A good set and it's starting to show that you’re getting the measure of this lens. It won't be long now before we see caterpillars at 1000yds.

Best regards

Very true Don in absolute terms but looking at the images we post here and other sites, we end up seeing differences in the quality and appearance of JPEG only shots.

I have no negative outlook to RAW and accept that "more" detail etc. can be achieved/retrieved but it's not for me. I can say that I don't set out to get a certain result. I just see the image, asses it (mind’s eye may say it’s a mono result, EV comp etc.) and shoot it. When I do see EV shortcomings on my images, they are normally close enough that a tweak in curves will fettle it.

To some, just getting into digital photography is a daunting task never mind the additional burden of PC/software skills needed.

Best regards

[quote:3496ace15f="testdasi
But if you want to (for example) recover 1 EV of blown highlight, you can't do it with a JPEG (all other things being equal).[/quote]I tend to fall back to the old skills used while shooting film. I tend to be able to judge EV compensation situations. If it's a "critical" shot I'd shoot 3,5 or 7 frames with EV comp presets.

That function could or should also be removed from the camera if we all shoot RAW as why have any photographic skills, the software will cover exposure mistakes.

I agree about the post processing advatages of RAW. I do not batch process. I aim to get the original shots correctly exposed.

Odd how the camera talk mimics HiFi jargon. Unfortunately I don't have the skill to say if a finished image started as a RAW or jpeg file from the camera.

Technically speaking, all my images are RAW but I choose to let the camera do the conversion. If the in camera conversion is not good enough for some people, maybe they should write to the manufacturer to get the in camera software improved.

Of course, depending where or how any prints are produced can also wipe out that extra detail gained so a double whamy.

Why do we even bother with producing images with so many pitfalls?

Best regards

Well presented and produced. A good POV with subtle, soft tones.

Best regards

So you put your images on sites in what format?

It sounds like this; the camera can't do as good a job as the individual when it comes to finally producing a jpeg and you paid how much for the camera? Best remove the jpeg option from the camera and get faster, more accurate AF.

Just think, a change of camera and you could shoot 14 bit RAW. Is there no end to image quality.

Best regards

It is Saleh Ali Misbah.

Taken at Awali Golf Club, Bahrain.

Also

link

He also won the 2009 event.

Best regards

Unfortunately not yet but hopeful.

He seems well pleased with it.

Best regards

Warning!

Contagious.

(hope the link works)

link

Best regards

One other self rule, I shoot "ping-click". If I'm within hearing distance of a golfer, I never fire until he's hit the ball. For T shot's it's a must to let the swing of the club "travel".







Best regards

The 17-50 and 50-150 should be first choice for the golf. You should never be too close and never in the golfers line of sight. The 55-300 is too slow. For longer shots your 300 f/4 is worth putting in the bag.
The 17-50 is ideal for wide bunker shots and at 50mm is great for put shots.
A 70-200 f/2.8 should be the standard weapon of choice for golf. I’ve used the 50-500 Bigma once or twice but it’s too slow and also needs a monopod. The 70-200 should have a Pod (beanbag) on the tripod mount, acting as a damper and being more comfortable in use.

Best regards