Jack, thanks. sometimes my poor english don´t help me. you were very clear.In the raw processor, if you click the White Balance tool (WB dropper) on the same spot in the images, then the color is identical in both
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
Jack, thanks. sometimes my poor english don´t help me. you were very clear.In the raw processor, if you click the White Balance tool (WB dropper) on the same spot in the images, then the color is identical in both
Now, ...... this is an announcement!.......
PPPS: If Nikon releases a 17PC-e on optical par with Canon's, and if they improve the 24 to match, OR IF A 3rd PARTY MANUFACTURER RELEASES QUALITY PC LENSES FOR NIKON, I am likely (not guaranteed, but likely) to sell off my remaining MF gear...
There you have it.
Interesting. Hope you'll post your thoughts on this from time to time.PPPS: If Nikon releases a 17PC-e on optical par with Canon's, and if they improve the 24 to match, OR IF A 3rd PARTY MANUFACTURER RELEASES QUALITY PC LENSES FOR NIKON, I am likely (not guaranteed, but likely) to sell off my remaining MF gear...
Jack, just to make sure I get it: do you refer to your back and the Arca and the Rodenstock lenses, or just to whatever belongs to the DF?PPPS: If Nikon releases a 17PC-e on optical par with Canon's, and if they improve the 24 to match, OR IF A 3rd PARTY MANUFACTURER RELEASES QUALITY PC LENSES FOR NIKON, I am likely (not guaranteed, but likely) to sell off my remaining MF gear...
Steven,Jack,
I know you are a very experienced C1 user and have spent countless hours perfecting capture sharpening in C1,
Have you or anyone else in this matter come up with some comparable
capture sharpening settings in LR4 for high frequency images, ie landscape stuff when using a D800 that would get me closer to a D800/E micro contrast?
I have been using the "so called" deconvolution setting in LR4
Amount 40
Radius .7
Detail 100
Mask to taste usually around 23 so my Telluride blue sky's and clouds don't get sharpened.
Steven
Chris,Jack, just to make sure I get it: do you refer to your back and the Arca and the Rodenstock lenses, or just to whatever belongs to the DF?
Chris
Jack,
I know you are a very experienced C1 user and have spent countless hours perfecting capture sharpening in C1,
Have you or anyone else in this matter come up with some comparable
capture sharpening settings in LR4 for high frequency images, ie landscape stuff when using a D800 that would get me closer to a D800/E micro contrast?
I have been using the "so called" deconvolution setting in LR4
Amount 40
Radius .7
Detail 100
Mask to taste usually around 23 so my Telluride blue sky's and clouds don't get sharpened.
Steven
In LR4 try instead 60 0.7. 70 and mask at 20 or to taste, boost clarity a little.
Those are Lloyd's at Diglloyds recommended setting I think. I will give these a try and I also remember reading that cranking up the detail to 90 more closely resembles the D800/E look, but don't quote me on this
Jack, like yourself I sold of my Leaf AFI Hy6 kit and holding on to my arTec
I still believe for WA images the tech view solution is superior to 35mm FF
In regards to C1 vs LR4 that's a whole other story and,I agree with you C1 has the advantage, yet I like LR because I am quite fond of the print module.
I think the widest I will go on my D800 is a Zeiss 35/2 which I am renting right now from lens rental.com and so far performing very well.
Now if I can find an affordable long range lens, I would love the 200/2 but way out of my price range. I have the 180/2.8 and for landscape it is not good at all
Steven
Steven don't forget to AF tune that 180 on my body it was off like -14. Im sitting here waiting for FedX and my 200 F2. freaking torture
My bad.. Sorry for the misread!I didn't try the Zeiss 25/2 I am using Zeiss 35/2
Steven, in an earlier posting we were discussing both the Zeiss 35 f2 for landscape use and the 180 f2.8 in general. As I mentioned, I was suitably iimpressed with the 35 f2 for landscapes and was one of the reasons I purchased it at that time. With regards to the Nikon 180 f2.8, I felt the copies I tried were a bit dated and were begging to show their inadequacy on higher resolution bodies. Some of those I tried even had soft edges/corners at mi-distances. A good copy of Sigma's 150mm f2,8 macro although a bit shorter focal length wise, was markedly superior at all subject distances, but it was important to obtain a good copy. At least there is fairly good consistency with most samples.Guy,
I was just shooting the 180/2.8 at infinity and just a hair of infinity, my corners were terrible. Though my closer up stuff looked great. So for me what I like to shoot. with long FL the 180/2.8 does not cut it or I got a bad copy??? Have you shot your 180/2.8 at infinity?
I am so jealous, 200/2 wow.... Im sure the results will be amazing.