A question to those that moved to the dark side...

Hi,

Msg DuttyD as I think he switched from 450d to d300s.

Possibly because of my d300 but he'll be able to say why.



Best thing would be to join a local meet and compare up, you'd want to take a few pics yourself just to see handling etc.

Raw files can still have the camera settings already done on them, so you'd really need to set both to no extra processing settings in camera then compare after processing... preferably you process both raw files to see which you prefer. also you'll need similar lenses or the same lens (m42 plus adapter?)...

If you want to see my d300 pics, check the links below.
 
Mike said easier that sharpness isn't everything - true, however its much easier to introduce blur (and noise for that matter) than it is to take them away - so if some some unknown artistic reason I chose to produce a soft image I'd sooner have the choice to do it my forcing focus out or in PP than to have that choice made for me by the equipment.
Click to expand...

Actually, the opposite can be true. You can have detail from a lens that isn't particularly sharp straight from the camera, and if you shoot raw it'll be a given to add a little USM to give it bite. However, some lenses have particularly contrasty edge definition which gives the appearance of sharpness but fine detail may not be there.
So in this instance the softer-looking lens can give better final performance than the one that initially appears sharper.
Beyond that, different lenses have different bokeh, colour saturation and resistance to flare all of which affect the quality of the final image.
I'm not suggesting that a poorly performing lens can be magically transformed with post processing. Bad optics are bad however you look at them.

For example I had a Sigma 105mm F2.8 macro once. It was an excellent performer and very sharp. I replaced it with a series 1 Minolta 100mm F2.8 macro. It isn't noticably sharper than the Sigma but the bokeh, colour saturation and colour depth are better. Images have a 3D effect that by comparison made the Sigma images look a little flat.
Having said all that, post processing could still be the key for your differences in IQ. If you can swap raw images I'd be interested in the outcome.
Mike.
 
Last edited:
This has given me second thoughts and I'm wondering if what I'm trying to do is beyond the capabilities of my skills - nothing clever, just get a decent shot indoors (my front room) without either the noise being as rough as a rhino's butt or resorting to flash which is somewhat intrusive.

I can see myself setting up a second thread for this, but I tried last night with the 5D and its one annoying failure (no auto ISO, so set to 800) really jumped out to me as I try to focus, which was slow to the point of my daughter legging it before I could take a shot - then I managed to get the jump on the toddler (set to aperture priority 2.8) and it took 1/6s as you can imagine its a mess.

I tried another before that using manual settings 1/60s, f2.8 (forgot about ISO at that point and it was at 200), needless to say it was very dark, once levels were applied however iy revealed a lot of noise, which even lightroom couldn't touch.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edit - a little later:

I just had a crack at some high (for the 5D) ISO shots - 1600 and "H" (3200) and while the speeds aren't great 1\15 to 1\30 the results were acceptable for snaps, especially give I had the 100mm on at the time.

I think I can see why people may have bought the mk II, just for the auto ISO.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Later Still:

Thank you all, I've had a re-think and your comments and suggestions have been a big part of that - so congrats, I'm usually pretty hard to shift viewpoint on!

Switching brand is a pretty big move, so if high ISO/AF etc is my goal, the first thing I need to do is recognise my kits limits - if I find it is lacking then theres always the 7D II or 5D3 ;)
 
Last edited:
From what I can see your a bit of a "new kit" junkie. You say you have a 60d and have had a 7d too. This is good, modern equipment. Which you can't have had very long at all. I would suggest you learn to use what you have before you worry about the next big thing. All that swapping and changing is very very pointless and will have a negative affect on the qulity of your photography.
 
Most likely, although if you don't mind me saying it came across a little harshly.

I have commented before that I try to buy my way out of a corner, such as the issue with "low light" (although I'd not agree with my camera that my well lit front room is low light ;)) - mostly it works but I suspect you're right that it hinders development.

According to a mate of mine the problem is that I'm never happy with the shots I take even though he says some are good - another issue I have is that I want 100% keepers, now I know this is unachievable but that doesn't stop me being disappointed when an obvious great shot is ruined due to being soft, especially when the lesser images either side of it were sharp! (Hence the want for something that will get the focus quickly, accurately and most importantly keep it!)
 
You know I would but the range is a little short ;)

**Kidding before someone jumps all over me - £4.5K is a little steep!!**
 
JohnN said:
Most likely, although if you don't mind me saying it came across a little harshly.

I have commented before that I try to buy my way out of a corner, such as the issue with "low light" (although I'd not agree with my camera that my well lit front room is low light ;)) - mostly it works but I suspect you're right that it hinders development.

According to a mate of mine the problem is that I'm never happy with the shots I take even though he says some are good - another issue I have is that I want 100% keepers, now I know this is unachievable but that doesn't stop me being disappointed when an obvious great shot is ruined due to being soft, especially when the lesser images either side of it were sharp! (Hence the want for something that will get the focus quickly, accurately and most importantly keep it!)
Click to expand...

Apologies John - I wasn't intended to be harsh with you.

100% keepers isn't going to happen. I'm a professional photographer and many of the pictures I take are deleted. 100% keeper rate isn't going to happen.


I know a couple of 7D shooters (for example) who tell me the 7D is great in low light.

Another thing you MUST remember - when shooting with high ISO's, your exposure must be spot on, shooting to the right of the histogram. I note in one of your comments you said you took a shot at ISO 200 in a dark room and then pushed the exposure in PP. That's never going to work and noise will be a huge problem. I would expect that on my D3s just as you got it on your camera.

Seriously - work on your techniques and knowledge of exposure and I'm sure your results will improve :)
 
Don't worry about that - harsh lessons do need to be learnt and I need to put the time into learning them.

Hope you don't mind me asking but roughly what percentage are keepers?

Also as among other things I see you're a wedding photographer I would image flash is ruled out of the main ceremony, so how would you handle that?

And as I'm being cheeky and asking all sorts of questions - when it comes to the night do, do you switch to using a flash?
 
Yep, 100% keepers will never happen. If you are expecting anywhere near that then you will disappointed as no camera, or photographer, can guarantee that.

If you are regularly taking pics in low light, then you need a camera which is good at high ISO's, and apart from going for full frame professional, in the 7D you have one of the better (if not the best) APS-C cameras for low light work. Fast lenses allow you to get faster shutter speeds in low light, but you do pay for the ability though as you know. :eek: ;) :lol:

I think you have to learn the limits of the gear you have. I know in certain situations I won't even get my camera out of the bag to take a picture because what I want is beyond what my gear can do, but that comes from experience. ;) I've never expected 100% keepers, just some pics I was happy with and what was in mind or my aim when I took the pictures.

As Ryanboy said, your exposure needs to be spot on all the time, but especially in low light, because any time you have to brighten an image you are introduces noise. And the opposite is true with overexposure, once 100% white and overexposed that detail is probably gone forever. But I'm sure you know that. ;)
 
JohnN said:
Don't worry about that - harsh lessons do need to be learnt and I need to put the time into learning them.

Hope you don't mind me asking but roughly what percentage are keepers?

Also as among other things I see you're a wedding photographer I would image flash is ruled out of the main ceremony, so how would you handle that?

And as I'm being cheeky and asking all sorts of questions - when it comes to the night do, do you switch to using a flash?
Click to expand...

About 2% on a good day :D

Seriously - I suppose technically 85% don't deserve being deleted. But of a 1000 shot wedding a couple will usually get to see 400. Just rough figures of course. The difference being pictures that are technically good and pictures that I LIKE enough to show the world.

No flash in church - typically 70-200 at f2.8 at around 1/80th second and ISO 800 to 3200 depending on how gloomy the place is. 3200 is my limit on a D700 and 6400 on a D3s. Of course I'll push the ISO further if I absolutely must but usually I'll let the shutter speed drop first. And of course at these shutter speeds the keeper rate is usually down to 1 in 2.

During the night do I usually use a little flash but set an ISO of at least 800 to record some ambient light. Getting a nice balance of ambient and flash is a must during the evening. Otherwise you get the blackhole syndrome which Uncle Bob can do just as well as anyone :)

HTH
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top