kmatthew

Long Valley 25/12/2007

Today, we used both a DSLR (Canon 20D + 400mm f/5.6) and digiscoping (Contax U4R + Lieca Scope). The Plaintive Cuckoo was a perfect model for our test as they tend to stay still.

20D photos:













Contax U4R photos (photos by TH Kwan my dad):







By comparison, our U4R digiscoped photos were much duller and softer than that of 20D. But the sharpness and detail of the bird is pretty much the same, Considering the U4R is 3.0 Mega Pixels less than the 20D. I am sure with better digiscoping equipment, a much better image can be produce with better colours. But I was pleased with what this little U4R can produce.

A downer with our 20D + 400mm is that we need to get much closer in able to get the same level of detail as the U4R. So much more sneaking was needed with our 20D, compare to my dad who stood there while taking these photos casually.

kmatthew

Thanks KK and Bob for your more proffesional advice and analyse . KK, I didn't shoot with RAW, I just shoot with Large smooth Format. For your comparison, this is the original un-cropped version:



I was much closer to the subject with my 20D up to as much as half way, between my dad and the cuckoo. In the other hand, the digiscope images were un-cropped.

Bob, I am sure my dad won't mind.

kmatthew

Thanks Wing, Here is a sharpened version of the first shot. But maybe if I increase the contrast a slight bit will be better...



Indeed Bob, running a workshop will be a lot of help to people like me. I am not too familiar with photoshop yet, so I will need much more time to get familiar with it. ops:

kmatthew

Here is another try to make this shot better, does it make it better??

kmatthew

OK, Here is the repost (left) and the original (right).



The image now looks slightly less saturated, and looks less bright. Am I right?? Show how much I know about editing photos...