02-06-2013, 09:58 PM
(This post was last modified: 02-06-2013, 10:01 PM by Brightcolours.)
[quote name='Reinier' timestamp='1360183195' post='21831']
Sorry for misspelling artificial. What I meant about the Jpeg straight from my current Canon EOS 5D, they are not what I am looking for. In my eyes these images are artificial. I don't know how it is with the D800, because I don't know anybody who has one. And so I cannot compare my EOS 5D Jpeg's with the ones of the D800.
I was just wondering if a higher DR would benefit me, because in a lot of photographs with my good old EOS 5D the shadows are quite dark. Of course I can PP that in LR4(which i own), but like I said I have a back problem and cannot sit very long. So, the least I have to PP, the easier it will be for me. Nothing to that I don't like PP like Brightcolors suggested. Just trying to find a way to reduce "pp-time".
[/quote]
As I said before.... the bigger DR is HIDDEN in the RAW data, you do not get the huge DR hidden in RAW data from normal camera output.
Both Nikon and Canon give special function settings (called D-lighting with a Nikon, and I do not remember with a Canon) that can give a bit more room DR wise in JPEG, but neither will give great results (seeing you do not even like standard JPEG output).
So, the best advice I can give you is to turn down the contrast when needed (you can make a custom lower contrast setting with the 5D mk II on its mode dial for instance).
To take advantage of the bigger DR at base ISO of the D600 and D800, you will need to put more effort in PP. The bigger DR simply is not something one gets with a normal tonal curve.
And as I mentioned before, also the Canon DSLRs have a lot of headroom DR wise, so when you want to bring back more RD at the top and/or bottom end in a RAW converter (like Lightroom) and/or post processing, you can do so with a 5D mk II too (and even with your 5D).
Sorry for misspelling artificial. What I meant about the Jpeg straight from my current Canon EOS 5D, they are not what I am looking for. In my eyes these images are artificial. I don't know how it is with the D800, because I don't know anybody who has one. And so I cannot compare my EOS 5D Jpeg's with the ones of the D800.
I was just wondering if a higher DR would benefit me, because in a lot of photographs with my good old EOS 5D the shadows are quite dark. Of course I can PP that in LR4(which i own), but like I said I have a back problem and cannot sit very long. So, the least I have to PP, the easier it will be for me. Nothing to that I don't like PP like Brightcolors suggested. Just trying to find a way to reduce "pp-time".
[/quote]
As I said before.... the bigger DR is HIDDEN in the RAW data, you do not get the huge DR hidden in RAW data from normal camera output.
Both Nikon and Canon give special function settings (called D-lighting with a Nikon, and I do not remember with a Canon) that can give a bit more room DR wise in JPEG, but neither will give great results (seeing you do not even like standard JPEG output).
So, the best advice I can give you is to turn down the contrast when needed (you can make a custom lower contrast setting with the 5D mk II on its mode dial for instance).
To take advantage of the bigger DR at base ISO of the D600 and D800, you will need to put more effort in PP. The bigger DR simply is not something one gets with a normal tonal curve.
And as I mentioned before, also the Canon DSLRs have a lot of headroom DR wise, so when you want to bring back more RD at the top and/or bottom end in a RAW converter (like Lightroom) and/or post processing, you can do so with a 5D mk II too (and even with your 5D).