Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 19

Thread: a300 @ ISO1600

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Guelph, Ontario
    Posts
    1,903

    a300 @ ISO1600

    taken with Minolta 35-70mm F4 in Live View mode. direct RAW conversion from Sony IDC to jpeg. no PP done.
    colour a little warm but such was the lighting and the colour in the room is pretty accurate.



    Camera Make: SONY

    Camera Model: DSLR-A300

    Date/Time: 2009:02:04 09:44:10

    Resolution: 800 x 536

    Flash Used: No

    Focal Length: 60.0mm (35mm equivalent: 90mm...

    Exposure Time: 0.125 s (1/8)

    Aperture: f/4.0

    ISO Equiv.: 1600

    Exposure Bias: 1.00

    Whitebalance: Auto

    Metering Mode: spot

    Exposure: aperture priority (semi-auto)
    Last edited by Elisha; 02-03-2009 at 08:25 PM.
    Canon EOS 7D

    flickr
    FLUIDR

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,562
    Looks good. Not too much noise either.

    Frank
    Sony A77
    Sony A580
    Sony A 100
    Maxxum 400si.
    Sony 18-70 Kit Lens
    Minolta AF 35-70
    Minolta AF 50 f/1.7
    Tamron 70-300 f/4-5.6 Di LD
    Tamron 60mm Macro
    Tamron 17-50 f/2.8
    Tamron 2x Converter
    Sony HVL-F42AM
    Quantaray 70-300 4.5-5.6 Macro
    Slingshot 200 Bag



    http://www.flickr.com/photos/22083244@N06/

    http://s305.photobucket.com/albums/nn219/sparkie1263/

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Guelph, Ontario
    Posts
    1,903
    Sony IDC shows less noise in the RAW when is HighSpeed mode but when you change to Standard mode before converting, the noise appears especially in the background.
    Canon EOS 7D

    flickr
    FLUIDR

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560
    Elisha, just for fun, knock that "White Balance" down to "2500K" ... and reshoot. Try to avoid AWB indoors, if possible. It rarely gives you decent results.

    Original



    I'm kind of getting this:

    Name:  WB-correction.jpg
Views: 146
Size:  412.2 KB
    Last edited by DonSchap; 02-03-2009 at 09:03 PM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Monmouthshire, UK
    Posts
    2,152
    Nice pic, Elisha.
    Don't think I agree with Don. You said the lighting was to your taste so I'm cool (or warm even) with that.
    Subject composition is good; the eyes fixed on something out of frame with the landscape format giving "room" for the subject's gaze. The diagonal shoulder line draws the eye out of frame as if pointing towards the focus of attention. It looks like she is looking out of a west facing window in the late afternoon sun, maybe at children playing or people passing by, who knows? Clever stuff, Elisha.
    If I have a criticism, it's in the background. If you'd crouched down a little and moved slightly left, the TV and the dark spot on the ceiling would have been obscured. The tendency is to forget the background in concentrating on the subject and I'm as guilty as anyone else of this failing.
    That doesn't make it a bad image though, 'cos it ain't.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Guelph, Ontario
    Posts
    1,903
    thanks guys. my aunt was not aware that she was being photographed. the camera was on the table with the screen flipped out and i pointed at her and took a few shots. because of the very dim lighting and slow shutter speeds, most of the pics i took of her had some motion blur.
    this was taken at night - the camera date and time is incorrect as i have not changed it back since i came back from vacation.
    the walls are a dark colour as well. so the pic turned out pretty much the same as what my eyes could see.
    but the subtle adjustment Don made does not look too bad at all.
    i personally like warmer skin tones and pics especially indoors.

    i think it turned out reasonable considering it is a 1/8th of a second shot with the lens wide open.
    Don, what colour temperature did you use there? 2500K?
    Canon EOS 7D

    flickr
    FLUIDR

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560
    I did a white balance adjustment with PS. I used the white highlight reflecting in her earring and then reduced the shadows a little. Like I said, using the camera indoors like this (no flash), I have better color results going to 2500K, if it looks a bit warm. It tends to push the blues a bit further, and lower the yellows.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Guelph, Ontario
    Posts
    1,903
    good to know. even though the white balance adjustment is un-natural for the given lighting, it looks nice and would probably be preferred if the viewer did not know of the lighting present.
    it would probably turn out nicer in prints as well compared to the original one.
    i'm impressed that ISO1600 turned out good. i know it works well in better lighting but i didn't expect such results in the dim light i shot it in.
    Canon EOS 7D

    flickr
    FLUIDR

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Ohio, USA.
    Posts
    1,161
    OK back to basic school for a second, Don did you 'warm' or 'cool' the tones with 2500K? Acooler image runs to the blues and a warmer image runs to the reds/yellows correct?
    2500k is on the 'cooler' side of the temp. range correct? What is considered or is there a 'neutral' temp. for kelvin?
    By the way both versions of the photo is nice, I think as I have not seen the lady in person that Don's image brings out her hair coloring better, and I prefer the skin tone in the second one, but I would be pleased with the first one if I took it also.
    Sony A700_____________Minolta AF 50mm. F/1.7
    Minolta AF 70-210mm F/3.5-4.5 Tamron AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR DiII LD Asp. [IF]
    Tamron SP AF 70-200mm. F/2.8 DI LD [IF] Macro
    Tamron AF 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di LD Macro 1:2
    Tokina AF 28-70mm F/3.5-4.5
    Tokina AF AT-X 80-400mm F/4.5-5.6
    http://flickr.com/

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560
    Normally, under Tungsten "hot lights" your WB would normally be a 3200K setting.

    For normal daylight or strobe, it goes to 5600K

    For extra strong, noonday sun ... 6600K

    Fluorescent winds up around 4400K ... it's that weird, green shift.

    Those are the static ranges.

    AWB can be fooled with soft Tungsten ... and you get the warmer look to the image, at 3200K

    By dropping to 2500K, you neutralize the warmer look ... by matching up with the warmer Tungsten glow.

    Those Sodium-Iodide lights (parking lots) are the worst. They are 2200K ... and you can't even get the camera to match that.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

Posting Permissions

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