Talk me into or out of the CL system please.

[ramarren]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 minutes ago, EUSe said:

So how do you do it? Overexpose? Underexpose? Change the contrast settings? As I usually also have to cope with motion blur, I set the camera to 1/3f, underexpose if necessary and leave the rest to Topaz DeNoise. But one should think that correct exposure is crucial.

The first thing you have to do to really get the most out of any camera is understand it. So I spend a lot of time testing my cameras to understand what to expect at various ISO levels in terms of DR. Once I have that, I take what the meter says and tweak it to do what I feel is going to give the best result. I use as little noise reduction as possible ... that usually costs in perceptual sharpness ... and carefully set the raw conversion parameters to get results that satisfy me. It's a bit of work.  

[EUSe]

vor 7 Minuten schrieb ramarren:

The first thing you have to do to really get the most out of any camera is understand it. So I spend a lot of time testing my cameras to understand what to expect at various ISO levels in terms of DR. Once I have that, I take what the meter says and tweak it to do what I feel is going to give the best result. I use as little noise reduction as possible ... that usually costs in perceptual sharpness ... and carefully set the raw conversion parameters to get results that satisfy me. It's a bit of work.  

The only sharpness issue I occasionally have is motion blur due to the missing image stabilization. So there is actually little choice even with a tripod. I rarely use noise reduction in post at all, but if necessary, Topaz does the job nicely. And I never shoot above 1600 ISO. Of course I adjust contrast and dynamics in post. I never define raw conversion parameters and never had issues.

[LocalHero1953]

Some subjects are easier than others at high ISO. Godfrey's above is fairly straightforward, because one is not particularly interested in looking at the fine detail, and the big surfaces have natural texture. Faces in the middle distance and beyond are much more difficult to handle - eyes and mouths are easily broken up by noise or flattened by noise reduction. Unless it's a posed shot, you can't compensate by a slower shutter speed or using a tripod either. This is a general comment, not specific to the CL

[EUSe]

vor 2 Minuten schrieb LocalHero1953:

Some subjects are easier than others at high ISO. Godfrey's above is fairly straightforward, because one is not particularly interested in looking at the fine detail, and the big surfaces have natural texture. Faces in the middle distance and beyond are much more difficult to handle - eyes and mouths are easily broken up by noise or flattened by noise reduction. Unless it's a posed shot, you can't compensate by a slower shutter speed or using a tripod either. This is a general comment, not specific to the CL

True -  structured surfaces or a shot in the forest with lots of detail won’t show noise so easily (leaves, small branches).

[ramarren]

6 hours ago, EUSe said:

The only sharpness issue I occasionally have is motion blur due to the missing image stabilization. So there is actually little choice even with a tripod. I rarely use noise reduction in post at all, but if necessary, Topaz does the job nicely. And I never shoot above 1600 ISO. Of course I adjust contrast and dynamics in post. I never define raw conversion parameters and never had issues.

Image stabilization does NOTHING to help if your subject is in motion. Ever. Same for a tripod.

While I normally keep the ISO setting down in the 800 and lower range for dynamic range, detail, and tonal purposes, I'm never afraid to run the ISO to the top if the subject I want is there. Whether a still life (which I do a lot of) or street shots of people, the important thing is the content and expression in the image to me, not whether it is perfect technically. 

I suspect we will simply never all agree on what's the most important thing. That's why all these "tell me why I should buy this thing" threads are ultimately a lot of hot air about nothing. My approach is to buy a camera and see what it see, what it does, then evaluate for myself whether or not it's what I want to use, whether I can make satisfying photographs with it. It's also why I have dozens of different cameras ... they all "see" differently and inspire me to do different things photographically. 

Have fun. 

G

[EUSe]

vor 2 Minuten schrieb ramarren:

Image stabilization does NOTHING to help if your subject is in motion. Ever. Same for a tripod.

While I normally keep the ISO setting down in the 800 and lower range for dynamic range, detail, and tonal purposes, I'm never afraid to run the ISO to the top if the subject I want is there. Whether a still life (which I do a lot of) or street shots of people, the important thing is the content and expression in the image to me, not whether it is perfect technically. 

I suspect we will simply never all agree on what's the most important thing. That's why all these "tell me why I should buy this thing" threads are ultimately a lot of hot air about nothing. My approach is to buy a camera and see what it see, what it does, then evaluate for myself whether or not it's what I want to use, whether I can make satisfying photographs with it. It's also why I have dozens of different cameras ... they all "see" differently and inspire me to do different things photographically. 

Have fun. 

G

OK, I messed it up - what I wanted to say is that image stabilization is helpful to keep ISO values down, but doesn‘t help if your subject is moving. Sorry. So actually we agree. As I am not shooting portraits - almost never, I am in a different situation. Macro in the open air is tough though, because if you are not working from table tops, motion blur is everywhere.