Which Lens - Factory or aftermarket ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeanoH

Initially she had an issue re clarity when cropping.

---

Generally it is best to try and do as little cropping as possible. Especially with APS-C sensors that are not the same with regards to quality as an APS-H (now discontinued) or full frame sensors. One of the reasons is that the manufacturers try to cram more and more pixels into a small area, which creates problems with pixel size and dynamic range etc. etc... If you crop an APS-C image in half and especially if your original image was of a mediocre quality, the half-size image will look very bad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeanoH

Have now set her the camera to max quality JPEG plus RAW capture so she can sample and compare though I was a bit disappointed with the quality of the Canon 'high' JPEG quality. It may be just me but I thought the 'high' JPEG quality of our Nikons was significantly better.

---

The reason jpegs may look bad is also how your friend sets the camera up. After all, the camera processes the image internally, rather than you or her later on a computer.

Get her to read the manual and understand what each preset option can do. Contrast, saturation, etc... The reason most people who are pretty serious shoot RAW files is that they have far more control over final image quality. Compare the file sizes. Your RAW should be nearly three times the size (in megabytes) of your highest, finest, jpeg. That means that much more data to work with. But digital is not the panacea for poor exposure skills. You may or may not have heard things like: Ah, if I get it right in camera I can fix it in Photoshop later. This is the biggest garbage statement one can say in my opinion. To get the best image quality, one must learn how to expose in digital world, that is; use the histogram on the camera and understand how the image is recorded. The proper exposure technique will ensure the recording of the maximum number of high-quality pixels and also minimize or totally eliminate dreaded digital noise. The below link is to a blog entry I wrote some time ago about digital exposure and what I do to minimize noise. While the post is about using high ISOs and noise in relation to that, the crux is still relevant to all ISO values.

A MATTER OF LIGHT » Minimizing noise when shooting at high ISOs.

In essence, I always shoot RAW and convert to jpeg before I post them on my web gallery or other digital media. I even send large, fine, jpegs to clients rather than bulky TIFF or PSD (Photoshop Document) files.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeanoH

I was unable to view the Canon RAW images on my PC using ACDsee Pro 5 as it couldn't view the proprietary Canon RAW format. I'll see if I can download a suitable plug in for it.

Deano :)

---

Digital Photo Professional should've been included with your friend's camera on a CD. If not, she can download it from the net. Just google DPP download or something like that and bingo.

G'day, I have a Nikon D90 which I love. Last year I bought a reasonably expensive aftermarket lens (Sigma) which, with the benefit of hindsight, I shouldn't have; yeah, I should've forked out the extra for a Nikon lens at the outset. Long story short, I sold the Sigma for about half of what I paid (it was only three months old) and bought a Nikon. Guess what? No problems. My excursion into the aftermarket options left me with a very sour taste being significantly out-of-pocket, with an understanding that you're better off with the genuine article. Yes, I know there are plenty of people who swear by aftermarket lenses and are very happy with their purchases, it's just not for me.

I would go Nikon all the way if I could afford it.....every time I have saved up to get the 28-70 something on my car blows up :D

or my horse needs a saddle

or something!!!

3 times I started t o save for the bloody lens and then gave up.

I really would liike to try again.

saying that though I have a Tokina 12-24 and it is a very nice little wide angle lens and I have read reviews where people that had the Nikon sold their lens to purchase this one because they felt the image quality was better

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grant052

G'day, I have a Nikon D90 which I love. Last year I bought a reasonably expensive aftermarket lens (Sigma) which, with the benefit of hindsight, I shouldn't have; yeah, I should've forked out the extra for a Nikon lens at the outset. Long story short, I sold the Sigma for about half of what I paid (it was only three months old) and bought a Nikon. Guess what? No problems. My excursion into the aftermarket options left me with a very sour taste being significantly out-of-pocket, with an understanding that you're better off with the genuine article. Yes, I know there are plenty of people who swear by aftermarket lenses and are very happy with their purchases, it's just not for me.

---

Hm. I just sold a very expensive Sigma lens on E-bay on behalf of a friend (he has no E-bay feedback history to warrant selling something like that anyway) and he got 30% of what he paid for the lens two years ago. Then even less as the paypal and ebay fees will be around 380 bucks! It cost him just over 10k for that lens at the time. So they don't seem to hold much value, not at the big end anyway.