What's new
L-MOUNT Forum

Register a free account now!

If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.

Do you want computational techniques in camera ?

I remember, back when I went to a camera club, attending a talk by a photographer who did flower photography. She exclusively used short focal length lenses and the results were amazing. I had previously thought macro = long focal length, so her talk was a bit of an eye opener.
 
pdk42 said:
I remember, back when I went to a camera club, attending a talk by a photographer who did flower photography. She exclusively used short focal length lenses and the results were amazing. I had previously thought macro = long focal length, so her talk was a bit of an eye opener.
Click to expand...

I really like a wide angle lens that can focus close. My favourite is the Sigma 24/3.5 i-series that's capable of 0.5x, and the 17/4 is pretty good at around 0.28x, which is very close given its focal length. The Panasonic 20-60 is also good, giving 0.43x at 26mm.
 
AlanC said:
I really like a wide angle lens that can focus close. My favourite is the Sigma 24/3.5 i-series that's capable of 0.5x, and the 17/4 is pretty good at around 0.28x, which is very close given its focal length. The Panasonic 20-60 is also good, giving 0.43x at 26mm.
Click to expand...
I never knew the Sigma did 0.5x, it is there in the specs but they don't exactly advertise it and macro nor close focussing is not mentioned.

My Vivitar 24mm Close Focus f2.0 is only 1:5 but is excellent for not so close macro-esque, but it's the bokeh with the other flower heads included in 1:5 magnification that makes it unique.
 
If you ever compared iPhone and Lumix photos you see that there is a huge amount of computational editing in iPhone photos compared to Lumix. The shadows and blacks are made lighter and the photos sharper plus colors more vivid. When people are looking at the photos they might say that the iPhone's edited result is better (when seen in the iPhone's small screen). If you want a good result you have to take the Lumix photo to an editing software.

So what should one think about it? Maybe iPhone photos are made more disposable and S5ii is more serious. At the same time it would be nice to have more computational help also in S5ii if you use auto -modes. If you could keep raw photos more "genuine" it would be nice.
 
First time last night uploaded S5ii RAWs onto M1 Nac Mini using the latest Lightroom version and haven't used it in around 5 years.

The Denoise is impressive trying with zoomed to 300% ISO 5000-6400 files, Denoise years vack in LR was terrible in comparison. I'm going to play later with masking & gradients and the amount of preset filters is now gigantic in comparison. I'm rusty with LR after a hiatus.

In general the RAWs look good with no changes to colour, exposure really required. I'm comparing to previous Pentax K-30 and K-70 APSC. Noise was only visible as I was zooming in to find nice macro crops beyond the 0.5x of the 25-105 f4.

I'm going to try the Denoise on some older astro landscape RAWs, the NR years back 'ate' the stars and it wasnvery limited, I know stacking is what to do with astro but lets see how this performs.

Yes if the camera could do it I suppose I'd use itvto save even more PP, I think it was off-liading processing and/or took around 50 secs on an Apple Silicon M1 Mac mini though, the latest iPhones do have serious processing power for that, the S5ii ? unknown L2 processor whilst quite good wouldn't have the same number crunching power.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top