Alexiz wrote:
I was wondering too. Like the pics and PP, Philip, great work as usual -- but I think your photos tend to be somewhat on the darker side as of late. (I know my monitor is on the brighter side when I am doing non-photo work, as I boost it up to 160cd/m, and they appear darkish, as if underexposed, nevertheless). If it's your concept, that's fine; but otherwise, IMHO, they would benefit from opening up to the lighter side just a bit. Spectacular work otherwise.
Small set from this evening, all 5N + CY28. I really like this lens. Ought to use it more often... PS. if anyone has tips for sharpening images like the 2nd two, I'm all ears. It's hard to get them to look sharp without being artifacty.
I started to write down my favorites from 429, and they are all fantastic.
Philippe - really like your first image of the Tenerife set. I like the Istanbul (was Constantinople) Boys, LightShow's image, Rioni's cool shot, Derek's stitch...
Every page of this thread has some serious eye candy going.
mco_970 wrote:
Small set from this evening, all 5N + CY28. I really like this lens. Ought to use it more often... PS. if anyone has tips for sharpening images like the 2nd two, I'm all ears. It's hard to get them to look sharp without being artifacty.
great shots!
my tip is display them bigger. when most of the details are smaller than the pixel size there is no way to make them look sharp without also looking crunchy.
Jim Schemel wrote:
James - nice job with the exposure ^^
-Jim
Thanks Jim
I'm quite happy with that shot, it's my desktop wallpaper right now.
I added a link to a larger version.
mike, what are you doing digital wise with your NEX gone?
Well, I have my iPhone!
I am probably going to get the DP2M. The NEX was great for my M lenses when I wasn't shooting film. After I came to the conclusion that I probably will never really be able to rationalize a digital M, I have started to sell off my M lenses, and really want to be happy with native lenses on a smaller format system. Fuji has those lenses, so I may go that route. I downloaded a couple RAWs from the DP2M, and, wow. For somebody who grew up (or is now accustomed to) shooting 36/16/12/10 shots at time, the time it takes to shoot and process (correctly) Foveon is fine. I can see how a spray/pray person could be frustrated with the timing/interface.
Anyway, I enjoy watching this thread, so I'll keep following it!
From someone who has a DP2 (old). Foveon is a wonderful sensor. But in a awful body.Slooow to operate...slow autofocus.Slow to wake up. Awful screen. I was hoping for some company who knows how to make a camera to buy the technology, but it did not happen...
corposant wrote:
Well, I have my iPhone!
I am probably going to get the DP2M. The NEX was great for my M lenses when I wasn't shooting film. After I came to the conclusion that I probably will never really be able to rationalize a digital M, I have started to sell off my M lenses, and really want to be happy with native lenses on a smaller format system. Fuji has those lenses, so I may go that route. I downloaded a couple RAWs from the DP2M, and, wow. For somebody who grew up (or is now accustomed to) shooting 36/16/12/10 shots at time, the time it takes to shoot and process (correctly) Foveon is fine. I can see how a spray/pray person could be frustrated with the timing/interface.
Anyway, I enjoy watching this thread, so I'll keep following it!...Show more →
Good you asked. I've been trying a lot of 50s, all manual. To sum it up, I'll sell all the others, including the Zeiss. They are all fine, but slow to operate for this kind of shot. And optically, none of them beat this one, which I found out to be of amazing quality...I just ended the search with it...Autofocus is very responsive, no complaints here.
Jim Schemel wrote:
vallejo - nice candid - what are your thoughts on the Sony 50? I have seen quite a few nice shots from it.How is the AF on the NEX 7?
-Jim
@ mco_970 - I use Photoshop's Unsharp Mask, radius 0.3 or 0.4 if less-sharp, amount 350-500, threshold up to 10-12 if shallow DoF, or else do it on another layer with threshold at 0, mask and paint the sharp areas in.
when most of the details are smaller than the pixel size there is no way to make them look sharp without also looking crunchy.
