[popo]

 Well JoJu if your happy,  I'm happy after all it's that that counts the most!

 

  As someone who shoots a lot at 600mm it's pretty pointless me worrying about a lightweight system, I used to swear never to have a heavy camera but here I am weighting/waiting for the delivery of my D750.

 

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/124690178@N08/

 

P.S. Pentax has a bigger problem than Nikon with reds, when saturated they turn slightly to magenta, Nikon just saturates and loses detail, to be quite honest I've never really shot with Canon, but I think sensors have less dynamic range in the red band, I can't say I've ever seen the green or blue band saturate, but the 255 max. is often seen with reds.  

 

Currently I mostly use up to 400mm on APS-C and also like birding. Nice photos there BTW. I'm not ready to give that up, but unless I'm intentionally doing that, I think there is room for a lighter bag for me.

 

As for bayer sensors, red channel has always been a funny one to me. They red part of bayer filter by itself covers quite a broad range of spectrum from green into NIR. It should be pre-filtered to attenuate the longer wavelengths by additional filters on top of the sensor, such as the IR block and possibly separate red shaping filter to help with colour balance. But it still retains some significant green sensitivity that have to be taken care of by the raw converter. So given that, I can well imagine depending on the scene and imaging chain design reds may run into problems in particular. Canon in particular have a relatively weak red filter in their bayer pattern so this usually results in weaker colour separation scores on DxOMark not that I care about their overall values. In relatively unprocessed side by side images I think Canon can have warmer looking images than Sony based sensors, but this may also be contributed elsewhere other than the sensor and I couldn't prove there was a link.

[JJ_SO]

Hello happy dave's clichés 

 

The Tamron ist still 0.8 kg less than the Sigma Sports version? I'm still finding out if it's sufficient just to take the Monopod and be more mobile or have the large Systematic 4 with Gimbal head. Smooth operation, heavy load...

 

Anyway, it's OT. Nonetheless I like your pictures and I think you'll be very happy with D750, too. At least I am. Happiness everywhere  ^_^

 

popo, your question about Fuji sensor's green bias pops up quite often in those sensor discussions, I just read a bit along. Some say X-trans is made by Fuji but the X-T1's sensor by Sony? I've no idea, am totally new to that system (and other mirrorless' as well) and still try to figure out, if I prefer to go mirrorless with Sony A7RII and get some lovely Zeiss'.

[felix]

I don't want to hijack this thread, so just some quick info regarding the Fuji "green" issue:


X-Trans is Fuji's marketing name for their color filter array as opposed to bayer pattern. The sensors are actually manufactured by Sony. I really hope for a "stock" Sony sensor in the next iteration of the X-T1 (28mp bsi please!) but I'm afraid Fuji doesn't want to give up this USP, even if it is actually useless for the customers...


Unfortunately, the problem with distant foliage is real and can really mess up some landscape shots. However, it seems to be very dependent on the RAW converter. Lightroom 5 is among the worst, but it's supposed to have gotten a bit better with the newest version. You can mitigate the effect by not using LR's default sharpening (use high levels of "detail" instead). However, the problem is the demosaicing of the image, so LR's results will remain suboptimal until Adobe decides to put some work into this. Supposedly, Iridient yields the best results with Fuji RAWs. Capture One is quite good, too, and imho miles ahead of LR for skin tones.


I'll see if I can find a problematic shot in my library and post the RAW in a separate thread in the Fuji section so you can judge for yourself. But don't expect anything before Sunday afternoon - I have a "Volksfest assessment center" tomorrow

[Guest]

I too have been disappointed by Fuji's foliage rendition at times. (It also shows in some other textures, like brick/rock, in certain circumstances and with certain lenses.)

 

However, I can say that I was (edit: 90%) pleased with the new Lightroom CC development (from Fuji RAW) with lots of foliage and rock on my last 11-day trip. I took almost nothing but landscapes, and am happy with my results.

 

(Edit: Upon finer inspection, deciduous trees at a short-middle distance in some lighting still show the 'watercolor' effects. Many of my landscapes were more distant and did not show the effect.)

 

I'd be interested to see a shot that you are disappointed with, and run it through the new Lightroom developer.

 

FYI - I saw the same thing (to a slightly lesser degree) with Fuji's Bayer X-A1. So I think it is a sensor reading thing rather than 100% due to the filter array.

[davidmanze]

Currently I mostly use up to 400mm on APS-C and also like birding. Nice photos there BTW. I'm not ready to give that up, but unless I'm intentionally doing that, I think there is room for a lighter bag for me.

 

As for bayer sensors, red channel has always been a funny one to me. They red part of bayer filter by itself covers quite a broad range of spectrum from green into NIR. It should be pre-filtered to attenuate the longer wavelengths by additional filters on top of the sensor, such as the IR block and possibly separate red shaping filter to help with colour balance. But it still retains some significant green sensitivity that have to be taken care of by the raw converter. So given that, I can well imagine depending on the scene and imaging chain design reds may run into problems in particular. Canon in particular have a relatively weak red filter in their bayer pattern so this usually results in weaker colour separation scores on DxOMark not that I care about their overall values. In relatively unprocessed side by side images I think Canon can have warmer looking images than Sony based sensors, but this may also be contributed elsewhere other than the sensor and I couldn't prove there was a link.

Hi Popo,

           You obviously have a greater knowledge than I on the technicalities of sensors, however what you say about the red band including other parts of the spectrum makes nothing but sense to me, yellows figure strongly also with the problem with Pentax. 

   For some while I was frustrated trying to get some sort of detail out of red flowers which were to all intents and purposes correctly exposed, but showing up 255 in the red band. I tried underexposing but as soon as you bring up the exposure again in PP your back to square one, the bottom line is I got no further with curing the problem than just taming it with the HSL colour control in CS6, reducing red and magenta saturation as a standard setting for all RAW images.

  The big surprise was that Nikon was only a little better, luckily not blowing into magenta, so a least I realized that reds are problematical, at least the major brands, I just learned to live with it.

Thanks for your comments!

[davidmanze]

Hello happy dave's clichés 

 

The Tamron ist still 0.8 kg less than the Sigma Sports version? I'm still finding out if it's sufficient just to take the Monopod and be more mobile or have the large Systematic 4 with Gimbal head. Smooth operation, heavy load...

 

Anyway, it's OT. Nonetheless I like your pictures and I think you'll be very happy with D750, too. At least I am. Happiness everywhere  ^_^

 

 I 'm still agonizing oven the Sigma sports decision not to have bought it, but by the end of a days shooting I feel I made the right decision.

  They say happiness is being on cloud nine, but I don't want to be within shouting distance of heaven, just in case Saint Peter gives me a call!   :o

Thanks for your comments.

[JJ_SO]

Well, when I take the "Sports" with me, there's only that - it's not like occasionally changing a lens because I'm passing by a wide-angle subject. Sure, I can take two bodies, I'm just too lazy to start body-building. I know, every famous wild-life photographer (from the last words only "photographer" applies to me) does this donkey work or has his sherpas.

 

But looking at Studor13's bag, the couch potato parts of my being start to wail and complain. While I'd be sticking a lens on a Monopod, after getting both out of their bags and needing two more hands, he is already continuing to walk on and the bird on it's way to Africa or retirement.

 

I don't know and didn't compare but I'm very sure the Sports is not a full kg better than the Tamron, optically. You see, you're agonizing and I'm, too. Why didn't I try both Sigma's first? Simple answer: There's close to no supply and no stock at dealers to do so. I don't know if I could do more handheld shots with 1.8 kg but at 2.8 it's gambling.

 

I could have got a used one. It's owner sold it because he needed a faster aperture and is now carrying even more weight in a prime (that says something about it's limits...). I'd say, beyond 3 kg it doesn't matter anymore. He got his in January only by urging and being a real pain in the a.. directly from Sigma Switzerland import dealer. And now he finds he paid (this dealer's fantasy price) 2300 francs while I got it new for 1625. Difficult to sell with that difference. 

[Brightcolours]

Flowers are a problem, not reds in general. Red/purple/blue flowers all can be difficult depending on the kind, due to parts of the invisible spectrum wreaking havoc past the CFA... You can tame "blown out" red in PP, but changed purples and blues are hard to get right again.

[popo]

For some while I was frustrated trying to get some sort of detail out of red flowers which were to all intents and purposes correctly exposed, but showing up 255 in the red band. I tried underexposing but as soon as you bring up the exposure again in PP your back to square one, the bottom line is I got no further with curing the problem than just taming it with the HSL colour control in CS6, reducing red and magenta saturation as a standard stting for all RAW images.

That's a different problem I think. Flowers can be very strong in some channels like red, but the metering (at least on Canon) seems to be heavily biased towards green. So it will over-expose the red channel in those situations. The red channel is much higher than others, so back in processing you will have trouble getting other channels up keeping balance without clipping the red.

 

I have the same problem at the opposite end of the spectrum when photographing my marine aquariums. The lights on those are really high kelvin so blue channel is very strong with little in red/green. Blue is often clipped if I don't first adjust the camera metering manually. My other workaround is to use a yellow filter which takes the blue down a notch, but colours are hard to balance afterwards.

[popo]

Flowers are a problem, not reds in general. Red/purple/blue flowers all can be difficult depending on the kind, due to parts of the invisible spectrum wreaking havoc past the CFA... You can tame "blown out" red in PP, but changed purples and blues are hard to get right again.

I'm not convinced that "invisible spectrum" is the cause here. That can only really be NIR or UV. On an intentionally modified camera (all filters removed other than bayer itself) the UV sensitivity was nothing much to speak of since most normal glass is pretty effective at blocking it anyway. For practical purposes the sensitivity of an unmodified camera is zero. NIR sensitivity is relatively higher but more complex as the typical bayer colour filters vary in their IR wavelength sensitivity, so you can get some interesting false colour images from that. But a standard camera will have a pretty effective IR block filter separate to that. Relative to a scene with visible light, the sensitivity is so low down to be insignificant.

 

Most likely if you're struggling with deep blues/purples in images, then after making sure you're not channel clipping, it is more a colour management in workflow problem.