Thanks Bob, Paul, Bruce and Ken. I used the 70-200 VR f2.8 and the 1.7 tele. I really like the quality from the combo, but after looking at it again, i think your right. Contrast between OOF rock and the Otter.
Thanksa again Dave Quoting Bob Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Very nice, and I think Bruce is right. > The sharp image next to the unsharp rock gives the illusion of being > too sharp. > Regards, Bob S. > > On 6/30/06, Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Yes, it is very nice. I'm thinking that the heavily blurred >> background next to the sharp otter is making you think it is overly >> sharp. Nice work there! >> >> -- >> Bruce >> >> >> Friday, June 30, 2006, 6:35:56 PM, you wrote: >> >> PS> Nice shot. It's just crisp and contrasty. It doesn't show >> PS> oversharpening artifacts. Good work. >> PS> Paul >> PS> On Jun 30, 2006, at 7:59 PM, David J Brooks wrote: >> >> >> From the GFM weekend. >> >> >> >> http://www.caughtinmotion.com/paw/otter1.jpg >> >> >> >> No sharpening done, but to me looks way over sharpened for some reason. >> >> >> >> Nikon D200, 70-200 F2.8 VR, 1.7 Tele >> >> >> >> Dave >> >> >> >> -- >> >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> >> [email protected] >> >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> [email protected] >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > Equine Photography in York Region -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
