05-09-2016 12:25 PM
Of course here's a link to drop box, did not think of that, thank you!
05-09-2016 01:10 PM
Resolution is the primary concern in digital photography. Higher resolution opens up options for larger prints. As an example, the Canon EOS 7D has an 18 megapixel (18 million pixels) 5,184 x 3,456 sensor, which contains enough resolution for a 16 x 24-inch print (at 220 dpi) without any loss in quality."
That quote is from the following article, found in Canon Digital Learning Center.
You just may be past the limit of the resolution of the 24 megapixel files if you're printing at 36 x 24 inches. You really do not want to go below 200 dpi when printing.
05-09-2016 01:17 PM - edited 05-09-2016 01:32 PM
Seems good to me.
You could have exposured 1/3 step more with the flower picture and after that in your raw converter pull down 1/3 step to collect more photons. I don't really think you would notice the gain of it.
If you change camera to one with a bigger sensor you will be able to recive more photons. If you like the image noise from my 6D maybe a 5DsR is the right step for you. You will find my raw file at http://kameratrollet.se/allt/_MG_3631.CR2
05-09-2016 01:42 PM
I know, that I have a lot to learn!
I wanted to make sure that my camera works as it should, after returning from Canon Service Center. They made adjustments, I just can't tell.
If the noise I am seeing is due to my technique or lack of, I can deal with that and try and get better. I just don’t want the camera to be working against me, I want sharp photos!
I definitely see a lot less noise in you photo Peter! So it is not my screen! And I might be expecting too much of my Rebel camera.
05-09-2016 03:21 PM
Are you sure you are not confusing the two issues here. Noise and sharpness? Of course nothing in photography can be taken by itself as everything effects everything else. A properly or correctly photo will display less nose than one that is underexposed. This is generally the case when folks push the ISO up. There isn't enough light in the first place.
The lenses you have are among the best you can buy. There isn't much room for improvement there. DOF is just one spec to consider. Too much emphasis on a single spec won't solve your issues.
A full frame camera, I.E., a 5Ds will make your posters look better. Will they be where you want them? Only you can tell that.
Also, where and how you are achieving the posters is a big point to consider.
How experienced with LR and PS are you? There are tricks you can do to help make the photos and thus the prints look better. No matter what anybody tries to tell you great photos are made in post. Always exceptions but not many. Post is where it's at.
05-09-2016 03:36 PM
The picture of the boys has just the shorter boy in focus. There is some CA going on and it will make noise look worse.
I can not tell exactly where the critical focus point is in the magenta flower petal.
Here is Peter's photo blown up the same 200%. Is this what you like? I am sure Peter did all the post editing the photo needed.
Not a great deal of difference is there? There is a slight amount of CA (purple) but at 200% it is darn good.
At normal it is non-existent.
05-09-2016 03:41 PM
"... I might be expecting too much of my Rebel camera."
Possibly, but even the best in the world ef 70-200mm f2.8L II lens is even better when not at full aperture. Try to keep it at f4 or better f5.6. Also, not too close. The closer you are to the subject won't be the best place. All lenses have their "sweet spot". A point where everything is right with creation.
05-09-2016 10:49 PM
I know that there are many factors to consider and that I can’t only focus on one. I know noise is one thing and sharpness another but again two factors that influence each other or that is how I see it.
I have done no post editing to any of these photos but I always do, I feel that I have to use NR almost every time so if it is not the camera then I must be doing something wrong. I know my lenses are great.
I have used PS for a long time mostly for web graphics, I am new to LR, but I find it easier than PS to make quick edits to photos.
It is a jungle out there in regards to printing or actually, it is not, you just have to be willing to pay. And I know the posters I did, was not printed in the best of quality! I do take that into account.
Yes, the shorter boy is in focus, but there is also focus points on the taller one, which you can’t tell from the picture. That is maybe my aperture that is at fault.
I am aware that lenses perform better when not in full aperture, but I have seen many good examples in full aperture especially with my lenses. So there are rules of thumb and sometimes when you break them, it is OK too.
Yes, I like Perter’s shot in 100% and 200%, I can’t get that result with post editing, but again I might not be doing it right.
MY CONCLUSION is; that you guys, who have responded to my post (I thank you for your time and insight) see issues with techniques and not the camera.
Thank you all for your input!
05-10-2016 05:04 AM - edited 05-10-2016 05:08 AM
Clarkvision has some good stuff to read for Canon owners. Take your time and check that website.
And even I use noise reduction at low ISO. Mostly because I will get smaller jpg file sizes.
05-10-2016 05:14 AM
"MY CONCLUSION is; that you guys, who have responded to my post (I thank you for your time and insight) see issues with techniques and not the camera."
I think "issues" is too strong a word. I think practice and experience would be a better way to say it.