Just some randoms with the 24-70.

[cdifoto]

Actually didn't do any real-life testing with this lens since getting it back. These are the first. I think it passed. All are at f/2.8. Performed my usual USM 10/60/0 for haze and 100/.3/0 for a bit of extra sharpness. Whibal Adjusted. Otherwise straight from camera RAW conversion.

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a304/cdifoto/20060428/2006-04-28-0002.jpg

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a304/cdifoto/20060428/2006-04-28-0003.jpg

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a304/cdifoto/20060428/2006-04-28-0004.jpg

[24Peter]

Very nice Don. You've got a good eye. :) So do you notice a difference in the lenses or body more since they were serviced?

[timmciglobal]

Ever notice how hard it is to stick to the thirds composistion rule? /duck

:)

Nice shots though, with the flowers growing I plan to take some nice shots!

Tim

[cdifoto]

LOL you guys are so full of crap...these are NOT good shots. :rolleyes: They're just sharp. :D But thanks anyway. :D

Yeah Pete it's much better. I can now shoot within the limitations of the entry level dSLR...rather than within the limitations of an overpriced, overglassed point & shoot.

[cdifoto]

Wow do I ever feel retarded. I DID use this lens...for an entire night since getting it back. At that live band thing. How could I have forgotten about that? Oye. Need...more...sleep....

[JTL]

LOL you guys are so full of crap...these are NOT good shots. :rolleyes: They're just sharp. :D But thanks anyway. :D They're the best shots I've ever seen!

Seriously, though, with a little cropping, the tulips could be nice...better than most shots is the "flower thread"...(except for mine, of course!) :p

[DonSchap]

The flower box, out front has a happy surprise this week:

11749

11750

11751

So I'm 'snap happy'... it looked worth some storage on my CF. :D I'd consider a card with something like this... for my sweet thing. If she went to the trouble to plant 'em... I had better :rolleyes:

[coldrain]

Nice tulips you have outside, Don and Don. A little bit of the netherlands in your yard ;)

[cdifoto]

Here's a few more with real attempts at composition. These are as-shot. Same deal as above with USM and whatnot.

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a304/cdifoto/20060428/2006-04-28-0006.jpg

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a304/cdifoto/20060428/2006-04-28-0007.jpg

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a304/cdifoto/20060428/2006-04-28-0008.jpg

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a304/cdifoto/20060428/2006-04-28-0009.jpg

[coldrain]

Looks like the USM steps are messing with your bokeh big time, cdi. If you want to use USM use it on the lightness channel of lab colors and select the area that can use sharpening leaving the bokeh well alone.

[cdifoto]

Looks like the USM steps are messing with your bokeh big time, cdi. If you want to use USM use it on the lightness channel of lab colors and select the area that can use sharpening leaving the bokeh well alone.

I dont know much of anything about channels. I generally just use USMs on the image as a whole. I know it's not ideal but it's what I know. heh. Thanks for the tip and I'll give it a try.

[cdifoto]

Is it ok to be kinda sloppy when lassoing the area to be USMed in Lab? Here's what I was quickly able to do. If being sloppy is alright then I can handle this...

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a304/cdifoto/20060428/2006-04-28-0006Lab.jpg

[cdifoto]

Here's another one done via the Lab mode. I'm assuming I did it right. I honestly can't tell the difference.

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a304/cdifoto/20060428/2006-04-28-0008Lab.jpg

[aparmley]

Looks like the USM steps are messing with your bokeh big time, cdi. If you want to use USM use it on the lightness channel of lab colors and select the area that can use sharpening leaving the bokeh well alone.

I always thought that "Defog" technique had adverse affects on my bokeh. I also noticed it would put a dark "halo" around the subjects of my photograph - I really only like using the techniue at something like 10-15 | 25-30 | 0 - everything else looked way toooooo contrasty like the suggested 20 | 60 | 0.

I really dig the first tulip shot though in the "real composition" section - or the one two images above my post.

[coldrain]

The difference is not huge... just that the background gets more restless. If you look closely you can see the left one is more restless, like it is in motion.

[cdifoto]

I always thought that "Defog" technique had adverse affects on my bokeh. I also noticed it would put a dark "halo" around the subjects of my photograph - I really only like using the techniue at something like 10-15 | 25-30 | 0 - everything else looked way toooooo contrasty like the suggested 20 | 60 | 0.

I really dig the first tulip shot though in the "real composition" section - or the one two images above my post.

I discovered that 20/60/0 was too powerful as well...except for when I used the kit lens. Probably because it's not contrasty at all to begin with. I've been running 10/60/0 on most of my shots and it's more on the money, IMO. I still can't see the halos and anti-bokeh action though. I must be blind.

[cdifoto]

The difference is not huge... just that the background gets more restless. If you look closely you can see the left one is more restless, like it is in motion.

Well it was breezy...and everything was moving. I managed to stop the flowers because they were swaying rather than swishing like that grass. Think that's what it could be rather than over-USM'd bokeh?

Reason I ask is I see absolutely NO difference between the lab-mode method you suggested versus my generic "all engines go" version I posted first...despite your claims that it would improve that. Maybe you can see a difference but I really cannot.

[arigato]

Is it me or does the shot with the yellow tulips seem a little dark? I like the last shot of the tulip opening up, it seems as if it has a built in light source of all its own.

[aparmley]

I discovered that 20/60/0 was too powerful as well...except for when I used the kit lens. Probably because it's not contrasty at all to begin with. I've been running 10/60/0 on most of my shots and it's more on the money, IMO. I still can't see the halos and anti-bokeh action though. I must be blind.

You have to train your eye - I mean preview checkbox is your friend! ;)

[cdifoto]

You have to train your eye - I mean preview checkbox is your friend! ;)

I can see a difference in the in focus subject when USM'd versus not USM'd but I can't see a difference in the bokeh between his way and mine. I just can't.

Coldy first says my USM did crazy things to my bokeh...then he said it's barely noticable. Which is it? Makes me wonder how much it really matters. Who do we take the pictures for anyway?

[coldrain]

Well, the pictures you posted have a certain dizzyness imposing quality to them. Something added a strange structure to the fuzzy stuff... and of the two pics you posted of the same subject, the effect was less... still there though. Since I do not have the original file I cant see what is going on.

But the 2nd one you posted was less severe, and that is what I pointed out...
A slight difference when you put them side by side but a muvh more peacefull pic for your eyes.

[cdifoto]

Well, the pictures you posted have a certain dizzyness imposing quality to them. Something added a strange structure to the fuzzy stuff... and of the two pics you posted of the same subject, the effect was less... still there though. Since I do not have the original file I cant see what is going on.

But the 2nd one you posted was less severe, and that is what I pointed out...
A slight difference when you put them side by side but a muvh more peacefull pic for your eyes.


They look exactly identical on my LCD monitor Coldy. Are you on a CRT? Maybe wierd things happening that I can't see because of it?

Here's the first one without any edits at all. I just resized and watermarked.

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a304/cdifoto/20060428/2006-04-28-0006orig.jpg

[ReValveiT]

I like that shot!

I think the darkness adds a lovely deep contrast.

[cwphoto]

The flower box, out front has a happy surprise this week:

11749

11750

11751

So I'm 'snap happy'... it looked worth some storage on my CF. :D I'd consider a card with something like this... for my sweet thing. If she went to the trouble to plant 'em... I had better :rolleyes:

Don, these look a bit blown out to me.

[TheObiJuan]

Me too christian, but not so much that it detracts from the lovely picture.
Don't you love how photography is so subjective?

[cwphoto]

Don't you love how photography is so subjective?

Absolutely.