Poison.

In the world of DSLR photography, when a photog refers to "poisoning", it is when a certain photographer has a certain type of gear that produces images that will "poison" the viewers to buy that equipment.

I've been poisoned for the past 3 months (and is also probably the cause of why I studied a little less :P)

The lens above is the Canon 15-85 IS USM f3.5-5.6 EF-S lens.

Right, so it's not a constant f2.8 lens which I am acustomed to.

But given the price of the 17-55 Canon f2.8 and the need to actually hunt for a decent copy of the Sigma 17-50 f2.8, I've decided to go for the 15-85 because of it's good optical performance, wide range and of course, the USM motor.

I hope to sell my current lens and then get this lens by VBS. My Sigma has front-back focusing issues (I'm going to service it first) and of course, is heavy and not as sharp as the Canon.

The canon weighs around 575g, approx 200g lighter than my current lens. It also features Image Stablization (which comes in handy with movie and low-light).

Sure the Sigma 17-50 OS HSM features an optical stabilizer, f2.8 constant aperture and HSM motor. But my biggest concern is that to purchase a Sigma 17-50 for the price of the Canon, I'll have to order it from online stores (which is fine in terms of trust). The problem is for lens hunting, especially since Sigma has QC issues whereby if you get a bad copy, you're screwed. Getting a good copy of the Sigma 17-50 will definitely give me imba image quality (Superb rating on the mtf charts) however, I don't think I'd take the risk.

Apart from that, I plan to get the Capa quick strap since I'll be doing more walkarounds in school and perhaps at other events. The extra comfort would be great. It'll cost me RM55.

Also, a great lens will have to come with a great filter (approx RM250) and a lens hood (Canon doesn't give away free lens hoods unless it's an L-series lens).

I'll also definitely need new diffusers for my speedlite.

Looks like I'll have to wait until next time to get my battery grip.

http://forum.lowyat.net/topic/1536268/+200?hl=capa

http://forum.lowyat.net/topic/1578033

Such an expensive hobby... But the benefits are great :D

The power of RAW image processing.

As most DSLR users would know, we have many options of picture formats to process our pictures in. The preset is usually under a large .jpeg setting. But what I realized after hanging around the pros in the Lowyat forums is that most of the pros who do PP(post-processing) shoot in RAW.

I understood a long time ago that shooting in RAW would allow me better PP capabilities, but only to a certain extent. I didn't do it at first because I needed to convert it afterwards and the file size was huge! With a empty 8GB card, I can shoot at least 900 .jpeg pictures, while it was only 250 if I shot in RAW.

But I eventually decided to try it out, and the results were...wow.

By shooting in RAW, your pictures keep most of the settings from your camera when the picture was shot, which I think, allows for better manipulation of the image. I couldn't use my normal editing software to process the picture though, so I had to use Canon's Digital Photo Professional that came along with my 60D. I was astounded by the results.

The colors turned out so much better after minor tweaking, and it was much easier to adjust the WB and exposure there.

Take these pictures of Alicea and Sarah for example:

First a few comments. On Aly's pic, there's an obvious amount of 'softness' in the picture. This is because of my misaligned lens that causes my focusing to be slightly off at my maximum focal length (70mm x 1.6). DPP cannot save the picture. What it did however, is improve the overall color settings of the picture without compromising much of your image quality. On Sarah's picture, I did a previous edit with a jpeg copy of it with my old editor and got slightly okay results, but after I did the RAW version of the picture, things became much more toned. In my previous software, increasing the contrast by a little would sacrifice alot of the images overall quality by adding grain into the picture and causing the colors to be imbalanced. RAW images however, are able to be tweaked without compromising that much.

But I do admit, using a software like DPP to edit is really hard and tiring. Only small changes are needed to be made to get a brilliant picture, and for that, you require a patient and gentle hand along with a sharp eye for colors, something which I haven't yet posses.

Though bare in mind, PP-ing can only get you thus far, the way in which the picture was taken is very important too.

In Sarah's picture, the exposure was imbalanced on one side of her face compared to the other. This was because the sun was pointing at one side of her face and creating a darker side on the other side of her face. I should have did a fill flash to balance the light, but meh, I was just lazy.

Alicea's picture on the other hand, had quite a fair amount of lighting on both sides of her face, so balance wasn't exactly the problem. The problem was of course, with the softness of the image. I could've corrected the WB a little better as the picture looks rather warm (no pun intended).

In both pictures, my composition could have also been better.

Nevertheless, shooting in RAW has really shown me how much potential I have in my camera.