Twelve 1500mm Fieldscope Images

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by M-M, Apr 13, 2007.

  1. M-M

    M-M Guest

    M-M, Apr 13, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. M-M <> wrote:

    > These were taken in the space of 1 hr 15 minutes:
    > http://www.mhmyers.com/fs-d80/index.html


    Many seem oversaturated, and I felt would benefit from some extra
    sharpening. Were these results the sharpest you could get even with post-
    processing and downsizing for the web? Anyhow, nice birds :^)
     
    Charles Gillen, Apr 14, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. M-M

    M-M Guest

    In article <Xns9911D28428BC6gillen@216.194.192.13>,
    Charles Gillen <gillen@hisdotcom> wrote:

    > M-M <> wrote:
    >
    > > These were taken in the space of 1 hr 15 minutes:
    > > http://www.mhmyers.com/fs-d80/index.html

    >
    > Many seem oversaturated, and I felt would benefit from some extra
    > sharpening. Were these results the sharpest you could get even with post-
    > processing and downsizing for the web? Anyhow, nice birds :^)


    I did no post processing on any of them (except to resize down to 25%),
    mainly to show what the setup did right out of the camera.

    I was impressed with the metering and auto-ISO adjustments to keep the
    shutter to 1/125.

    I had set the camera to one step up in saturation but I'm not sure I
    like that.

    ---
    m-m
     
    M-M, Apr 14, 2007
    #3
  4. On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 22:45:18 -0400, in rec.photo.digital M-M
    <> wrote:

    >In article <Xns9911D28428BC6gillen@216.194.192.13>,
    > Charles Gillen <gillen@hisdotcom> wrote:
    >
    >> M-M <> wrote:
    >>
    >> > These were taken in the space of 1 hr 15 minutes:
    >> > http://www.mhmyers.com/fs-d80/index.html

    >>
    >> Many seem oversaturated, and I felt would benefit from some extra
    >> sharpening. Were these results the sharpest you could get even with post-
    >> processing and downsizing for the web? Anyhow, nice birds :^)

    >
    >I did no post processing on any of them (except to resize down to 25%),
    >mainly to show what the setup did right out of the camera.


    Yes, but you do have the camera set to:
    http://www.netaxs.com/~mhmyers/fs-d80/images/dsc_1306.jpg

    * Contrast = normal (0)
    * Saturation = high (2)
    * Sharpness = normal (0)

    and so you are blowing out the red channel and therefor losing a bit of
    detail in the process.

    --
    Ed Ruf ()
    http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html
     
    Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!), Apr 14, 2007
    #4
  5. M-M

    M-M Guest

    In article <>,
    "Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!)" <> wrote:

    > Yes, but you do have the camera set to:
    > http://www.netaxs.com/~mhmyers/fs-d80/images/dsc_1306.jpg
    >
    > * Contrast = normal (0)
    > * Saturation = high (2)
    > * Sharpness = normal (0)
    >
    > and so you are blowing out the red channel and therefor losing a bit of
    > detail in the process.



    Yes, I know. I guess I was reading a bit too much Ken Rockwell.

    --
    m-m
     
    M-M, Apr 14, 2007
    #5
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. RHM
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    829
  2. M-M
    Replies:
    51
    Views:
    4,584
    Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)
    Apr 14, 2007
  3. M-M

    Good looking Cardinal at 1000mm (1500mm equiv)

    M-M, May 21, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    511
  4. M-M

    Blue Grosbeak @ 1500mm

    M-M, Jul 13, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    566
    Paul Furman
    Jul 16, 2008
  5. M-M

    Io Transit of Jupiter through a Fieldscope

    M-M, Sep 16, 2010, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    359
    Martin Brown
    Sep 18, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page