True on all counts. I would guess shooting digital is like shooting
slide film if you shoot jpegs. But shooting RAW is a whole different
game, and the latitude is far greater. I overexpose a bit when I need
shadow detail, and I will usually shoot right at the meter reading when
I need highlight detail. It seems that the camera (at least the D) will
underexpose a bit at the meter reading. I've had good luck with the K
135/2.5 as well. I used it for most of my wakeboarding shots. That was
a situation where I went with meter reading to save the highlights in
the water spray.
Paul
On Apr 14, 2006, at 10:14 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Thanks Paul, but some of the credit has to go to Godfrey. We were out
shooting in SF that day, and he explained to me that it's OK to
overexpose
based on the metered scene. So this shot was about a good stop over
the
meter reading, thus enabling good shadow detail retention while still
maintaining detail in the brightest parts of the scene.
What is constantly surprising me is the latitude one has when shooting
raw,
especially when the exposures are made with a knowledge of how they'll
be
processed in PS. It's been said that shooting digital is like shooting
slide film in terms of how one exposes, but that just doesn't seem
right.
I'd swear that if you get the exposure right, and know what you're
doing
with the raw converter, you can get more latitude than color neg film.
BTW, of all the K lenses I've used on the DS thus far, the 135/2.5 is
clearly amongst the best.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Paul Stenquist
Fun pic. I like it. And it looks like you succeeded admirably in
retaining both good shadow and highlight detail.
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
This was more or less a test shot - one of the first times I used
a K lens on the istDS. Apart from anything else, I was curious
how well the highlights and shadows could be rendered using
raw.
http://home.earthlink.net/~shel-pix/reflections.html
Tech stuff: istDS, K135/2.5, ISO 200, 1/250sec, F8.0 (iirc)
