anyone using sony carl zesis 16-35 len
- Thread starter tchoonyong
- Start date
- Status
Hehe... Zapper showing his work!
Is it due to the angle of your shoot or this lady is very tall??
Anyway, just notice someone selling a rather new Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 and B&S, and is internal focus. Interesting...
http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=509479
Is it due to the angle of your shoot or this lady is very tall??
Anyway, just notice someone selling a rather new Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 and B&S, and is internal focus. Interesting...
http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=509479
reaper3075
New Member
think its the wide angle distortion that causes the long legs effect.
but nicely done in my opinion :thumbsup:
kingfishers
New Member
HI, I think the differences are in the gray scale, they have more mutiple color selection for the gray and also can calibrate projector as well.
The RAW file does not really show straight away, it appeared more after post processing but apart from some leveling and curves I did not apply anything specific. I wonder if it is light/temperature or camera body related, I had a similar issue before with another high-end glass.
kkleong
New Member
Shot in Port Dickson last weekend, mounted on the Minolta 5D. (Suffering a bit from color halos around the upper part of the tree, would be nice if someone can enlighten how this is caused, really)
This is halo effect :think: Pic is a little small to see it.
Normally it's caused by too much or aggressive sharpening (blur, gaussian, USM,..) in PP.
Also could be a little due to jpeg compression. However, jpeg compression will also cause pixelation which is not quite noticeable here.
IMHO, it's likely your lens is already pretty sharp and not much sharping to be done.
Under certain situations, some ppl also love the halo effect - example, around head of portrait.
I did shadows and highlights indeed .. i confess. And the final sharpening is there too. It's not in the compressed jpg as the bigger version and the psd file has it too ...
I will start re-processing from the ground to see where it appears. I do know indeed that sharpening may cause it but what i can remember it was there already. Well, as said, will try again ..
I will start re-processing from the ground to see where it appears. I do know indeed that sharpening may cause it but what i can remember it was there already. Well, as said, will try again ..
This one shot with with CZ 16-35mm @ 16mm at f/3.5. Not easy to shoot portraits with this lens, esp when wide open. The placement of model in the frame have to be quite deliberate since there will be distortion.
Cropped to 70%
:thumbsup:
I thought Minolta 17-35 would be a good buy for UWA in FF. I was right but it turns out that CZ16-35 has much more to offer.
The distortion, albeit, still there but very much controlled at 16mm. It is wider and sharper than the 17-35. Colors are usual as in other Zeiss lenses.
I wouldn't recommend anyone to rush into CZ16-35, as the Minolta 17-35 (non G) is still an affordable and worthy UWA lens. If you need more, CZ16-35 is available at a premium pricing with more to offer.
The distortion, albeit, still there but very much controlled at 16mm. It is wider and sharper than the 17-35. Colors are usual as in other Zeiss lenses.
I wouldn't recommend anyone to rush into CZ16-35, as the Minolta 17-35 (non G) is still an affordable and worthy UWA lens. If you need more, CZ16-35 is available at a premium pricing with more to offer.
kkleong
New Member
Different lenses (as well as photos) may need different levels of adjustments.
Anyway, good for you.. bro :thumbsup:
- Status
Similar threads
