Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (
More info?)
Colin D wrote:
>
> Foto Ryadia's Studio wrote:
>
>>Jeremy Nixon wrote:
>>
>>>From Foto Ryadia's Studio <nospam@ryadia.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Interestingly enough, I shot some scenes on Sunday in just those
>>>>conditions. I used a speedlight on my 1D but the FZ20 I took along, I
>>>>just used it "point and shoot", held in one hand. One of the shots here.
>>>>http
/www.ryadia.com/sailor_lost.htm
>>>
>>>
>>>A shot with blown highlights and no shadow detail. Great example! It
>>>really illustrates the camera's ability to deal with wide dynamic range!
>>>
>>>I bet the 1D could have done much better, if you knew how to use it.
>>>
>>
>>Ahh yes. You just press the button, don't you Jeremy?
>>No 1D that day but a 20D. Sorry, the 1D was doing wedding.
>>http
/www.ryadia.com/flinders-20D.htm
>>
>>Now before you start... Apples with apples, someone said. OK so the
>>unfair advantage the 20D has is RAW mode capture. I minimized that
>>advantage when I converted it to a JPEG with "Irfanview" and added my
>>name then resized it and compressed it, exactly the same as I did with
>>the Panasonic image. For all intent and purpose these images were
>>brought to the Internet in exactly the same way. Program mode on both
>>cameras. You could print the FZ20 pic but not the 20D one without editing.
>>
>
> Doug, there seems no doubt that the 20D underexposed that shot. The
> exif shows 1/640 second at f/9, 100 ISO, on a winter's day, with the sun
> a bit lower than noontime, judging by the shadows. 'Sunny f/16' at 100
> ISO would have given about 1/400 sec at f/8, and adjusting for the light
> you had would make it about 1/200 or 1/250 sec at f/9, so 1/640 at f/9
> is about two stops or so underexposed.
>
> Since the sailor's white leg and thigh is about where the partial meter
> would have read the light, I would say the meter was fooled into giving
> underexposure, and this is borne out by the histogram, where the
> brightest highlights are less than three-quarters of the histo scale. I
> tried lightening the shadows in PS, but no luck. I would think though,
> that since the camera image is a RAW file, the ISO speed could be
> adjusted in the RAW converter to lift the shadows without losing the
> highlights before conversion to jpg.
>
> Forgive me, but I have to ask: could you not have moved left or right a
> little to lose the microphone?
>
> Colin
20D's with FX 580 Speedlight's attached.
The Custom functions of a 20D allow you to set the speedlight to fire at
1/250th fixed speed when you choose aperture priority mode. You have to
deliberately choose this in the functions.
It has one really nice advantage over other flashlights in that you can
capture movement (like someone dancing around a fire before dawn) but it
also locks the exposure when lighting gets too bright for the
aperture/speed you have selected.
The simple way to overcome moving inside to outside and back again while
keeping the flash primed for action capture in low light is to switch
between program mode and Av mode when you move from one set of
conditions to another.
The flash was switched off on that shot because a minute or so before, I
took a picture of a rubber boat at high speed. I forgot to switch it
back on for that shot. When Jeremy said "a 1D would do better", I
couldn't help but show him it could not. That's how that picture came to
be posted. No way to move in a crowd of 20 Photographers who descended
on the re-enactment like a plague of locusts.
I realize now it is impossible to post an image on the Internet which
looks like a true photograph. You either sacrifice image quality so dial
up users can see the picture or you consume all your bandwidth with
people downloading high resolution image just "to see if they are focused".
Here's one you might be interested in. Shot with 20D and FX 580 Speedlight.
--
Douglas,
Zero care factor for negative responses
from anonymous posters.
Facebook
Twitter