If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
FIRST PORTRAITS WITH THE FAB 5D2!
Annika1980 wrote:
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/106970377/original http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/106957914/original http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/106970378/original No real difference compared to your 20D shots of the same subjects. -- -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. -- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
FIRST PORTRAITS WITH THE FAB 5D2!
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 16:19:20 -0500, Alan Browne
wrote: Annika1980 wrote: http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/106970377/original http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/106957914/original http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/106970378/original No real difference compared to your 20D shots of the same subjects. The Law of Diminishing Returns does seem to apply. Bret has been doing well enough with his "old" equipment. I don't see how anyone could look at these images and tell that he's upgraded. Not that the pics aren't good, but with the ballyhoo about the new camera one would be expect to scratch the dog's back in the photo and see one rear leg start to move. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
FIRST PORTRAITS WITH THE FAB 5D2!
Alan Browne wrote:
Annika1980 wrote: http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/106970377/original http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/106957914/original http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/106970378/original No real difference compared to your 20D shots of the same subjects. That was my initial reaction too but there 'seems' to be more clearly defined fur on the cat and certainly the lighting is better than his earlier work. This probably is achieved through higher ISO. I think the real benefit of a higher resolution camera is lost on the Internet. Apart from posting a full size image, there is now no way of comparing image quality on the Internet. I think critical mass was reached at about 6 Mp and anything else needs large prints to see any meaningful improvement in detail rendering. As has been shown in the past, downsizing an OOF image to web size often conceals the OOF. Not that I'm saying any of these are out of focus. Maybe his movies will be more impressive but right now, if this camera was bought to impress Usenet junkies, it fails miserably. Let's wait to pass judgement until we see some outdoor stuff. Plenty of winter scenes around now that are worth taking. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
FIRST PORTRAITS WITH THE FAB 5D2!
tony cooper wrote:
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 16:19:20 -0500, Alan Browne wrote: Annika1980 wrote: http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/106970377/original http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/106957914/original http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/106970378/original No real difference compared to your 20D shots of the same subjects. The Law of Diminishing Returns does seem to apply. Bret has been doing well enough with his "old" equipment. I don't see how anyone could look at these images and tell that he's upgraded. Not that the pics aren't good, but with the ballyhoo about the new camera one would be expect to scratch the dog's back in the photo and see one rear leg start to move. I have little doubt over Bret's ability to present images that reflect the capability of the camera; I just hope he doesn't do an entire repeat of the family pets and post the links. -- -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. -- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
FIRST PORTRAITS WITH THE FAB 5D2!
Alan Browne wrote:
tony cooper wrote: On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 16:19:20 -0500, Alan Browne wrote: Annika1980 wrote: http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/106970377/original http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/106957914/original http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/106970378/original No real difference compared to your 20D shots of the same subjects. The Law of Diminishing Returns does seem to apply. Bret has been doing well enough with his "old" equipment. I don't see how anyone could look at these images and tell that he's upgraded. Not that the pics aren't good, but with the ballyhoo about the new camera one would be expect to scratch the dog's back in the photo and see one rear leg start to move. I have little doubt over Bret's ability to present images that reflect the capability of the camera; I just hope he doesn't do an entire repeat of the family pets and post the links. Yeah, like where did the cheerleaders go??? -- john mcwilliams In fact, I'm a word nerd. I get a kick out of tossing a few odd ones into my column, just to see if the pervicacious editors will weed them out. --Michael Hawley |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
FIRST PORTRAITS WITH THE FAB 5D2!
Jurgen wrote,on my timestamp of 13/12/2008 8:58 AM:
Annika1980 wrote: http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/106970377/original http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/106957914/original http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/106970378/original No real difference compared to your 20D shots of the same subjects. That was my initial reaction too but there 'seems' to be more clearly defined fur on the cat and certainly the lighting is better than his earlier work. This probably is achieved through higher ISO. Nup, he's using 50. I think the real benefit of a higher resolution camera is lost on the Internet. Apart from posting a full size image, there is now no way of comparing image quality on the Internet. Of course not. Anyone claiming otherwise has gotta have rocks in their head. Which Helen and Bret have in abundance. I think critical mass was reached at about 6 Mp and anything else needs large prints to see any meaningful improvement in detail rendering. As has been shown in the past, downsizing an OOF image to web size often conceals the OOF. Not that I'm saying any of these are out of focus. Doesn't take a university degree to figure they are. Web-size photos like those can be taken with any 4MP camera, to use a 5D2 for that and claim it looks different only demonstrates the idiocy and ignorance of the person(s) doing so. Maybe his movies will be more impressive but right now, if this camera was bought to impress Usenet junkies, it fails miserably. Let's wait to pass judgement until we see some outdoor stuff. Plenty of winter scenes around now that are worth taking. Careful, he'll now post heaps of minuscule shots of non-white snow... |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
FIRST PORTRAITS WITH THE FAB 5D2!
Annika1980 wrote:
On Dec 12, 8:29 pm, Noons wrote: Not that I'm saying any of these are out of focus. Doesn't take a university degree to figure they are. You wish, dip****. Here's a full-size crop of Buster's eye: http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/106982614/original I'd post the whole image full size, but I don't want you to **** yourself. Careful, he'll now post heaps of minuscule shots of non-white snow... If we ever get snow here, you'll know it pretty fast. I don't want to burst your bubble of joy at getting this new camera but 2 years ago I took a shot of an unspectacular wine glass with a 40D. http://jurgens.smugmug.com/gallery/6...35539595_s5dLq Sure there are artefacts in the full size clip of the glass but you have to expect this when you shoot in JPEG mode. When the whole (cropped) image is printed, you can't see them. The original image was long ago cropped into a landscape orientation from it's original portrait mode. In comparing your "eye shot" where you used a shorter (more manageable) lens with flash assist, there is not enough difference in the image quality compared to this hand held, 200mm, natural light shot to make me run out and buy a 5D to replace the old battered 40D that took this shot, much less any of my new cameras. Any chance you've taken any movies yet? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
FIRST PORTRAITS WITH THE FAB 5D2!
Annika1980 wrote,on my timestamp of 13/12/2008 1:30 PM:
I'd post the whole image full size, but I don't want you to **** yourself. That would be real hard: first, few of your photos have any more DOF than a paper sheet. Second, I was taking 21MP photos years before you even attempted one. Careful, he'll now post heaps of minuscule shots of non-white snow... If we ever get snow here, you'll know it pretty fast. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
FIRST PORTRAITS WITH THE FAB 5D2!
Helen wrote,on my timestamp of 13/12/2008 1:48 PM:
On Dec 12, 9:30 pm, Annika1980 wrote: On Dec 12, 8:29 pm, Noons wrote: Not that I'm saying any of these are out of focus. Doesn't take a university degree to figure they are. You wish, dip****. Here's a full-size crop of Buster's eye: http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/106982614/original I'd post the whole image full size, but I don't want you to **** yourself. Careful, he'll now post heaps of minuscule shots of non-white snow... If we ever get snow here, you'll know it pretty fast. http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/106982614/original Now THAT is amazing detail! Really? why is it that the eyebrow of the dog is out of focus while between the eyes it appears to be in focus? But then again: technical examination of a photo is not your forte, is it? |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
FIRST PORTRAITS WITH THE FAB 5D2!
Helen wrote:
On Dec 12, 9:30 pm, Annika1980 wrote: On Dec 12, 8:29 pm, Noons wrote: Not that I'm saying any of these are out of focus. Doesn't take a university degree to figure they are. You wish, dip****. Here's a full-size crop of Buster's eye: http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/106982614/original I'd post the whole image full size, but I don't want you to **** yourself. Careful, he'll now post heaps of minuscule shots of non-white snow... If we ever get snow here, you'll know it pretty fast. http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/106982614/original Now THAT is amazing detail! No. That's merely a low detail crop. A high detail crop is: http://www.aliasimages.com/images/a9...0428_CROP1.jpg from: http://www.aliasimages.com/images/a9...C00428_SML.jpg -- -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. -- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FIRST PORTRAITS WITH THE FAB 5D2! | Pete D | 35mm Photo Equipment | 30 | December 24th 08 05:41 PM |
New Portraits - 135 mm f/2 + 5D | [email protected] | 35mm Photo Equipment | 4 | April 11th 07 10:56 PM |
Fat portraits | Tom Thackrey | General Photography Techniques | 1 | December 10th 06 07:47 PM |
A few new portraits | G. Hoppenbrouwers | Digital Photography | 19 | November 20th 05 02:05 AM |
Three portraits | 223rem | Digital Photography | 4 | November 9th 05 06:23 AM |