| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/07/2005 12:37:18 AM · #1 |
Here's my Leading Lines entry from a couple months ago, shot with Coolpix 5700:
Revisited the scene today, took these with 20D: 70-200 f/4L for the close ones, 10-22 f/3.5 for the wide one:
  
Quite a difference?
Robt.
|
|
|
|
08/07/2005 12:43:29 AM · #2 |
|
|
|
08/07/2005 12:44:17 AM · #3 |
yeah lots better
your side of the world sure is pretty
|
|
|
|
08/07/2005 12:45:17 AM · #4 |
| Well the light is certainly at a different angle but you can sure see the sharpness and detail difference. The foreground of the new shot is much cleaner and richer. The background on the original has a more pleasing (to me) green than the new one but that looks like a light and editing issue. |
|
|
|
08/07/2005 12:45:29 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by Fetor:
yeah lots better
your side of the world sure is pretty |
More like a "corner" than a "side", but yeah... This is a regular drive-by of mine, 10 mins from home...
Robt.
|
|
|
|
08/07/2005 12:48:13 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by jbsmithana:
Well the light is certainly at a different angle but you can sure see the sharpness and detail difference. The foreground of the new shot is much cleaner and richer. The background on the original has a more pleasing (to me) green than the new one but that looks like a light and editing issue. |
Yah, the "original" was shot like an hour and a half before sunset, these more like 20 mins before sunset. A completely different light. But the "original", that's totally post-processed, major hue/sat work to produce that effect. These are relatively straight shots, as far as color goes. Gradients have been applied to the skies, is the major PP effect.
R.
|
|
|
|
08/07/2005 01:09:30 AM · #7 |
great, thanks for making my 5700 look worthless in comparison
|
|
|
|
08/07/2005 06:16:20 AM · #8 |
Great comparison. Thanks for posting!
Yeah, the shots with the 20D look better, but what's really compelling to me is the power that the 10-22mm (probably shot at 10mm?) gives you to totally transform the composition. That's something you couldn't do with the 5700. |
|
|
|
08/07/2005 07:22:50 AM · #9 |
Well thanks a million, Robert! I've been telling myself "you don't REALLY need a 20D/350D ... your current camera is perfectly OK." And now you do this to me. Looks like I have to sell my golf clubs after all.
And I agree with Chris, the 10-22mm shot makes a remarkable comparison, and a stunning photograph in this case.
P.S. Next winter, use the 20D to re-shoot your cottage shot from architecture. I can start that controversy up all over again! |
|
|
|
08/07/2005 09:06:04 AM · #10 |
Originally posted by Keith Maniac:
Great comparison. Thanks for posting!
Yeah, the shots with the 20D look better, but what's really compelling to me is the power that the 10-22mm (probably shot at 10mm?) gives you to totally transform the composition. That's something you couldn't do with the 5700. |
Yeah, that was shot at 10mm. Bear in mind that the original was a "leading lines" entry, so the wide angle wasn't what I was looking for there. It was shot at something closer to 80mm (equivalent on the 20D, I have no idea what it was on the 5700 'cuz that info is not included in the package LOL).
But for those who have questioned whether 10mm is "too wide" for landscape work, this (and other images I have posted recently) show how very useful it can be. You need really strong composition with it, though. Regardless, it's a level of shooting that's unobtainable with the 5700 (or other cameras like it).
Robt.
|
|
|
|
08/07/2005 09:08:34 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by ubique:
Well thanks a million, Robert! I've been telling myself "you don't REALLY need a 20D/350D ... your current camera is perfectly OK." And now you do this to me. Looks like I have to sell my golf clubs after all.
And I agree with Chris, the 10-22mm shot makes a remarkable comparison, and a stunning photograph in this case.
P.S. Next winter, use the 20D to re-shoot your cottage shot from architecture. I can start that controversy up all over again! |
Oddly enough, the "skiff location" is around the corner of the marsh from the cottage, and I drove by there after shooting these shots, yesterday. I saw a car in the drive, something I'd never seen before, and stopped to introduce myself to the lady that owns the place and summers there. I now have permission to wander her property whenever, and we can hope to see more shots of this structure from other points of view :-) Perhaps even some interiors...
Robt.
|
|
|
|
08/07/2005 12:29:58 PM · #12 |
| I liked the original, but the new ones are heaps better! They just seem to pop more. The lighting (as mentioned before) is completely different. Not only the vertical angle and warmer, but appears the horizontal change over the past several weeks has helped light the boat better. The 10mm shot is great! |
|
|
|
08/07/2005 11:54:38 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by tsheets:
I liked the original, but the new ones are heaps better! They just seem to pop more. The lighting (as mentioned before) is completely different. Not only the vertical angle and warmer, but appears the horizontal change over the past several weeks has helped light the boat better. The 10mm shot is great! |
Yah, more subtle light on the dory for sure... Thanx for the comments, all. I just made a 17-inch print of the WA shot. Wowza!
R.
Message edited by author 2005-08-07 23:55:15.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/21/2025 05:33:41 PM EDT.
