Seems DSLR marketing has shifted.

[arikyeo]

nope. just straight from camera. if i did the colors will not be so neutral. and yes. 55-250 is a sharp lens. dun look down on it.

Didn't the 55-250 suffer from softened images& big CA? :dunno:

 

[brapodam]

No, I compose the shot first, set the aperture, etc... then take a test shot before the event. I know the lighting isn't gonna change. If the image is even slightly ugly I delete it, then tune the settings to make it good.

Some things like contrast can't be changed in camera to achieve the specific effect you want, if you want to use a specific aperture and shutter speed setting. Personally I wouldn't shoot only natural light (you mentioned something about not using flash to explain the under-exposure in your event shots) if I know I must use a flash to get a correct exposure. That is called being foolish and inflexible.

Using manual is also not the only way to get good shots or the effects you want out of your cameras. It's just one way of getting good shots. I use mostly aperture priority, and I can get great shots too. When I use manual, it's because aperture priority cannot achieve the effect I want, or I want control over both aperture and shutter speed at the same time. Even then it's not full manual, I'll usually leave it to auto ISO on manual mode if the lighting conditions will change. If they won't then of course, full manual is fine.

It's more about using the different modes to get the effect that you want. I use both aperture priority and manual, but for different purposes. I won't foolishly stick to manual mode because I know I probably won't get consistency, which is important. If you can master manual exposure, good for you. I'll stick to aperture priority, which gives me the shots I want anyway, and I can PP my shots to give the exact effect I'm looking for.

Didn't the 55-250 suffer from softened images& big CA? :dunno:

Soft images can be sharpened in PP, and soft is only at 100%. At reasonable resolutions, it's not soft. I have the Nikon version and I don't expect the Canon version to differ too much - and I find the lens to be reasonably sharp if you sharpen it. CA can be avoided as mentioned before. If you insist on taking the specific picture which will lead to CA in your image (due to some reason like wanting a specific composition), then maybe a better lens will have better CA control, and even then it will still have CA, but probably less of it.

 

[deathrequiem]

Didn't the 55-250 suffer from softened images& big CA? :dunno:

http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=235571&id=697527913

wheres the CA? :dunno:

the entire album is straight out of camera, didnt bother to photoshop, and yes could have gotten sharper images by stopping down but i was negligent to that.

 

[arikyeo]

Some things like contrast can't be changed in camera to achieve the specific effect you want, if you want to use a specific aperture and shutter speed setting. Personally I wouldn't shoot only natural light (you mentioned something about not using flash to explain the under-exposure in your event shots) if I know I must use a flash to get a correct exposure. That is called being foolish and inflexible.

Using manual is also not the only way to get good shots or the effects you want out of your cameras. It's just one way of getting good shots. I use mostly aperture priority, and I can get great shots too. When I use manual, it's because aperture priority cannot achieve the effect I want, or I want control over both aperture and shutter speed at the same time. Even then it's not full manual, I'll usually leave it to auto ISO on manual mode if the lighting conditions will change. If they won't then of course, full manual is fine.

It's more about using the different modes to get the effect that you want. I use both aperture priority and manual, but for different purposes. I won't foolishly stick to manual mode because I know I probably won't get consistency, which is important. If you can master manual exposure, good for you. I'll stick to aperture priority, which gives me the shots I want anyway, and I can PP my shots to give the exact effect I'm looking for.


Soft images can be sharpened in PP, and soft is only at 100%. At reasonable resolutions, it's not soft. I have the Nikon version and I don't expect the Canon version to differ too much - and I find the lens to be reasonably sharp if you sharpen it. CA can be avoided as mentioned before. If you insist on taking the specific picture which will lead to CA in your image (due to some reason like wanting a specific composition), then maybe a better lens will have better CA control, and even then it will still have CA, but probably less of it.

Everyone has their means of capturing the shot... no point arguing/ debating about it. If we really wanna compare how about a gathering? :dunno:

 

[allenleonhart]

Didn't the 55-250 suffer from softened images& big CA? :dunno:

see urself and judge?:dunno: i dun see any obvious problems with the 55-250. softened images, and big CA? haha. u got scammed. its the sharpest lens i have in my current inventory.

sometimes, dun just listen and parrot what others say. some claim what, the 55-250 very plasticky build ar. some claim this and that.

point is, go down, rent equipment, shoot, and see what happens. THEN u conclude. my 55-250 is a pretty babe.

 

[allenleonhart]

Everyone has their means of capturing the shot... no point arguing/ debating about it. If we really wanna compare how about a gathering? :dunno:

is that a competition ur asking from us?

brad merely pointed out what u cannot do with ur camera: contrast.
and what u can do to save urself: pp, composition.
he admits everyone has their own preference. just using manual doesnt mean u are good if u dun understand the basics.

u dun have to go around challenging like some kungfu kid. :bsmilie:

 

[Leong23]

Everyone has their means of capturing the shot... no point arguing/ debating about it. If we really wanna compare how about a gathering? :dunno:

I don't mind teaching someone with no basic, but not someone with no logic.

 

[brapodam]

Everyone has their means of capturing the shot... no point arguing/ debating about it. If we really wanna compare how about a gathering? :dunno:

I understand everyone has their means of capturing the shot. I'm just pointing out the fact that you can get better images if you PP. Judging by those photos you posted on FB, they can look much better with some basic contrast and exposure adjustments. You used manual and didn't nail the exposure right, so go PP them and get the right exposure? Not trying to accuse anyone or anything, but I tend to think that people who say they never ever want to PP their shots are either plain lazy, or can't be bothered whether their shots look the best that they can be.

see urself and judge?:dunno: i dun see any obvious problems with the 55-250. softened images, and big CA? haha. u got scammed. its the sharpest lens i have in my current inventory.

sometimes, dun just listen and parrot what others say. some claim what, the 55-250 very plasticky build ar. some claim this and that.

point is, go down, rent equipment, shoot, and see what happens. THEN u conclude. my 55-250 is a pretty babe.

Yes, I agree. There are many reviews that talk about build quality and plastic lens mount etc. Both my lenses suffer from poor build quality and plastic mount, and nothing has happened yet. Take care of your equipment well and you should be fine.

The 55-250 may not be the sharpest lens around, but it definitely can get decent images, unless you're printing posters to put on buildings. If there's anything to complain about my 55-200 lens, it's the focusing speed at the longer focal lengths, and the max aperture. Definitely not the image quality.

 

[deathrequiem]

I understand everyone has their means of capturing the shot. I'm just pointing out the fact that you can get better images if you PP. Judging by those photos you posted on FB, they can look much better with some basic contrast and exposure adjustments. You used manual and didn't nail the exposure right, so go PP them and get the right exposure? Not trying to accuse anyone or anything, but I tend to think that people who say they never ever want to PP their shots are either plain lazy, or can't be bothered whether their shots look the best that they can be.

Yes, I agree. There are many reviews that talk about build quality and plastic lens mount etc. Both my lenses suffer from poor build quality and plastic mount, and nothing has happened yet. Take care of your equipment well and you should be fine.

The 55-250 may not be the sharpest lens around, but it definitely can get decent images, unless you're printing posters to put on buildings. If there's anything to complain about my 55-200 lens, it's the focusing speed at the longer focal lengths, and the max aperture. Definitely not the image quality.

focusing speed and slow aperture irks me too, but hey the IQ is really decent, it has IS which is useful for telephoto, and value for money!

 

[allenleonhart]

anyone managed to access his fb yet? i still havent seen his photos so i cant comment much

 

[night86mare]

Everyone has their means of capturing the shot... no point arguing/ debating about it. If we really wanna compare how about a gathering? :dunno:

gathering at downtown east? :bigeyes::bigeyes:

 

[night86mare]

LOL

BTW, the link is up: http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=37161&id=100000750349726&l=80c535f36d

All images were taken only using the light available, NO flash, so if the image is dark I'm only using the light available (just like the concert scene)

Please don't headbutt each other, I learnt my lesson after I got infracted.

what jumps out at me is the poor composition of all these.

i didn't even want to open the thumbnail to see how sharp your lens is, whether there is CA, or whether got flare.

 

[allenleonhart]

i wont say... all the composition is bad. just that hitrate is very low...

i'm guessing u covered for sch. here is mine... http://www.facebook.com/#!/album.php?aid=250354&id=786218584

not very good, certainly far from perfect. but i dun see much prblems with my lens from the images... except one where there actually was a flare.

 

[night86mare]

i wont say... all the composition is bad. just that hitrate is very low...

exposure is very inconsistent, can't say the moments presented were particularly interesting. so he has a 50mm f/1.4, i can see that, but i can't see how the shots are representative of a "seasoned photographer" who has somehow risen beyond the level of using a crappy kit lens. :bsmilie:

 

[Taurean]

what jumps out at me is the poor composition of all these.

i didn't even want to open the thumbnail to see how sharp your lens is, whether there is CA, or whether got flare.

exposure is very inconsistent, can't say the moments presented were particularly interesting. so he has a 50mm f/1.4, i can see that, but i can't see how the shots are representative of a "seasoned photographer" who has somehow risen beyond the level of using a crappy kit lens. :bsmilie:

Cut him/her/it some slack la, he could be suffering from aliment/illness while covering the event, which he/her/it forgotten to mention leh :bsmilie:

 

[arikyeo]

exposure is very inconsistent, can't say the moments presented were particularly interesting. so he has a 50mm f/1.4, i can see that, but i can't see how the shots are representative of a "seasoned photographer" who has somehow risen beyond the level of using a crappy kit lens. :bsmilie:

i wont say... all the composition is bad. just that hitrate is very low...

i'm guessing u covered for sch. here is mine... http://www.facebook.com/#!/album.php?aid=250354&id=786218584

not very good, certainly far from perfect. but i dun see much prblems with my lens from the images... except one where there actually was a flare.

what jumps out at me is the poor composition of all these.

i didn't even want to open the thumbnail to see how sharp your lens is, whether there is CA, or whether got flare.

is that a competition ur asking from us?

brad merely pointed out what u cannot do with ur camera: contrast.
and what u can do to save urself: pp, composition.
he admits everyone has their own preference. just using manual doesnt mean u are good if u dun understand the basics.

u dun have to go around challenging like some kungfu kid. :bsmilie:

IF you're referring to those high speed images of model rockets where they're super dark, I purposely set the shutter speed to 1/4000 so that the water droplets can be frozen... You cannot say that they have poor exposure.

 

[allenleonhart]

exposure is very inconsistent, can't say the moments presented were particularly interesting. so he has a 50mm f/1.4, i can see that, but i can't see how the shots are representative of a "seasoned photographer" who has somehow risen beyond the level of using a crappy kit lens. :bsmilie:

but one caught my eye, its the water explosion one. that was interesting i:think:

 

[allenleonhart]

IF you're referring to those high speed images of model rockets where they're super dark, I purposely set the shutter speed to 1/4000 so that the water droplets can be frozen... You cannot say that they have poor brightness.

erm. who says so?

and i have more reason to under expose. outside was drizzling. but i think its relatively ok.

anyways, its not the rockets. i find them still acceptable...

 

[arikyeo]

erm. who says so?

title of the photo: right in ur face!

What shutter speed did you use? You bumped up the brightness and contrast by how many fold?

 

[night86mare]

IF you're referring to those high speed images of model rockets where they're super dark, I purposely set the shutter speed to 1/4000 so that the water droplets can be frozen... You cannot say that they have poor exposure.

you used your highest iso?

if you haven't, then why not?