Sigma 17-70 - HDR like images ?

I've owned the Sigma 17-70 for a while now I am delighted with it, however I've recently received a few comments via my website that my images appear "HDR-like". I certainly don't process HDR & do minimal post-processing in general.

Do other 17-70 owners think that it produces HDR-like images (Personally I don't) ?


simon

Do you use an ND grad filter perhaps?

I would say most of the people who ask you probably dont know much about photography, or arent very experienced, and wouldnt know that its possible to have a properly exposed land and sky without HDR

I do use NDgrad from time to time but mainly make an effort to catch the best lighting I can, as you say perhaps the conditions I take the shots in make some think that they are HDR images ?

simon

Yes, alot of your images have a great dynamic range lighting wise that it would lead people to believe that they were HDR, but to me, they just look like some awesome photography Well done!

Simon, I like your images and recognise many of the locations as I live in the middle of the N.Wales coast. Which camera do you use and are most of the images taken with the 17-70. I use a K100D and am looking to upgrade my kit lens - was looking to get something a bit longer than the 17-70 but if your images are taken with one I may sacrifice the extra length.
Regards
Richard

Hi,

I use the Samsung GX10 (the K10D clone) & almost exclusively the 17-70, my own copy is excellent - it's actually its colour/contrast rendition that impresses me most, although its nice & sharp too

simon

Thanks for getting back to me Simon.
Sorry to be a pain but I assume that you shoot in RAW. In which case what software do you process with? From the "natural" look of many of your images I assume that postprocessing is minimal......I'm struggling with RAW processing and have more or less given up and reverted to JPEG. It just seems to take quite a while sitting at the computer to edit a RAW when my JPEGs (using grads and polorisers) look OK - not a patch on yours but I don't think thats anything to do with the software - more a user issue
Cheers
Richard

I use CS3 for processing & yes all my shots are in RAW.

I don't do much PP though as I much prefer to try and catch the best lighting possible - does often mean several visits & lots of petrol but as the scenery around here is so good don't mind spending more time in it !!

simon

Hi Simon, it's me again with another question. I havn't got round to buying the Sigma 17-70 yet and not gone off the idea either, just watching the exchange rates € V's Stg as I'll be in the Uk next Month. Have been reading about Pentax Lens 17-70 to be released this year.
" The smc Pentax-DA17-70mm is the third lens under development and on display at PMA. It is a standard zoom lens that also provides a SDM system offering super-quiet, extra-smooth auto focus operation and is designed exclusively for Pentax digital SLR cameras. With a 4.1-times zoom ratio and focal lengths equivalent to 26mm to 107mm in the 35mm format, the camera is perfect for all types of photography. "
Would you have any opinion as to how this might rate against the Sigma. I notice the its listed at f4. Is this likely to be as fast as you described the f2.8 on the Sigma.
Kind Regards
EddieD

Hi Eddie,

Noticed this myself too - very difficult to compare the 2 though, for obvious reasons.
I'm guessing though that it will be noticeably more expensive than the Sigma, the SDM should provide some advantage although some of this is probably down to personal choice - don't have any issues with the Sigma.

Perhaps one weakness of the Sigma (apart from sample variation) is that it does suffer some distortion at 17mm, I'd hope that the Pentax would be better in this respect although using "PTlens" most distortion is easily correctable.

What concerns me at the moment about the Pentax offering is the negative postings appearing about the 16-50 !!

Just my thoughts

simon

It seems barrel distortion at the wide end is just something you have to accept with all lenses of this sort of range (16-45+mm). I don't think there is one with MUCH less distortion than the Sigma 17-70.

Simon,
I have been admiring your pic's since I first joined this forum (if you will excuse my opinions on waterfalls) and I think that people who think you are using HDR are mistaking perfect exposure, which allows you to process a brilliant finished picture, for jiggery pokery. You've certainly made me think about the exposure of my shots a lot more. I actually tend to expose for the brightest part of the sky now since using RAW I am realising that under exposed parts of the picture can be "lifted" if you know what I mean.

Thanks for the very generous comments. For me the great thing about the GX10/K10D (& pretty much all DSLRs) is the ability to rapidly bracket shots using RAW.

I'm certainly no expert at judging exposure but take advantage of the bracketing function giving myself a choice of the best image - also as many Pro landscape photographers have said, LIGHTING IS EVERYTHING !!


simon