not one pic really worth posting), and what will I use? 50mm of course. Though everything else will be in the bag as well...:-)
philber wrote:
Congratulations on your new lens, mwalrod!
Martin, you really know how to make that 50 sing. I plan to go out shooting tomorrow morning early in the hope of breaking my stale spell (3 shoots, not one pic really worth posting), and what will I use? 50mm of course. Though everything else will be in the bag as well...:-)
Thanks Philber, and that's an approach I like! If I were you, I'd dare to leave "everything else" at home.
Fact is, a shoot with 50mm only has never failed yet for me. Those shoots where I failed were with my bag of too many lenses (5). Somehow the concept of the Tri-Elmar sounds crazy, but attractive. I am slowly coming to the conclusion that buying the 28 and the 100 were mistakes, and that my long term kit looks like 21, 35 f:1.4 (am I the only one to find the samples very promising?), 50 f:1.4, 85 f:1.4.
Edit: Hmm, no matter how I try the last image looks like crap when converted to JPEG (severe banding). It's a bit better with PNG, but the board doesn't support it..
I am also holding out for a 21/2.8, 35/1.4, 100MP kit. Failing that, I would get the 50MP instead of the 35/1.4, I think, or maybe even the 35/2, but the 35/1.4 really appeals.
.... happens to be the most distant object you can see without a telescope if your skies are dark enough ... great framing in that pic... make me want to get out under the fall stars myself (I think the draconid meteor shower is tonight)
