Notice: Undefined variable: splityear in /var/www/vhosts/fredmiranda.com/httpdocs/forum/viewtopic.php on line 99 Micro Four-Thirds Image Thread - Leica & Alternative Gear - Photography - FM Forums
Alan Kefauver wrote:
granpa..is that the original 100-400 of the MkII?
Yes sir, it is. I've considered upgrading but just don't think it's worth the extra $$. This one is fine for what it is. If anything I need something faster. Still gotta get around to renting the 300 f/4 to see if that makes sense. I like the idea of the new 50-200 but that's gonna be too expensive for me, as is the 150-400.
I recently shifted most of my food and hotel photography work to my M43 kit due to the weight advantages and being able to bring a wider variety of lenses to a shoot while still having sufficient image quality. Below are some examples of that and following those, a variety of other images I've shot in the same period:
ketang wrote:
I recently shifted most of my food and hotel photography work to my M43 kit due to the weight advantages and being able to bring a wider variety of lenses to a shoot while still having sufficient image quality. Below are some examples of that and following those, a variety of other images I've shot in the same period:
Ketan, I like the colors of these photos. These aren't sRGB jpegs, correct? What are they - Adobe RGB, Display P3...? Do you process in Lightroom, Capture One, or some other app? I would appreciate it if you add some processing details of your posted work - thank you!
ruthenium wrote:
Ketan, I like the colors of these photos. These aren't sRGB jpegs, correct? What are they - Adobe RGB, Display P3...? Do you process in Lightroom, Capture One, or some other app? I would appreciate it if you add some processing details of your posted work - thank you!
Thank you so much! They are JPEGs saved in Adobe RGB. Here is the basic process:
-Shoot in raw (ORF)
-Process in Adobe Camera Raw as a 16-bit file. My choice profiles are usually Camera Muted, Camera Natural, Adobe Landscape, or a custom X-Rite profile made with a ColorChecker Passport chart.
-Load into Photoshop for additional work on contrast and sharpening. Keep in 16-bit and Adobe RGB profile and save as a PSD.
-Export the PSD as a JPEG with color profile embedded.
Had a little fun at a skate park recently. First time ever shooting BMX. The OM-1 mkII's were brilliant.
With regard to the square format, that's how I shoot all of my personal work. Rectangles are for clients, squares are for me. Keeps me from getting confused as to my motivation for shooting.
ketang wrote:
Thank you so much! They are JPEGs saved in Adobe RGB. Here is the basic process:
-Shoot in raw (ORF)
-Process in Adobe Camera Raw as a 16-bit file. My choice profiles are usually Camera Muted, Camera Natural, Adobe Landscape, or a custom X-Rite profile made with a ColorChecker Passport chart.
-Load into Photoshop for additional work on contrast and sharpening. Keep in 16-bit and Adobe RGB profile and save as a PSD.
-Export the PSD as a JPEG with color profile embedded.
Thank you! I thought these couldn't be sRGB jpegs - thank you for confirming.
petersm59 wrote:
Had a little fun at a skate park recently. First time ever shooting BMX. The OM-1 mkII's were brilliant.
With regard to the square format, that's how I shoot all of my personal work. Rectangles are for clients, squares are for me. Keeps me from getting confused as to my motivation for shooting.
Two different days, different light, different subject. Most importantly different backdrops. If my memory serves I was a little further away from the bird with the OM-1 shot but both are close to full frame. Not looking to start anything but may be an interesting comparison nonetheless.
I've sold my Z9 and Z 180-600 along with all my other Z lenses. Not because I wasn't happy with them, that Z9 was easily the best camera I've ever owned. And the 180-600 is an underpriced and fantastic lens. But the OM System is so much more versatile. So much easier to pack, and so much lighter. Being that this is strictly a hobby for me, and IMHO I'm getting more than simply "useable" images from the OM System, this switch just seemed to make sense for me. Sure, I miss the Z system at times but I can't say I regret the decision.
Gary
Imagemaster wrote:
N. Pygmy-Owl, 6.5 - 7.5 inches in length.
Love that third shot Tony. Just curious, do you see a noticeable difference in IQ between the 150-400 and the 300 F4 @ 300mm ?
You can disregard Tony. I just rented a 300 F4 to see for myself
