Birds, books, churches and anything else I want to waffle about
Oh dear - this is a hard one.Generally speaking, I would say that the second batch have greater definition than the first (especially the yellow flower). And the depth of colour, IMHO, is better.
The first five are brighter and the colours are brilliant.
i'll had a comment later about lenseshey carin you've vanished from bgb. all ok?
LOL LOL Pete, no, I've not vanished from BGB! I only redecorate my flat.
Ok I prefer the yellow flower in the first lot and the mauve clematis I prefer the second lot.
Pete, i would say it was easier to compare if they were together. But the later ones seem more true to life, colour wise.I also agree with Tricia on definition.
What does he mean "blogger hates me and is no longer updating posts"..one of the girls will tell me what he means....or Pete???? I needs to know. His posts look ok to me.
bloglines hates me!! some people use feeds to monitor blogs and only visit when a change is notified.bloglines is no longer updating for my blog changes. I've switched to google reader!
I was wondering what that meant as well. Beautiful photos Pete.
very difficult to make a comparison; the trouble it's not clear the same subjects have been taken (the only one I could identify is the yellow flower); are we looking for sharpness, composition, quality ?I'd say it's all pretty much of a muchness; there's a couple in the first lot I prefer, and a couple in the 2nd lot I prefer; clearly there is a difference in colour in some of them, but without knowing the actual colour in real life of the flower it is hard to know which lens is accurately representing the colour (assuming WB is set correctly). Also there are 2 shots of a clematis bud (dsc 6 and 8) from the same lens which clearly show a different picture. So making a comparison from different lenses is even harder when you're getting different quality shots from the same lens anyway !side-by-side or at least alternating shots of the same subjects with each lens would be nice :)
anony - can we have a name?white balance was set for bright sunshine. I'll have to look at the unaltered pics 6 & 8 and the settings. I may have played to much with one of them. I'm not looking for composition. I was comparing two totally differentlenses the first 5 were shot with a Nikon d70 6mp and a well reviewed Sigma 150 macro.the second set were shot with a Nikon d80 10mp and £79 Nikon 50f1.8I was rather pleased with how good the cheap prime performed.
I'd say the 50 f1.8 is not bad indeed, how do you feel about the colour reproduction - the clematis are more purple in the d70 and more blue in the d80 (or is it due to the lens?)if I had to pick a favourite I'd go for no.9 and no.5Geoff (anony!)
Hi GeoffI think this may be me. I had the d80 white balance set for sunshine and the d70 was on auto.pic 5 was f8 1/500 and was played with a little in photoshoppic was f8 1/640 and was played with in photoshophard to tell what is more faithful. if it was scientific I'd have swapped lenses and taken the pics with the same camera and made sure it was the same flower etc. if pushed I'd say the 2nd set.what really pleased me though is just how good that cheap prime was. seems like a really nice low cost lens and great for flowers, portraits etc and the camera feels so light with it on! If nikon could produce a 20mm or 24mm f2.8 lens to the same build quality (a little pasticky) and weight and under £200 I'd snaffle it up. don't want much do i!!
I get colour issues sometimes, ie. with Euonymus europaeus, I can see with my own eye pink and orange, yet the orange won't show up in the photo...very interesting trying to find the right settings that accurately reproduce the exact colour !The cheap prime is a goer - personally I love my Sigma 105 macro, it's my favourite lens. I'm still hoping there will be a new version of the 80-400VR, that plus a D300 and I'll be happy as a pig in....um....a pigsty !
I think the cheap lens did a fine job...I like all the photos...I could not tell which was shot with what lens if you had not told us Pete...good light, good settings..I wonder how the cheap lens would do in poor light.
will try it in a church!!did you get the email?
Post a Comment