Posts: 1,252
Threads: 112
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
18
06-25-2011, 08:48 PM
(This post was last modified: 06-25-2011, 08:48 PM by thxbb12.)
I found this Pentax D-FA 645 25mm f/4 review.
In the 100% crops, the amount of details is truly amazing!
Seeing the wonderful photos the reviewer is taking also helps quite a bit <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='  ' />
Impressive indeed: http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/penta...eview.html
[quote name='thxbb12' timestamp='1309034881' post='9540']
I found this Pentax D-FA 645 25mm f/4 review.
In the 100% crops, the amount of details is truly amazing!
Seeing the wonderful photos the reviewer is taking also helps quite a bit <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=' ' />
Impressive indeed: http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/penta...eview.html
[/quote]
Beautiful, jaw-dropping pictures..! Thanks for the link
I guess living close to places like that helps just a bit, too..?! <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=' ' />
Posts: 6,715
Threads: 236
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
22
Nice photos, sure... but that is mainly the photographer. I can not help but think that the IQ ia not very special, they have a kind of veil over them... One could get equal or better results with a Nikon D3X or Canon 1Ds mk III.
The CA of this lens has quite an impact, especially because of the AA-filterless nature of the images. Of course, 25mm is quite wide... but the sensor is not that much bigger.
So, yes, nice camera, and good photographer. But not overly impressed by the camera-lens performance.
Posts: 8,000
Threads: 1,850
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
49
[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1309075399' post='9554']
Nice photos, sure... but that is mainly the photographer. I can not help but think that the IQ ia not very special, they have a kind of veil over them... One could get equal or better results with a Nikon D3X or Canon 1Ds mk III.
The CA of this lens has quite an impact, especially because of the AA-filterless nature of the images. Of course, 25mm is quite wide... but the sensor is not that much bigger.
So, yes, nice camera, and good photographer. But not overly impressed by the camera-lens performance.
[/quote]
Well, 35mm has probably a lesser DR than medium format. At least on paper.
Posts: 6,715
Threads: 236
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
22
[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1309181134' post='9584']
Well, 35mm has probably a lesser DR than medium format. At least on paper.
[/quote]
Depending on the sensor technology level, yes of course, you are right. I tend to dislike a high dynamic range though, I always find myself making images a bit more contrasty instead <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=' ' />...
People tend to like contrast, me included. So a high dynamic range only would benefit corrections in post processing, mostly. After that we lower the dynamic range again.
[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1309190633' post='9585']
Depending on the sensor technology level, yes of course, you are right. I tend to dislike a high dynamic range though, I always find myself making images a bit more contrasty instead <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=' ' />...
People tend to like contrast, me included. So a high dynamic range only would benefit corrections in post processing, mostly. After that we lower the dynamic range again.
[/quote]
That's not relevant to the original post though. High dynamic range would benefit precisely the photographs in the thread linked above. The histograms in those photographs would have peaks (EDIT: I mean several peaks per photo) to the leftmost and rightmost parts of the graph.
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutoria...grams1.htm (EDIT: In particular, look at the coastal photo histogram.)
Posts: 6,715
Threads: 236
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
22
06-27-2011, 06:03 PM
(This post was last modified: 06-27-2011, 06:05 PM by Brightcolours.)
[quote name='guy_incognito' timestamp='1309197210' post='9586']
That's not relevant to the original post though. High dynamic range would benefit precisely the photographs in the thread linked above. The histograms in those photographs would have peaks to the leftmost and rightmost parts of the graph.
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutoria...grams1.htm
[/quote]
If it had high dynamic range, it would not have peaks at those parts. High dynamic range flattens peaks over a wider area....
Unless you mean that those images would show clipping otherwise (so peaks going into the edges of the histograms and being cut off), and now would contain the peaks within the boundaries of the histogram.
Which would not be the case in those images shown, anyway, even my 450D can master the low dynamic range of those scenes with ease, and so could my 350D before that... So an 1Ds MK III and a D3X will master those scenes with the greatest ease too... <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/unsure.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':unsure:' />
[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1309197819' post='9587']
If it had high dynamic range, it would not have peaks at those parts. High dynamic range flattens peaks over a wider area....
[/quote]
You don't seem to understand. Follow the link I posted. Look at the histogram of the first photo.
Posts: 6,715
Threads: 236
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
22
06-27-2011, 07:28 PM
(This post was last modified: 06-27-2011, 08:13 PM by Brightcolours.)
[quote name='guy_incognito' timestamp='1309198226' post='9588']
You don't seem to understand. Follow the link I posted. Look at the histogram of the first photo.
[/quote]
I have.. now what does that high dynamic scene got to do with the much lower dynamic scenes in the Pentax lens review post?
The first photo you refer to is with sun.. and even into the sun... The Pentax lens review post only contains cloudy or very low sunset images.
Which, like I said before, do not pose a big challenge for my 450D.
The image on that site you refer to, is a high dynamic range scene, and it shows an image after whatever conversion that is of low dynamic range (compared to the scene). We see clipping both at the right side and the left side of the histogram.
If the image was a high dynamic range image, like the scene, we would not see those high peaks (they would be more smeared out) and we would not see them cut off (they would go down before the boundaries of the histogram).
[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1309202899' post='9590']
If the image was a high dynamic range image, like the scene, we would not see those high peaks (they would be more smeared out) and we would not see them cut off (they would go down before the boundaries of the histogram).
[/quote]
That's the point. That's the benefit of a camera with a high dynamic range. Do you understand now?
(EDIT: You can download the first sunset/sunrise 645D picture in that thread. There is a small bump on the far right of the histogram, corresponding to the sun. There is a larger bump on the far left corresponding to the foreground.)
I was only referring to your post about dynamic range and contrast. I wasn't interested in a debate on MF vs. your 450D camera.
|
