Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Sony

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 31, 2004, 6:10 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
nickphoto123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,356
Default

Hello All,

This is my first post here at Steves-Digicams. A site I have visited daily for a few years now.

I shot this wedding on July 24, 2004.

I look forward your comments / feedback,

Thank you, Nicholas

http://www.nickphoto123.smugmug.com/gallery/205556


nickphoto123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 3, 2004, 8:42 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
nickphoto123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,356
Default

:?For my first post here at Steve's, Did I do something wrong?

I thought some actual wedding pics from an F-828 would draw some response.

Either positive or negative, its why I posted a link to my pics.



Good night, Nicholas


nickphoto123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 4, 2004, 5:42 AM   #3
Junior Member
 
cornel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 17
Default

but try to enhance them (let's say PSP) :-)
Attached Images
 
cornel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 4, 2004, 7:52 PM   #4
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 25
Default

I thought the pictures were very nice. Did you shoot in any other ISO's?

I am contemplating buying the 828 but I've heard a lot of negative reviews on the "noise", etc. and am wondering if the 8mgp cameras are worth the bother as opposed going to a d-slr.

That aisle with the pillar in the middle was strange.
Keep up the good work.
wisperin squash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 4, 2004, 9:11 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
nickphoto123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,356
Default

Thanks for the response.

Any adjusted picture should be marked as not the work of the original photographer, especially when posted on the web.

Please remember that my images are sRGB as you view them. My bride was very pleased with my prints as Adobe 1998.

Color enhancement is not appropriate for wedding pctures.

The bride knows very well the colors which were chosen for her wedding party.

Show her a print with an off color and you batted LESS THAN ZERO.

People of Color know full well their Color.

I once touched up a print of a friend's daughter, Black-American. The photographer did not expose properly for the gown she was wearing and metered for the dark skin tones. To compensate and bring out the fabric's texture I 'lightened' the picture. When I presented the lighter (skin tones as well) touched up print to the mother, I will never forget her words to me... "My daughter looks dead!!"

My posted image reflects reality at about 95%, even the variation of the different skin tones is evident.

Regards, Nicholas

To Whispering Squash,

That pillar in the aisle is a structual member that separated the two stores that were combined to make this store-front church. The area is low income but Everyone in the Congrgation was richly spirited with warmth and kindness and welcome, even for me, the photographer.

I will use my F-828 on my next wedding.

Of the 24 8x10 prints in my bride's 'official' album, 5 would have been missed if I had a viewfinder DSLR instead of my F-828.

17 out of 85 4x5 images owed to my F-828.

ONLY 4 shots wre out of focus from 400 taken. This includes 25 shots during a lights-out candle ceremony!!!

28-200 F2-F2.5? Zeiss T*? NO DUST? SYNC at 1/2000?

ISO 64 - 100 'OK'? Need NN? YES.

All this for +-$800? Can't beat that, IMHO

Good Night, Nicholas










nickphoto123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 5, 2004, 12:51 PM   #6
Junior Member
 
cornel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 17
Default

First I did not intend to offence anyone. Second even the best camera could not take the best picture so from time to time we may adjust here and there....
cornel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 5, 2004, 1:18 PM   #7
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Nicholas:

I thought the photos that you posted from the wedding were nice. The composition was great.

Myconcern with trying to use a camera like this at some weddings, is that flash may not be allowed (and you'd need higher ISO speeds than the prosumer cameras are capable of without excessive noise and/or motion blur insome conditions).

But, given the photos you posted, I would imagine that you've gotother cameras when higher ISO speeds and/or better dynamic range is needed -- or when portraits with a shallow Depth of Fieldare desirable (so that distracting backgrounds aren't as obvious in some settings).

Increased Depth of Field can be good for some settings, but bad for others, and the much greater depth of field you get from a prosumer model at any given aperture and focal length (due to the shorter actual focal length of their lenses), may be a handicap in some conditions, depending on the desired result.
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 6, 2004, 7:02 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
nickphoto123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,356
Default

Hello JimC,

Thanks for your comments.

Depth of Field is easily 'reduced' with Photoshop CS. I find starting with a deep Depth of Field enables you to decide which images benefit or not by it. This is why I find the greater depth of field from my Prosumer sensor is an advantage to me.

I am glad you liked my compositions. The 8 MP of my F-828 gives me room to crop. Cropping enables me to improve my compositions.

Cropping my D60 from 3x2 format to 4x3 format eliminates abot 1 MP from the D60's 6 MP. With the resulting 5 MP I find many 8x10 prints are lacking image detail. My F-828's 8 MPgives me this cropping advantage with plenty of image detail for an 8x10 print. The new 20D Canon will increase this 5MP a bit but not much. I will still have more image detail in my 8x10 prints from my F-828 than from the new 20-D. (This is not a knock ofthe 20D.). When printing larger than 8x10 this issue becomes even more important.

Your interesting comment:

"I would imagine that you've gotother cameras when higher ISO speeds and/or better dynamic range is needed "

brings up an important issue regarding dynamic range. At present, IMHO, only film cameras would offer a better dynamic range for a Given exposure. Once the exposure is made, digital images can be processed (PS CS - Levels - Curves - Shadow-Highlight) to extend Dynamic range as long as you do Not over-expose.

My F-828 provides me with files of good (print wise) dynamic range.

Regarding Higher ISO speeds, noise on my F-828 becomes a problem only when you are NOT shooting at the proper exposure. I mean if you are relying on your High ISO to compensate for insufficient lighting on the sensor, your image for print purposes will usually be lacking in quality.This situation is even worse with film. My F-828 is unusable (for wedding pics) at 400 or above.

Regarding your concern about no flash permitted during a ceremony, whether I am shooting film or digital, once I have failed to convince the Celebrant to permit flash, I will immediately inform my Bride and Groom that we will have to Re-enact parts of the ceremony using my flash because the Celebrant would not permit flash.

All of this is not to defend my choice of the F-828. All of this is to show how I have made certain compromises regarding equipment, expenses, accuracy of auto-focus, without sacraficing print quality.The F-828 is almost 'all the camera I need' for wedding pictures. No camera is perfect.

Thank you again, Nicholas






nickphoto123 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 1:57 PM.