Portrait of the adult bad eagle-and my impressions of the 7D2

[arash_hazeghi]

I got this frame with Henrik Nilson in Vancouver area. This handsome adults claimed the perch from a juvenile.

Attachment 147808


Shot with EOS 1D-X and 300 f/2.8II with 2X III. ISO 3200, f/5.6 at 1/640sec. Hand held. I applied some shadow adjustment during post. about 90% of the original capture. Processed on my MacBook Air with DPP 4.15.

Henrik was kind enough to let me try his 7D2 (his backup to a 5D3) and the new 100-400 II which I really liked. My impression of the 7D2 is not that positive though, you can read it here. keep in mind this was a quick test and not a through review.

http://arihazeghiphotography.com/blo...-100-400-l-ii/

[Jim Neiger]

Nice portrait, Arash. I like the bg and the visible talons.

[Andreas Liedmann]

Hi Arash nice solid portrait of the majestic bird . Nice color palette and nice tones from 1/4 to the darks . HL do look too much recovered IMHO (grayish look on top of the head ) .I also feel there is too much luminance NR used , too soft in parts fro my liking , i personally set NR to 0 in DPP 4 under 3200 ISO with the 1Dx , but that is my way. If i need i do that in PS with Neat Image selectively . Because within DPP 4 there is no selective workaround .

TFS Andreas

[arash_hazeghi]

Hi Andreas,

I did not use NR on the bird, it doesn't look soft to me, it actually looks tack sharp to my eye, so I am not sure what you are referring to. I am using my laptop monitor which isn't that great to process so the highlights or darks may not be perfect.

you can see the HD file here

http://ari1982.smugmug.com/Avian/Rap...R8Tdn&lb=1&s=O

Best,
Arash

[Andreas Liedmann]

Hi Arash ,the HD file do look the same . I am referring to the surface (not the edges ) of feathers /perch and specially the head , they do look too smooth . The edges are sharp , but there is not that much sharpness in the surfaces .

Following your DPP 4 guide , which i did because i purchased it , one should set the luminance NR to 5-6 ??!! If you follow your own route as per your guide ....... then you use NR on the bird , right ?

And this is why i have the feeling it is too soft on the surface of the bird and the perch , that is one reason why i stay completely away from luminance NR in DPP 4 ( even if better than older version ) and deal with the noise within PS , but that is my way .

Nothing wrong with it in general Arash , i just look at it maybe from a different perspective about the NR and detail .

Cheers Andreas

BTW the same effect on the HD version , at least to my eyes .

I am looking at the image , on a well calibrated 30" Quato Pro screen

[arash_hazeghi]

Hi Arash ,the HD file do look the same . I am referring to the surface (not the edges ) of feathers /perch and specially the head , they do look too smooth . The edges are sharp , but there is not that much sharpness in the surfaces .

Following your DPP 4 guide , which i did because i purchased it , one should set the luminance NR to 5-6 ??!! If you follow your own route as per your guide ....... then you use NR on the bird , right ?

And this is why i have the feeling it is too soft on the surface of the bird and the perch , that is one reason why i stay completely away from luminance NR in DPP 4 ( even if better than older version ) and deal with the noise within PS , but that is my way .

Nothing wrong with it in general Arash , i just look at it maybe from a different perspective about the NR and detail .

Cheers Andreas

BTW the same effect on the HD version , at least to my eyes .

I am looking at the image , on a well calibrated 30" Quato Pro screen

Hi Andreas,

Thanks for elaborating.

Re feathers: That's just how the adult bald eagle feathers look like, not sure if you have seen one up close (?), there is no loss of details from NR. I usually pay attention to that Bald eagles do have smooth feathers and this adult was pristine and clean. The focus point was placed on the head so some parts of the bird like the shoulders and the tail are outside DOF as you can see below. We also had dim light with no sun in the sky so micro-contrast will be lacking a bit. The surface of the perch is not soft either, but it was wet from the rain.

To answer your second question, I do use and recommend luminance NR in DPP 4 because I believe it does a a better job than NI in most cases (there are a few exceptions where I still prefer NI). In this case I actually used a setting of 4 because the file was very clean to begin with, and below you can see it has no impact on feather details. If you 0 all the NR and then apply NI externally, the output will be the same.






Hope this answers your question

Happy Holidays!

Arash

[Andreas Liedmann]

Hi Arash thank you for your response and more detailed info in this image .
As i said i am fine with it , it is your image , and your way of dealing with noise and detail.I just saw from my POV "too much" softness in the areas i was referring to. And still stand my thoughts, hope that is ok with you .

I just have a different approach of dealing with it . I actually prefer the version with L set to 0 , and would like to see a low res as an RP , that would be great for comparison . And it would have been better if you have set the sharpness to 0 to see what detail gets eliminated by NR in DPP . I judge the noise with sharpness set to 0 within DPP 4 .

I think this is somehow nit picking , but for me the only way to learn with real life examples about other peoples workflow and thoughts regarding the "problem" areas in an image (like noise , highlights, shadows) .

Just coming back to your statement no NR on the bird , by setting the L = 4 , you apply NR to the bird ............. ? to be correct .

Hope you don´t mind this little discussion , i am fine with it , cause all the time something to learn here .

Thanks Andreas

[arash_hazeghi]

Hi Andreas,

You are correct, when I said no NR on the bird I meant no external NR, I did use L=4 in DPP which I didn't count because all RAW convertors do apply some kind of base NR. I should have elaborated, sorry. From the above it's pretty clear that it makes no difference though, but if get a chance I will re-process with L=0 and NI. Frankly details look quite good to me for this image and that's why I posted it :)


Discussion is great and always welcomed, I don't mind at all.

thank you so much for your contribution and discussion

Best,
Arash

[Loi Nguyen]

Hi Arash, nice portrait of the bird and good BG. You didn't have much light there. My impression is this is not one of your best, but again, this was shot in low light and with a 2X, so can't be compared with your usual 600f4/1.4TC in good light. I have shot many images with the 2X too and at 100%^ view, yours looks pretty good to my eye under the lighting condition. TFS. Loi

[arash_hazeghi]

Thanks Loi, the 2X III + 300 II is every bit as sharp as the 600 II+ 1.4X you cannot really tell the difference, not to mention the fast focus.


best

[David Salem]

Great looking shot of this majestic eagle. I like the pose, perch, BG and the nice looking feather detail throughout. Very well done.
IMO the few points of NR actually clean up a bit of the chroma noise in the bird but it doesn't take away from the feather details at all. I have been doing this lately and I haven't lost any actual detail in my images.

[Glenn Conlan]

Great capture Arash. The head detail really makes this come alive especially the eye. Next time your down here I need a few pointers on processing your presentation is excellent.

Glenn

[Moe Ali]

Arash, I couldn't nit-pick anything about this image even if I tried. I'd be proud to have this shot in my collection.

To my eyes you have fantastic detail, a beautiful pose, and a gorgeous fully matured eagle.

I agree with your comment about DPP. In my trials I find that it does a better job than ACR in post-processing images. I find that photos have a "different" look to them when I use DPP at the start of my editing workflow. Better output overall for some reason. Maybe it's the lens optimizer, or how the software handles noise and shadow detail. I don't know, but it works.

[arash_hazeghi]

Arash, I couldn't nit-pick anything about this image even if I tried. I'd be proud to have this shot in my collection.

To my eyes you have fantastic detail, a beautiful pose, and a gorgeous fully matured eagle.

I agree with your comment about DPP. In my trials I find that it does a better job than ACR in post-processing images. I find that photos have a "different" look to them when I use DPP at the start of my editing workflow. Better output overall for some reason. Maybe it's the lens optimizer, or how the software handles noise and shadow detail. I don't know, but it works.

Hi Moe, Thanks

DPP uses proprietary algorithm for demosaic that is tailored for each image sensor used in Canon bodies. This leads to better overall color response, fine detail and micor-coctrast rendition. The new version also uses much better noise reduction algorithm. ACR uses generic DCRAW based algorithm for all cameras regardless of sensor so it cannot give the best results for most...


best

Arash