2069

thanks alan. thanks andrew. it all seems so complicated, with so many variables in play. will have to dig more and try understanding what's going on.

regards,

Thanks Andrew for the info.

I will probably never print most of my images...and i will be carrying around my laptop to different lighting situations while travelling...so basically its about the optimum appreciation of my images on my computer display.

my problem is that if i increase the display brightness, the lost shadow detail can be seen and images are no longer dark...something that i would be doing in photoshop....

It seems funny to keep changing the display brightness all the time...:)

regards,

hi,

i have a thinkpad laptop, the display is lcd. i noticed that with different

power-managing options (like 'optimum battery', 'max performance', 'ac power'

etc...), the display brightness changes.

i have been editing my images with 'save batter' preset...which makes the

display go dull...as a result the images look darker than they should...

what should be the optimum brightness level of a lcd display??

which makes me think...is photoshops brightness tool interchangeable with my lcd

display's brightness levels...i mean if the image is dark, i can probably up the

display level to make it brighter instead of doing it in ps...and vice-versa...

therefore, what's the differnce...i don't quite get it...

will appreciate if someone could explain...

thanks and regards,

anurag

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_1855_3556is/index.htm

regards,

Considering this is taken at 0.6 seconds, its' not tack sharp, but the left hand corner is as sharp as the center.

With this new lens, there is no muddyness. The dayshots are really sharp with clear edges.

regards,

Hi all,

yesterday, i got this new lens.

i hadn't gone to buy it, but i asked for it and it was there.

i was completely surprised when i saw this lens cause' i was expecting it to be the same crappy kit lens plus IS. But it seems much better than that. To sum it up:

1

Nice broad rubber zoom grip with vertical lines.

Min focussing dist 0.25 (it was 0.28 with kit lens)

Front element proudly announces "made in japan" vis a vis sheepish "made in china" hidden on the rear of earlier kit lens.

focus ring slightly broader.

zoom ring is smooth, and overall the lens gives cues of better quality than the decidedly cheap looking kit lens.

2

but the best part is this: i shot few pics while coming back home. i could handhold at 0.6 seconds from a moving taxi. The shot was tack sharp.

Overall image quality seems to be positively improved. May be its just IS thats making me feel like this. But i am very happy that the shots are much much better.

3

I had gone to exchange my 400D for a new one because i was getting soft pictures plus very dark shots. I posted to this effect few days back.

Guess what. All these problems are gone. I believe that all my problems were actually the kit lens problems.

My camera is not giving dark pictures now (based on yesterday and today morning shooting).

Shots are not soft. They are crisp with focus bang on.

Will post few pics later.

Thanks a lot.

regards,

--

anurag

Hi, just a small thing...

Do you think that the poster is in focus?

regards,

Brian Pape

At f/9, you're certainly compensating for the field curvature (focus) issue...

PRECISELY. IN WHICH CASE THE SOFT CORNER FOCUS SHOULDN'T BE THERE, ISN'T IT? ALSO, DOF AT 18mm SHOULD BE LARGE FOR SUCH A FLAT SUBJECT.

DOES THAT MEAN, IS THERE A FOCUS PROBLEM WITH THE LENS?

JC uknz

I suggest using mid or long end of the zoom and eventually get a better lens ...

I DID, AND THE RESULTS WERE MUCH WORSE THAN THIS, EVEN AT 1/1000

Andrew Hinkle

Finally, I think you might be being too critical.

TOO CRITICAL?

I had gone to shoot this poster with a friend (an art director) who also shot it with his Sony digicam. After we saw the results, he said let me check out what i have. And the digicam image was what he used eventually for a small magazine artwork that we're doing. Obviously i felt very bad.

I HAD A G2 (F2-F2.5) AND I SHOULD EXPECT BETTER THAN THAT FROM MORE $$$$ I SPENT.

regards,

Also...my submission is that at such high shutter speeds and F11, shouldn't an (almost) flat subject come out completely in focus?

regards,

Jos van Eekelem,

Your comment suggests that this is normal result from a kit lens. Is it? I have seen many pictures from the kit lens that are sharp and well-focussed.

I shot these at 50mm also...that's much worse...the field of focus is flat there, still you have soft corners...also, when comparing with a digicam, i am not bothered about the hazy/soft/not-sharp look of the pictures, which can be corrected perhaps in photoshop. My discomfort was about "focus".

regards,

Let me add, that this is one of the better examples. Here the focal length is 18mm.

Same shot taken at 55mm is very bad. Please remember that the shutter speed was optimum.

Is it the cameras' fault or the lens's fault?

Unable to understand what's going on...:)

Today, i shot this poster for some office work. I was shocked to see that the

focus was off in the corners. I noticed this when i compared the same image shot

by a typical sony digicam. I was astonished to see that sony digicam image

appeared to have better focus, and therefore sharpeness.

This was despite:

FAST Shutter speeds 1/125 to 1/1000.

CLOSED DOWN Aperture, 7.1 to 11.

Here are the crops, shot as JPEGs and resized in ps.

Can someone tell me what's going on? If this is what i should expect from a SLR

then its quite demoralising....

regards,

anurag<div></div>

Hi,

I asked a question yesterday. Here is one more :)

When you shoot a grey card/neutral tone, where should the spike fall on a

histogram....in the middle, or towards the left side of the middle?

My camera has a 5 stop division of histogram. What does the exact middle (2.5)

of it represent? 50 percent grey or 18 percent grey?

My camera gives me a spike one stop lower/left from the middle when i meter from

a plain surface of any brightness (i understand that the camera tries to turn

everything to 18% grey, which is why so)...but shouldn't the spike be at the

middle of the histogram?

Since its not in the middle, does it mean that my camera is underexposing by one

stop?

regards,

anurag

Actually my question was...suppose i shot a picture that's made of middle tones with no highlights as such. And the histogram shows 1 or 2 stops blank at the right side, because may be the camera underexposed or may be its the right histogram for the given image, i don't know.

Now, is it okay to ALWAYS pull the levels slider to fill the blanks and make the image brighter? Should one always make the histogram fall end to end, or leaving the blanks at the right is fine for a middle tone picture?

regards,

anurag

Thanks a lot everybody. Brian i actually meant highlights. I've read Luminous Landscape article and its' very nice. I try and follow that as much as possible, even if its a bit difficult to do that.

I started having all these doubts when i read about underexposure problems with my camera. As it turned out, my copy also gave dark indoor pictures. I thought may be the pictures are dark because the scene itself has dark/gray tones.

Thanks everybody.

Thanks a lot.

So basically one shud expose to the right, even if no whites in the scene. But where to actually place different tones is a matter of taste/personal choice.

Is that right?

Hi,

I have read everywhere that in digital capture, one should push the histogram to

the extreme right so that the whites go complete white.

My question is, what if the image doesn't have whites?

I have a 400D and i routinely get indoor shots where the right side of the

histogram is blank as much as 1-2 stops. I would think that the image is

underexposed, but then i think that may be because the scene doesn't have any

white to begin with, hence the dark result.

If i move the levels slider on such an image and fill the right side blank of

the histogram, the image becomes brighter. Now i can't decide if this one was

right or the earlier one....is it necessary to keep your histogram tight, end to

end, irrespective of weather the image itself has any whites or not??

Can someone help me out?

regards,

anurag

Hi,

I have the same problem, don't know what's the solution....prieview pictures are blurred in dpp 2.0

Hi,

Also on www.dpreview.com

Actually, they have announced many cameras...including fz 50.

In LX2, now you have ISO 1600, 10 MP chip, Widescreen LCD, Venus 3 engine and silkypix included.

regards,

just saw this:

http://www.photographyblog.com/index.php/weblog/comments/panasonic_lumix_dmc_lx

2/

regards,

anurag