Arne Hvaring
Well-known member
Three more from Bath.
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
I agree!Very nice travel photos Arne, thanks for posting.
I especially like this one:
I actually asked because I was impressed by the colors (I find the same thing with C1's base profiles.)Thank you Jack!
Mostly I use C1 (for all the images in the preceding posts), but I also like Photo Ninja. I prefer the raw conversion as such of PN to C1, but C1 has so many additional useful tools and excellent colours.
I am leaning toward the 70-200/2.8 when it becomes available, assuming it is as stellar wide open as the 24-70/2.8 is. For travel, I have the 70-300/4-5.6 AF-P VR lens -- it is very lightweight, of course has VR and is surprisingly good optically from 70-200. It deteriorates to 'softish' at 300, but remains somewhat usable. I was playing with AF tracking yesterday with it just for fun, horrible light too, but here's a shot to show what it does at 300mm handheld at f6.3. A female ruby-throated hummingbird drinking from my fountain, this is just the in-cam jpeg and sooc:Yes, the lens is a small jewel, perfect for travelling. I hope Nikon will make a 70-200 f4 of the same caliber.
I am leaning toward the 70-200/2.8 when it becomes available, assuming it is as stellar wide open as the 24-70/2.8 is. For travel, I have the 70-300/4-5.6 AF-P VR lens -- it is very lightweight, of course has VR and is surprisingly good optically from 70-200. It deteriorates to 'softish' at 300, but remains somewhat usable. I was playing with AF tracking yesterday with it just for fun, horrible light too, but here's a shot to show what it does at 300mm handheld at f6.3. A female ruby-throated hummingbird drinking from my fountain, this is just the in-cam jpeg and sooc:
Full sooc jpeg resized for web:
Actual pixel crop from above in-cam jpeg:
>>>Update Edit. I quickly reworked the nef in C1, and have to admit even I am surprised at how much more was in the file to be had. Here is the same crop as above, but from the C1 nef -- I'll let you draw your own conclusions about color and detail improvements, but do call your attention to what are now recognizable as pollen remnants on her beak from her flower foraging . Not too shabby coming from a relatively inexpensive zoom! :
I have not used ACR in a very long time, so cannot answer definitively. I've become very used to (and like!) C1's UI and capabilities for storing and converting files. I tried NX-D out, and with some work, got to a very comparable result as C1. But being more facile with C1, it was of course easier.How does conversion with C1 compare to ACR or similar?