Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 14, 2007, 11:40 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
bigdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Thach Alabama
Posts: 14,981
Default

The first one was shot with a Takumar -A Zoom lens at 28mm f/3.5 1/60 sec ISO1600. Here is the un retouched photo. I in the first one I posted used Auto levels and auto contrast and that is just about all. The banding is from using the High ISO.

First a un retouched version. Forget the 200mm of the EXIF as I had forgotten to change it from a previous lens. Would have been worse maybe if I had moved it. No tripod was allowed and the Aperture was not a fast one.

Dawg

Attached Images
 
bigdawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 14, 2007, 11:43 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
bigdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Thach Alabama
Posts: 14,981
Default

In this one I used Neat Image to get rid of the banding and noise.

Dawg
Attached Images
 
bigdawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 14, 2007, 11:44 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
bigdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Thach Alabama
Posts: 14,981
Default

In this one I used Neat Image and adjusted the levels and contrast manually.

Dawg
Attached Images
 
bigdawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 14, 2007, 11:54 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,974
Default

FWIW,

These under the conditions captured are better than nothing at all. The use of neat image really smeared most of the shots. Loss of detail to reduce the noise is almost a "catch 22" so to speak.

Shot number 5 is the best of the bunch.
vIZnquest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 14, 2007, 11:55 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
bigdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Thach Alabama
Posts: 14,981
Default

In this one I used DCE Tools Auto Enhance Plugin for Abobe Photoshop. Then selecting only the dark areas I used Neat image to remove most of the banding and noise.

Dawg
Attached Images
 
bigdawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 14, 2007, 11:57 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
bigdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Thach Alabama
Posts: 14,981
Default

No. 5 had the most light available thus a better photo.
bigdawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 15, 2007, 12:01 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
bigdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Thach Alabama
Posts: 14,981
Default

Same photo as above but added +10 contrast and +7 saturation.

Dawg

Attached Images
 
bigdawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 15, 2007, 8:06 AM   #18
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,052
Default

Thanks for the explanation about what you did to the picture - it rather tracks what my experience has been. The banding isn't particularly noticeable if you don't try to push underexposed 1600 ISO pictures - the minute you do, it comes up. I also don't see it as well with my work monitor, the better one, but it's darker than it should be and I can't adjust it any more.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 15, 2007, 10:52 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
bigdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Thach Alabama
Posts: 14,981
Default

mtngal wrote:
Quote:
Thanks for the explanation about what you did to the picture - it rather tracks what my experience has been. The banding isn't particularly noticeable if you don't try to push underexposed 1600 ISO pictures - the minute you do, it comes up. I also don't see it as well with my work monitor, the better one, but it's darker than it should be and I can't adjust it any more.
I very seldom venture into the 1600 territory and have this come up all the time...Also I get in a hurry to post a photo sometimes and use the auto level and auto contrast in PS 7.0. This is faster but almost never delivers the approximation to what I see with the naked eye. The last one other than the bit of camera shake blur is very close to what was actually there. I need a faster wide angle lens to keep from having to do these manipulations to recover a photo to what I see. Also a noise reducing program like Neat Image helps but it also can cause more blurring or an increase in the blurring already there.

Question from the other wide angle lens owners out there...Which one to buy and why!!!

Dawg
bigdawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 15, 2007, 8:29 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,052
Default

The only fast wide angle I have is the M 24mm 2.8. It's a lens I disliked on a film camera because it had too much distortion for my taste, and isn't quite wide enough to be a true fisheye. It's much better with a dSLR - there's still some barreling, but not that bad and CS2's lens correction tool takes care of it easily. Optically it's quite sharp and has good contrast, and (when you can find it) usually priced reasonably. There are probably other, better options out there but I don't have experience with them.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:28 PM.