Photoclubalpha

As the above link may not work properly in some geographic areas I'm attaching the direct link
http://www.sony.jp/products/Consumer/ds ... ample.html

Sonolta wrote:http://babelfish.yahoo.com/translate_ur ... =Translate

Not much to complain about here...these a900 24-70 Zeiss shots look sweet! Click on the image for the full size view.

-Sonolta

Yeah, great detail! She has a make up "blob" on her chin, some "beard cut" type hairs on her upper chest and something smeard on her left arm

(Edit: the upper pic that is)

OK let me clear some points.
1- the second shot (the portrait one, second from top) is not shot with the Zeiss 24-70 but with the 85/1.4 Zeiss (look at the exif data)
2- the girl doesn't have any hair on the chest, but those are superficial tiny blood vessels
3- that beautiful girl has oily skin, enlarged pores and pimples which were camouflaged with an appropriate tonal cream (a very good one I would say, cause it's not that obvious)
4- ready to take care of her skin

Dr. Harout wrote:2- the girl doesn't have any hair on the chest, but those are superficial tiny blood vessels

Maybe it's my poor english setting me back here so you don't understand.. . but it looks like she has a couple of "trimmed beard hairs" stuck on her chest, the kind that always get stuck in my t-shirt and itches like h*ll all day

See what I mean:



BR,
/Zeb!

[SiC] wrote:

Dr. Harout wrote:2- the girl doesn't have any hair on the chest, but those are superficial tiny blood vessels

Maybe it's my poor english setting me back here so you don't understand.. . but it looks like she has a couple of "trimmed beard hairs" stuck on her chest, the kind that always get stuck in my t-shirt and itches like h*ll all day

See what I mean:



BR,
/Zeb!

Oh I see, you are referring to the first picture, while I was talking about the second one. I will download it too to see that.

Dr. Harout wrote:Oh I see, you are referring to the first picture, while I was talking about the second one. I will download it too to see that.

Yes, hence the:

[SiC] wrote:(Edit: the upper pic that is)

Those are hairs, yes but cannot comment more. Could be that she just came out from a beauty salon prior to pose or something like that.
Anyway as soon as I download that picture I will look upon the exif data. As I said, the second picture is shot with a 85/1.4 and definitely not with the 24-70 Zeiss.

Sonolta wrote:I posted those as an example of the cleanliness if the files and the nice detail...I did not realize peeps would start ragging on the chick. This is what you will get with "too much" resolution. If you need this camera then buy it...if you don't need a thousand miles of resolution and monster size files then skip it.

-Sonolta

May I comment a bit on such a camera?
Whenever we speak about photography we try to classify it as landscape photography, indoors, architectural, sport, birding, wildlife and so forth.
I will definitely add a separate topic which is medical photography. And with such a camera... wow, it will come handy. Specially in my field which is dermatology.
You will get all details you want and whenever you want, revise them later, consult with a colleague, show to students/residents etc. (I dare say it exceeds the Dermoscopy tool).
So Hail to Sony.

And if you equip this camera with a SAL50M28 (Sony 50/2.8 Macro), you are in a totally different world. I am sure some will praise Sony 100/2.8 Macro much more, possible but I'm not acquainted with it.
This my friends is one of the reasons I believe that Sony will enrich its Macro department (Ring flash, special lenses, bellows maybe, microscope adapters, just to name a few). Time will tell...
At the end of the previous year my Sigma 50/2.8 Macro DG EX broke and naturally I saddened. But now I am even glad it happened cause I purchased the Sony one (albeit 2.6 times more in price). Honestly the IQ is more than 2.6 times better than the previous lens

I know that Don, thanks for the links, but there are few who do the shots themselves. And do believe me, sometimes you really need to enlarge as much as you can or is possible.
That doesn't mean I'm not satisfied with my A700.
Large format size would be of greater help too, but let us settle on A900

I always revise my shots of patients (the rashes). And I always try to inspect the lesions at their greatest magnification to find as much details as I can (for proper treatment/cure).
It was not once that my shots helped me and my patients to get a way better approach/diagnosis/treatment.

Wow it's easy to get you mad.
Seriously, it's the construction I don't like, the IQ was fine, not like Sony, but fine. I promised to do a shot of the inside of Sigma lens (I'll do that very soon).
Commenting on Sigma is like making you eat these

Shot with Sigma 50/2.8 Macro DG EX

Relax Just kiding

Sonolta wrote:Doc, make sure you look at the UV vs. Daylight photo samples...You need a UV system if you want to do it right!

http://www.profectmedical.com/support.html

"Color Observed in a UV Image Clinical Application
Coral-red Porphyrin
Orange-pink Porphyria cutanea tarda
Yellow-green Pseudomonas infection
Blue-green Scalp Ringworm (Tinea Capitis)
Bluish white Normal skin
Bright white/violet Dehydration
Dark Brown/Black Hyperpigmentation / Melasma / Sun Damage
White Loss of pigment (i.e. Vitiligo)"

Check the facial studio UV sample.
http://www.profectmedical.com/galleries/

Understanding UV Photography for the Medical Office
http://www.profectmedical.com/support.html

Those guys have some cool stuff!

-Sonolta

Don, relax. You are tackling a subject you probably know nothing about (I'm using the word "probably" just to lower the tension). If it interests you, then yes, I use Wood's light a lot.
And you were saying that you use links only by remembering them. I didn't know you were in the profession of medicine.
Doctor Sony (for your liking)

Sonolta wrote:BTW...those peppers look a tad bit blue to me...

Probably due to siggy lens
Joking. Bad PP from my side.
How about this:

No PP at all

Sonolta wrote:No, I am not a doctor, but I do know a little bit about this macro stuff, and I know several people into the UV/IR thing.

-Sonolta

Looking in UV light is something you should see, it's very interesting (IMO).