Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: My friend, cropped close... Just a test for RF glass...

  1. #1
    BPN Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Location
    Sunrise, Fl
    Posts
    3,241
    Threads
    525
    Thank You Posts

    Default My friend, cropped close... Just a test for RF glass...

    Attached Images Attached Images
     
    EOS R RF 70-200 @200 f2.8 1/3200 ISO 320 HH, Manual EXP, ~25% of FF

    I have been noticing how crops with this glass hold up much better than with my very old EF glass
    (2 to 4 generations(for this particular range zoom) back including TCs). So, just to play, looked through my few frames of this beauty with a pose that put head in the brighter parts only of the steep grass bank BG. Also wanted one that was wide open to really show the resolving power without stopping down. Please forgive any of my dismal PP skills. I did minimal PP with no masking/selection (even when sharpening) and made a concerted effort not to over sharpen. The closer flange distance (from optics to sensor) allowed Canon to improve further on the EF version 3 of this glass due to less elements (less bending and distortion of light). With newer bodies and finally some super telephoto glass coming in this year and next even serious Canon nature photographers (speaking of you talented pros) will be able to join the currently Sony only FF mirrorless fun. In addition to being wide open, I was close giving a very narrow DOF.

    As always, thank you for your valued inputs on previous posts. Please keep them coming.

  2. #2
    Wildlife Moderator Steve Kaluski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Somewhere in the world
    Posts
    20,688
    Threads
    1,296
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Hi David, why shoot wide open, I know you said you were close, but there is no really depth, detail, clarity within the plumage, it just look flat even being square on to the sensor... in addition why 1/3200, I would have thought 1/2500 would have been OK, but then you may have techs from previous shoot? The BKG, is it as is, or please don't say you added any NR?

    David, I can't remember what you use for Conversion, but I think you could increase the Exp, bush in some negative exp over the bill and work up more around the yellow part to bring out some tone/detail. Plumage on the head and neck, yes you can pull a bit more out, body plumage not much more I fear. I feel you are improving on the colour side, which is great.

    With such mega low ISO I would try increasing your DoF, which will bring down your SS and as the BKG is so far away you should still have a nicely diffused backdrop.

    TFS
    Steve
    Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.

  3. Thanks David Roach thanked for this post
  4. #3
    BPN Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Location
    Sunrise, Fl
    Posts
    3,241
    Threads
    525
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Kaluski View Post
    Hi David, why shoot wide open, I know you said you were close, but there is no really depth, detail, clarity within the plumage, it just look flat even being square on to the sensor... in addition why 1/3200, I would have thought 1/2500 would have been OK, but then you may have techs from previous shoot? The BKG, is it as is, or please don't say you added any NR?

    David, I can't remember what you use for Conversion, but I think you could increase the Exp, bush in some negative exp over the bill and work up more around the yellow part to bring out some tone/detail. Plumage on the head and neck, yes you can pull a bit more out, body plumage not much more I fear. I feel you are improving on the colour side, which is great.

    With such mega low ISO I would try increasing your DoF, which will bring down your SS and as the BKG is so far away you should still have a nicely diffused backdrop.

    TFS
    Steve
    Hi Steven, Thanks for your always valued comments and queries. Short answer, new glass so I'm playing to test capabilities. I did work this subject mostly at f4 and wanted f8 but the BG situation (close wall (at steep up angle) of grasses dappled with dark shadows). In PP I was actually trying to get the most challenging situation to look at resolving power (also why wide open). As I said in title "just a test". Yes, there is no noise reduction. The point of this post was testing glass capability not optimal detail. At 25% of FF and focal point on cheek and eye, I'd say the glass did it's job and when stopped down properly can even produce suitable IQ on medium to large crops. Not so with my old glass.
    Your expertise, help and encouragement is always appreciated, my friend... Please keep it coming.

  5. #4
    Super Moderator Daniel Cadieux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    26,311
    Threads
    3,979
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    For the test you were making I can see that as posted for web the details on the face are more than acceptable with that big crop. Great-looking young bird.

  6. Thanks David Roach thanked for this post
  7. #5
    Publisher Arthur Morris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Indian Lake Estates, FL
    Posts
    32,557
    Threads
    1,438
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    I love the image and I havd zero clue what Steve is talking out. I am seeing a ton of gorgeous detail especially on the head and face.

    with love, artie
    BIRDS AS ART Blog: great info and lessons, lots of images with our legendary BAA educational Captions; we will not sell you junk. 30+ years of long lens experience/e-mail with gear questions.

    BIRDS AS ART Online Store: we will not sell you junk. 35 years of long lens experience. Please e-mail with gear questions.

    Check out the new SONY e-Guide and videos that I did with Patrick Sparkman here. Ten percent discount for BPN members,

    E-mail me at samandmayasgrandpa@att.net.










  8. Thanks David Roach thanked for this post
  9. #6
    Wildlife Moderator Steve Kaluski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Somewhere in the world
    Posts
    20,688
    Threads
    1,296
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    I love the image and I havd zero clue what Steve is talking out. I am seeing a ton of gorgeous detail especially on the head and face.
    Artie, there is detail in the head/bill, but for me I would have liked similar detail as you have in the neck to continue down the plumage and into the body so to speak. In addition, by making some simple adjustments in the yellow area between the eye and bill David can gain more there too. Hope that helps.
    Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.

  10. Thanks David Roach thanked for this post
  11. #7
    BPN Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Location
    Sunrise, Fl
    Posts
    3,241
    Threads
    525
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Thanks to you astute gentlemen for looking and all valued inputs. Steve, I did get your points as I've already stated. Daniel, if you saw the tif before downsize, you might even agree a decent print could be had. The eye especially as it has what I have seen in longer glass views what looks like lined up red/orange worms radiating from the pupil in the iris portion. pretty amazing to me from such a large crop. But. I'm not used to modern glass. And Artie, as always thanks for a photographic lifetime of learnings. Please keep the valued comments coming.
    Peace,
    David

  12. #8
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Ithaca, NY
    Posts
    10,421
    Threads
    1,708
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Looks spot on to me one of your best portraits i have seen.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Web Analytics