RE: Studio shot? (further thoughts)
- From: David Young <dsy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: leica@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 07:39:43 -0700
Geoff wrote:
I agree with Doug. I would add that it otherwise does look like a posed
portrait, almost too perfect and maybe a little static. By the way, not to
pick on Oly but a worthwhile comment on AF, I think; have you seen the print
ad for the E-3 that is a close up of a painted face? The focus misses the
eyes and has the painted skin sharp? Maybe a deliberate tactic? Bothers the
heck out of me though.
To which Doug added:
On another list a photographer compared his bird photos made with a
Nikon F5 and AF-S lenses with his photos made with the R8 and
modular APO-Telyts. The Nikon produced many photos that were pretty
good, but it often missed focus by a bit and in his words "a miss is
a miss". With the R/APO-Telyt combination when focus was off it was
usually WAAY off but when it was "on" it was spectacular and he
reports more 'keepers' with the R than with the Nikon.
Doug, Geoff, and all the others who commented, both on and off list,
about the focus being a problem..
I agree, the focus point is a problem. I think I was taken with the
shot, because when shooting active performers, with stage lighting,
one seldom gets shots with such clean backgrounds, where the
performer is looking at the camera, while the shot is taken. The
similarities to a studio shot astounded me. OTOH, the focus is,
indeed, off. :-(
As for the percentage of AF shots being "on"... Since my move to the
AF Oly, my percentage of good, sharp, well focused shots, has gone
waay, way up. This, I think, is not due to the superiority of Oly's
AF (though it is very fast and very good), but rather to the poor
percentage of keepers I was getting with MF, due to failing eyes.
As for your comment, Geoff, on the Oly ad ... I have not seen it.
However, here is a "grab shot", of my nephew, Nathan (10), as he came
out of the pool, at the Water Slides. There is, I think, a slight
bias towards focus on his left eye, but again, maybe that's just my eyes.
http://www.furnfeather.net/Temps/Nathan.htm
Does this one live up to standards?
Thank you, all, for taking the time to look, and to comment.
Cheers!
---
David Young,
Logan Lake, CANADA
Limited Edition Prints at: www.furnfeather.net
Personal Web-site at: www.main.furnfeather.net
Stock Photography at: http://tinyurl.com/2amll4
=========================================================
To Unsubscribe: Send email to leica-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in
the Subject field. The acknowledgment that you then receive MUST be replied to
per instructions. You may also log in to the Web interface to unsubscribe.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Studio shot? (further thoughts) - AF and sharpness
- From: Mark Bohrer
- RE: Studio shot? (further thoughts)
- From: Geoff Hopkinson
- References:
- Re: Studio shot?
- From: wildlightphoto
- RE: Studio shot?
- From: Geoff Hopkinson
Other related posts:
- » RE: Studio shot? (further thoughts)
- » RE: Studio shot? (further thoughts)
I agree with Doug. I would add that it otherwise does look like a posed portrait, almost too perfect and maybe a little static. By the way, not to pick on Oly but a worthwhile comment on AF, I think; have you seen the print ad for the E-3 that is a close up of a painted face? The focus misses the eyes and has the painted skin sharp? Maybe a deliberate tactic? Bothers the heck out of me though.
- Re: Studio shot? (further thoughts) - AF and sharpness
- From: Mark Bohrer
- RE: Studio shot? (further thoughts)
- From: Geoff Hopkinson
- Re: Studio shot?
- From: wildlightphoto
- RE: Studio shot?
- From: Geoff Hopkinson