El fin del Otoño
El Otoño es una estación muy especial para realizar interesantes fotografías, por esos colores tan llamativos como el rojo, naranja y amarillo que podemos encontrar entre las últimas hojas que resisten en algunos árboles y las demás que están repartidas por el suelo.
Los motivos principales a fotografiar, suelen ser los paseos llenos de hojas, los contrastes de colores y esos cielos nubosos que desprenden unos escasos rayos de sol.
Pero lo más importante en Otoño es saber jugar con los colores, la saturación, el balance de blancos, la luz del día (en función de la hora a la que vayamos) para conseguir una foto mucho más espectacular y original.
Antes de que el Otoño llegara a su fin, saqué un rato durante el fin de semana pasado para llevarme algunas fotos de recuerdo, y estos fueron los resultados:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/herzeleyd/3040246163/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/herzeleyd/3038177566/
Las fotos llevan el habitual procesado del RAW, ajuste de niveles por zonas y algo de saturación. En el caso de la última foto también jugué un poco con el color de las hojas, intentando crear una escena un poco diferente de lo habitual.
Este año se me ha escapado el Otoño sin enterarme y casi no he hablado sobre la fotografía Otoñal, si bien es cierto os mostré varios ejemplos sobre este tipo de fotografía aquí, pero para el próximo año intentaré hablar un poco sobre este tipo de fotos, que merece una mención especial.
Pufff, que bonitas. Echo de menos cuando vivia en USA y esos peazo bosques que tenia a nada de casa. Ahora ni tiempo ni bosuqes cerca 🙁
Hay que aprovechar el frio del ambiente que se hace ver en la naturaleza, deja unas vistas maravillosas.
Saludox!
PD: Aqui seguiremos todos el otoño que viendote;)
Para el año que viene más y espero que mejor 🙂
Saludos!
Apreciado Herzeleyd:
Tras mucho calentarme la cabeza (como tú) y contar el dinero mil veces tení amuchas dudas sobre que cámara comprar. Un fabuloso artículo me ha sacado de dudas. Lo explico todo en mi último post. a ver que te parece.
Como ya sabes la Alpha 700 es el equivalente de la d300. Aquí te va la revisión más seria que se ha hecho de tu futura camara:
Conclusion – Pros
Good detail at lower sensitivities, very slightly more than ten megapixels but no massive gain
Low noise at higher sensitivities although at the expense of detail (perhaps too much luminance NR)
Excellent dynamic range at ISO 200 (more highlight range than we are used to seeing)
Wide range of DRO options, manual settings deliver biggest difference
Excellent long exposure capability, no noticeable hot pixels even at 30 seconds with NR off
Good built-in flash, well metered, no color casts
Full support for ‘Sony Alpha’ lens mount and all Minolta A-type lenses
Good ergonomics, comfortable grip, great optional vertical grip (lots of controls)
Dust reduction provided by anti-static coating and ‘sensor shake’ using stabilization system
Environmental seals around controls (although not storage / battery doors)
Built-in ‘Super SteadyShot’ sensor-shift image stabilization appears to work fairly well
Good build quality, solid construction with no creaks or rattles (although not metal body)
Fast auto-focus, accurate and reliable
Camera feels fast in use, responsive and no real usage delays
Superb large, high resolution LCD (delivers full-color VGA; 640xRGB x 480)
HDMI video output (up to 1080i)
Five frames per second continuous, good buffering, superb write speed with SanDisk Extreme IV CF
Clean, easy to follow menu system
Quality glass pentaprism viewfinder (bright, large view)
Customizable ‘hard button’ on camera rear (‘C’ button)
Wide range of image parameter presets, addition of brightness custom adjustment
Built-in AF assist lamp (with projected focusing pattern)
Very fast USB 2.0 throughput (over 20 MB/sec)
Easy to understand percentage (%) battery life display
Supplied infrared remote control
Value for money
Conclusion – Cons
High sensitivity noise reduction applied before RAW image is produced
Base sensitivity isn’t ISO 100, this isn’t directly indicated on the camera
Reducing noise reduction setting doesn’t make enough difference (doesn’t change on-chip NR?)
Lack of live view will be counted against the A700 compared to the competition
No ISO display on viewfinder status bar
No top panel LCD status display
Variable battery life (using the main LCD for status can be a big drain)
Poor RAW conversion from Image Data Converter SR
Average automatic white balance performance, still very poor under incandescent light
Overall conclusion
The Alpha 700 was introduced as a complementary model to the Alpha 100; aimed more at the serious amateur and semi-professional photographer it enters a segment of the market which is buzzing with new models (EOS 40D, D300 and E-3). The A700 clearly has a lot of Minolta DNA (it’s a natural successor to the popular Maxxum 7D) but also exhibits a range of development which can be attributed to the new development team that has come out of Sony’s purchase of the Konica Minolta DSLR division.
Konica Minolta were the first manufacturer to put a sensor-shift Anti-Shake system into a digital SLR (again, in the 7D which shipped in early 2005), this same feature graces the A700 but has now been renamed ‘Super SteadyShot’, refined possibly since then but it works in exactly the same way. In our tests it worked well enough to make a difference providing somewhere between 1.0 and 1.5 stops of ‘improvement’ which it has to be said is somewhat less than Sony’s claims.
One thing that is clear when you start shooting with the A700 is that Sony has worked hard on performance; it feels very responsive, button presses for menus or image playback occurring instantly and there’s no feeling of lag when changing settings. Other performance criteria such as continuous shooting speed, buffering and write speeds were all very good, with a pretty blazing 34 MB/sec write speed with SanDisk Extreme IV cards. I should also make special mention of that new high resolution LCD monitor which really does make a difference to the whole shoot & review experience.
My primary gripes were around a couple of questionable decisions; firstly that RAW files already have noise reduction applied to them, this in effect means that the photographer can’t treat RAW as the ‘digital negative’. This subsequently removes the ability to successfully apply any third party noise reduction method (either now or in the future) or to make his or her own decisions about the balance between noise and NR. I understand that this is because a certain amount of noise reduction occurs very early in the image pipeline (at or around the sensor) but why that can’t be simply disabled by choice is a curious to say the least.
The second oddity is the fact that this camera’s base sensitivity appears to be ISO 200 (not ISO 100), subtly hinted by the fact that the Auto ISO range begins at 200 and supported by our own dynamic range tests. Sony managed to indicated that ISO sensitivities above 3200 were ‘out of calibration’ but not those below 200 (the trade-off below this point is highlight dynamic range). This gives rise to the rather ridiculous situation where most users (who try to stick to the lowest ISO wherever possible) will not only be shooting at a setting that doesn’t produce the optimum image quality, but also losing a valuable stop of sensitivity at the same time.
With the gripes out of the way I have to say that overall image quality was very good, with the A700 producing as much resolution / detail as the competition at lower sensitivities and noise reduction keeping noise levels in check at higher sensitivities without losing too much detail (although we personally would prefer less luminance reduction and more chroma reduction, which is Nikon’s approach). Color was predictable and neutral and tonal response was good without ever being over contrasty (nice roll-off in highlights from ISO 200 upwards).
Overall then the A700 is a good performer with good overall image quality with a nice range of features – even if on the negative side there are some quirky design decisions which may or may not affect you. Best of all though is the fact that it weighs in at the lower end of the price band for this category of DSLR, that makes it about $400 less than the Nikon D300 and $300 less than the Olympus E-3.
En resumen, una excelente cámara que estaría al nivel de la D300 si no fuera porque hace demasiado de fotógrafo , corrigiendo escesivamente los RAWS y JPGS lo que nos deja muy poco margen a un retoque efectivo en Photoshop (pero puede que el resultado iniciall ya convenza, tendrías que probar una y ver si realmente son fotos demasiado suaves) Por cieto aquí podrías tener una clave de porque tus fotgos no acaban nunca de ser nitidas, Sony corrgie demasiado in camera dejando poco margen a la nitidez.
Interesante. Pues si ya tenía dudas, ahora tengo mil más. Con lo fácil que era elegir cámara cuando empecé…
Ya uno no sabe que hacer.
Gracias Josep.
q bonitas fotos, luego en primavera al cerezo en flor jeje
Claro sugui, a ver si para entonces te vienes conmigo y hacemos fotos juntos 🙂