Personal computing discussed
Moderators: renee, Dposcorp, SpotTheCat
Airmantharp wrote:From our last 'dusting', with the EOS-M and EF-M 22/2:
TheEmrys wrote:Airmantharp wrote:From our last 'dusting', with the EOS-M and EF-M 22/2:
Little bit saturated for my taste. Certainly a capable little camera.
Airmantharp wrote:Definitely great shots with limited light and magnification- always a challenge!TheEmrys wrote:Airmantharp wrote:From our last 'dusting', with the EOS-M and EF-M 22/2:
Little bit saturated for my taste. Certainly a capable little camera.
The camera and wide lenses are surprisingly sharp, and the sensor produces RAW files that are far more pliable than what I got out of my 60D. The real challenge with the daytime shots in the neighborhood was the bright snow obscuring detail. The over-saturation is an attempt to correct that- trying to bring out detail in the ground without adding too much noise to the rest of the shot. It's one of those cases where I wish I'd had the 11-22 instead with the CPL .
Airmantharp wrote:It took about five seconds to dial the saturation down to a more reasonable level; -10 in LR5 did the trick. Burying whites, boosting shadows, and burying blacks along with a default medium contrast tone curve pushed the saturation up a bit too much.
TheEmrys wrote:Airmantharp wrote:It took about five seconds to dial the saturation down to a more reasonable level; -10 in LR5 did the trick. Burying whites, boosting shadows, and burying blacks along with a default medium contrast tone curve pushed the saturation up a bit too much.
Want to post up the results?
PenGun wrote:My elk are gone in a couple of seconds. Why are those just standing around?
TheEmrys wrote:Airmantharp: PM sent with Dropbox link for a couple for you.PenGun wrote:My elk are gone in a couple of seconds. Why are those just standing around?
There are a couple of reasons:
There was a strong cross-wind, so I was not smelled.
I was pretty well covered in snow, and wearing camouflage, so I wasn't seen.
Being in a national park near Estes Park, CO, many of the elk are used to humans.
There was literally no one around to mess it up, and there was some very good grazing there.
I also used to bowhunt quite seriously, so I used many of my old tricks. I did not ever look at them directly (unless it was through a viewfinder) nor did I ever move much. I am sure there were better angles I could have had, but with wildlife I can't ever be picky. I am actually pretty amazed I got some shots of with a FF camera at 105mm. And, a couple of shots there I used my camera's digital zoom. It is essentially a crop that then up-converts it. I thought it was a bit of a gimmick, but I am pretty pleased with the results.
lonleyppl wrote:Well, I went to change my focusing screen today and the clip holding it in broke. I ordered the part to fix it, but I think I'm going to go look at cameras this weekend.
lonleyppl wrote:At this point, I think I may go for the A7. I'm really looking forward to focus peaking in the viewfinder, and the fact that FF is actually okay at high ISOs. The adaptability of the mount (it'll take my m42 and K-mount lenses) and size of the camera is also really nice.
I'm also sorta considering the 6D and D600, but they don't seem to offer (m)any advantages over the A7, and won't have much to help with MF.
I looked at some m4/3, and the size advantage is nice, but the performance usually leaves a bit to be desired.
The X-E1 looks like a pretty good option, especially at current price point, but the AF leaves a bit to be desired, as do the ergonomics and low light performance.
Also, since I'm not really locked into any system, it's not a bad time to change.
Airmantharp wrote:How adverse are you to using the hollow AF adapter and the newer Tammy 2.8 in A mount?
PenGun wrote:I wish I could do that $200 deal with an a7R and a 55mm, that would kill, but I still am too poor.
TheEmrys wrote:I would really look between the a7 and the OMD-1. If you can try each out, definitely do so. What sort of shooting do you do?
TheEmrys wrote:It would be the Tampon 28-75/2.8. I would look at the Minolta 35-105 original. Awesome lens for $100 or less. Super sharp and excellent bokeh.
Airmantharp wrote:TheEmrys wrote:It would be the Tampon 28-75/2.8. I would look at the Minolta 35-105 original. Awesome lens for $100 or less. Super sharp and excellent bokeh.
Actually, it'd be the 24-70/2.8. Very sharp lens with modern AF and modern coatings along with weather sealing, second only to Canon's 24-70/2.8L II.
TheEmrys wrote:It would be the Tamron 28-75/2.8. Its a good lens, but if you are expecting corners to be sharp, look to hit f/11. I would look at the Minolta 35-105f/3.5-4.5 original. Awesome lens for $100 or less. Super sharp and excellent bokeh.
TheEmrys wrote:The a6000 may change that. The AF-C looks awesome. In the video with the parrot, it keeps up completely.
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/live-coverage-sony-a6000-officially-announced/