Definite difference, much better IMO Dave
On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 11:39 AM, Paul Stenquist <[email protected]> wrote: > While I agree with Bob that natural light is almost always better than flash, > it isn't always practical. Here's a comparison of the same bird shot with and > without flash. Now, if I had better long glass, I might be able to pull off > more available light wildlife shots, but the A400 is extremely prone to color > fringing when backlit even by a bright, indirect sky. Here's the no-flash > shot. Color is nothing special, there is more modeling of the shape, but > there's also an abundance of fringing. I could PhotoShop the fringing out of > there but given the overall dullness of the shot, it wouldn't be worth the > trouble, IMO. > > http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=14783692&size=lg > > Here's the same bird shot with flash fill. It's not full power. The flash > comp was set at -1 stop. But -1.5 would have been better. > > http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=14780352&size=lg > > I'm hoping that Pentax shows up with a DA* 400/4 some time soon. And it's > less than $1500. > > Paul > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
