View single post by Eric | ||||||||||
Posted: Sat Feb 10th, 2024 09:39 |
|
|||||||||
Eric
|
novicius wrote:I have been dissatisfied with the rendition of my 24-70 VR, For a week or so have I been trying all sorts of tests ,so yesterday ,D3s with the 24-70 VR perched on a tripod ,during a gruelling test, with VR set to Off...Normal...Active..with different apertures..shutterspeeds..distances...the Inevitable happened,.. Thanks for that. Glad it didn’t fly into 6 or 7 pieces like my 24-70…although it was easily reassembled and it too worked better after the fresh air got into it. (I suspect the technician at ACS did a more precise calibration/ lubrication job) I am now off to whack the living daylights out of one of my Sony lenses which is underperforming….. …..although I may need to punch myself in the face if it makes no difference and I need to look elsewhere for the reduced quality. I have been going back through my archives thinning them out! Whilst training on a Mac and defamiliarising myself with Photoshop after a 5-6year break using Affinity Photo. One thing that strikes me is how good some of the images look on a variety of cameras over the years. Sure if you zoom in and pixel peep you can see that the definition/resolution isn’t quite as sharp as the latest camera BUT the image as a whole still looks good. It reconfirms my belief that if the original composition, subject interest, lighting and technique are solid….the camera / lens used is of lesser importance. Last edited on Sat Feb 10th, 2024 09:39 by ____________________ Eric |
|||||||||
|