Funny, but for me the non-flash shot is a nice picture of a cute bird
and is my first choice. Of course there is the fringing.
Besides the less interesting expression of the bird on the flash shot,
this one is for me a typical flash shot with much weaker gradation as
seen in particular on the breast of the bird. With more flash comp. my
preference may be reversed.
Henk
Op 11-12-2011 17:39, Paul Stenquist schreef:
While I agree with Bob that natural light is almost always better than flash,
it isn't always practical. Here's a comparison of the same bird shot with and
without flash. Now, if I had better long glass, I might be able to pull off
more available light wildlife shots, but the A400 is extremely prone to color
fringing when backlit even by a bright, indirect sky. Here's the no-flash shot.
Color is nothing special, there is more modeling of the shape, but there's also
an abundance of fringing. I could PhotoShop the fringing out of there but given
the overall dullness of the shot, it wouldn't be worth the trouble, IMO.
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=14783692&size=lg
Here's the same bird shot with flash fill. It's not full power. The flash comp
was set at -1 stop. But -1.5 would have been better.
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=14780352&size=lg
I'm hoping that Pentax shows up with a DA* 400/4 some time soon. And it's less
than $1500.
Paul
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
