|
xzzy posted:I tried that, it didn't go well. So I just collect gear to get better. I'm an A+ gear collector for some hobbies for sure. Not many can come close.
|
#
¿
May 21, 2022 18:20
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 8, 2024 14:11 |
|
|
Sorry for the derail, but I've got a question. In my camera I have an option for "lens aberration correction" and it lists my lens and says profile found. Great, so I would imagine the warping some lenses have is corrected somewhat. Neat. However, when I look at the photo in Lightroom Classic under the Lens Corrections menu on the right, I can select "Enable Profile Corrections" and my lens is listed again correctly, and you can see a noticeable difference in the photo. The center bulges out a bit, and the histogram changes a little altering the color. Now - it looks fine before and after. It's noticeable, but not enough to really see that one looks better or, more "correct" than the other. My question, is this just applying what has already been applied via the camera a second time and I should leave it be unless I'm using a lens that my camera doesn't recognize, but Lightroom does?
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2022 05:03
|
|
|
Canon 70D and Canon EF-S 55-250 IS II. RAW only.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2022 14:50
|
|
|
Alright, so the settings within the camera for lens correction only applies to JPGs. Is that for every setting like colorspace, sharpening modes, etc?
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2022 16:27
|
|
|
Yep. Thanks. Took another look and exported a photo of a table from lightroom with one raw lens corrected and the other as-is. You can really see the difference when you're using the line tool in photoshop. Another step in my develop process that is worth doing.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2022 23:38
|
|
|
2x reading glasses help a lot to spot sensor dust, go in there with the sensor cleaning activated and give it a few air squirts. When I see it across all lenses but not in the photos, it's always been dust up in the viewfinder. Just use the rubber air blower a few times up in there without the sensor cleaning activated. Philthy fucked around with this message at 03:03 on Jun 17, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2022 03:00
|
|
|
So here's a weird one. I've got the 55-250 EF-S IS. I wanted some more reach and got the 18-400 Tamron to check out. At 400mm it has less zoom than my 250mm? Barely, but noticable. Whut Edit: Object 6' away it's like this. Door across the street the 400mm is about 1/3 closer than the 250mm. This is weird voodoo. Philthy fucked around with this message at 20:47 on Jun 26, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2022 20:30
|
|
|
Yep, there was a youtuber video with this same lens and a nikon 50-250 and he experienced the same thing. It is focus breathing and it kinda sux balls when you want extra reach close up and before 50ft, after that it begins to properly magnify, which at that point its loving useless. This lens will likely be sent back. It is pretty sharp and the focusing is real quick, which surprised me. But I need the zoom up front and center because the flying bugs at 100ft away aren't going to cut it. Philthy fucked around with this message at 20:59 on Jun 27, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2022 20:57
|
|
|
brand engager posted:I don't think focus breathing is able to make a 400mm and 250mm have the same field of view, there's gotta be some details missing from this story Here's what I am experiencing, but moreso. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AehDvTu3O5Q&t=805s For subjects that are within 3.6ft (minimum distance of my 250 lens) the object is smaller @400mm than on the 250@250mm. Which is where I wanted the reach. Both lenses are EFS crop sensor specific being used on an EFS camera (7Dmk2). It feels like I learn the hard way for anything photography. "Just buy an L" memes are pretty spot on I guess. The lens is going back, and money will be going toward an R lens when my R7 arrives in 2027. Philthy fucked around with this message at 21:55 on Jun 27, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2022 21:43
|
|
|
Yeah, I'm kinda of walking that line of macro vs traditional zoom. I'm shooing birds at 50', and insects at 3-5 feet. I'll have to see if I swing one way entirely to buy a dedicated macro or not.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2022 02:57
|
|
|
Neat, one of those would be a solution to a problem I face every outing at least once.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2022 03:09
|
|
|
Yeah, that 100-400 is kind of a grail lens for me. Great shots.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2022 05:45
|
|
|
I gave it a try and didn't care for it. I just find Lightroom just works really well with my simple flow and dual monitors, the added bonus of Photoshop is a plus for the shitpost meme wars over on Twitter.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2022 19:47
|
|
|
Yep. It uses other peoples eyes etc. Sometimes it gets it really great, other times it's anime eye scary. The blemish reduction on the person's skin in the photo comes out looking pretty good for larger images I've found. This might be good for portraits/images that are high resolution to begin with, so it doesn't fill in any blanks other than making the skin look better.
Philthy fucked around with this message at 14:45 on Sep 20, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2022 14:39
|
|
|
For video you want to look for v60 or v90 cards, I believe. Depending on what resolution you're shooting it might make a difference. With the R7 out, most people have tested SDXC cards endlessly and the Lexar v60 cards are holding their own against the top of the line v90s. Seems to be the current go to card that is affordable to most everyone.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2022 15:08
|
|
|
I noticed everyone charges for their major updates, so I just stuck with Lightroom. It seems to have a lot of new features/improvements every two or three months, so I've been pretty happy with it. Plus, I grew up on Photoshop, so having that as a bonus, is a pretty big bonus. That used to run a few hundred on it's own every year.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2022 00:45
|
|
|
Got Fred Herzog: Modern Color for Christmas, and it's absolutely amazing. The best inspiration for me is just paging through photobooks and getting a feel for what makes a particular photo so good. It helps your muscle memory for framing, I've found.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2023 00:09
|
|
|
Flickr integrates really well with Lightroom for me (Just make sure you set the plugin to export at 100% JPG quality - default is like 70%), and while there is a lot of weird groups, you will also find that many of the groups you can join do have some inspiring photos. Overall, I feel like it offers a lot more positives than negatives. I've also done some test prints of photos with their service and they've come back looking pretty nice for framing.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2023 16:05
|
|
|
Unless your end goal is to open a store in a high end shop in Las Vegas. Then you need to learn how to move the saturation slider past 100%. Very few people know how to do this.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2023 16:24
|
|
|
In the US, most private parks want you to purchase a permit if you're doing anything commercial, but public parks you wont need a permit unless it interferes with the public. Like making a movie, or having a several hundred person wedding, etc. Public spaces for a person snapping stuff, you can do whatever you want. 9/11 kinda tried to curtail that because idiots thought every nerd with a camera was carrying C4 in their bags, and also planning to fly planes into the the hot barista at the local Starbucks on the corner but none of that held up in court.
Philthy fucked around with this message at 05:53 on Feb 12, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2023 05:50
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 8, 2024 14:11 |
|
|
It looks like a passive aggressive statement towards the other photogs in the state.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2024 21:34
|
|