Pemihan
Well-known member
Paul, just to be sure - what you are referring to is when you have underexposed shadows you want to pull right?
When making a normal say 60 second exposure at twilight with no need for shadow pull it's another matter?
Peter
When making a normal say 60 second exposure at twilight with no need for shadow pull it's another matter?
Peter
We all see things differently for sure. I see no way the shadow recovery of the 260 comes close to the 250. Even at base ISO. Pull the shadows and the overall loss of details is most noticeable. Not any difference in LEM either trust me I had really hoped that LEM at ISO 140 would be special I did not find that to be the case. If shot in bright to normal light or used with a longer exposure time and the 260 does an excellent job. Need 1/125 (on a tech camera) or faster shutter speed and again unless you are in good light the details are just not there.Take it to ISO 200 and any shadow recovery is pretty lack of details the CCD Nust did not get enough light. Believe me I wish it wasn't this way but it's a characteristic of CCD.
This is my perspective after 3 years with either 160 or 260 all on a tech camera. Using a DSLR body may may a difference since you have so much more control of shutter speeds i.e. 1/3 and 1/2 stops and a much more accurate speed on full stops. Not 1/90th when set to 1/60th or 1/350th when set to 1/250th as I tend to see on all my copals.
Obviously others opinions will differ.
Paul