Thanks Anden - that's a great compliment, coming fron you Would you mind showing me your 21:9 vision? I like this shot, but struggle when it comes to cropping.
ManWearPants wrote:
Maybe a bit difficult to find Kodak SLR/c now. Do any of you reckon the Sigma SD15 will have such vibrant and contrasty colours as well?
Likely, the Sigma is well known for excellent colour. But what it won't have is anything approaching the resolution of the SLR/c or SLR/n.
pdmphoto wrote:
Steve, I think you own a 5D? I have the 5DII and it is no match for the Kodak's colors - even in post processing.
I sold the 5D last year. I own a 5D II, 1Ds II, Nikon D2x and Panasonic G1. The colors from these cameras are just fine. The colors from the Panasonic are just about the most natural and accurate of any camera I've used so far. The colors from my Kodak SLR/c files are also very good.
I rarely have problems with color with any camera I've owned or used. What I find to be the problem with color — if there is one — is that getting the color right with some cameras takes more work than with other cameras.
I have to work harder (and longer) when I use the 5D II than I did with the Kodak, that's for sure. But I eventually get there. And when I do, I save the profile for future use. I have about 35 custom profiles in Lightroom that cut my time considerably.
helimat wrote:
Love this shot! Although it is too bad the guy out front isn't within the DOF... Nice anyways.
Thanks. Yeah, shame about the DOF. But it works anyway, maybe even better than if that little guy was just as sharp as the others. It's hard to get that kind of DOF when shooting full frame with a 70-200 f/4 IS wide open.
ManWearPants wrote:
Maybe a bit difficult to find Kodak SLR/c now. Do any of you reckon the Sigma SD15 will have such vibrant and contrasty colours as well?
KEH had a few recently, but it appears they have been snapped up.
FWIW, I still have my SLR/c. I'm an scientist by training and believe that the color and low speed of the Kodak (and Sony full frames) is a result of a narrow bandpass of the color filters giving the purity we like.
Also had canons and nikons and believe that while you can boost and manage color the reason it is hard is due to spill over the wider bandwidth filters. This also enhances speed by allowing luminosity to spill to other channels increasing effrective light hitting the sensor sites.
bill vann wrote:
FWIW, I still have my SLR/c. I'm an scientist by training and believe that the color and low speed of the Kodak (and Sony full frames) is a result of a narrow bandpass of the color filters giving the purity we like.
Also had canons and nikons and believe that while you can boost and manage color the reason it is hard is due to spill over the wider bandwidth filters. This also enhances speed by allowing luminosity to spill to other channels increasing effrective light hitting the sensor sites.
kindly,
Bill
From a discussion I had with FM'er "the Suede" who is very knowledgeable in this area, about color response differences, it is not only just the narrower bandpass of the CFA's that give cameras like the Sony A900/850 its more intense color but also the basic color fingerprint of the camera maker. The narrower filters with less overlap help reduce areas of metamerism in colors which are in between the basic component colors. But even colors like green grass are more intense like film due to more the basic color fingerprint. The new Hassablad H4's seem to have a more intense color response than the new phase backs.
THe 24-85N does look great, but I have a tendency to move away from zooms. I tell myself that I need the faster speed, but rarely do. Here's one with the Sigma 150/2.8 macro on the SLR/c:
ManWearPants wrote:
Can a SLR/n be converted to SLR/c? it seems there are more n around than c.
No, the only thing the two cameras have in common is the sensor and image processing. The SLR/n is a heavily modified Nikon F80 body while the SLR/C is a heavily modified Sigma SA9 body.