|
Post by johnno on Mar 17, 2014 16:42:46 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2014 17:48:52 GMT
Voted for the last two. Based on the window on the right of the pics and also the red bricks in the middle. Couldnt see any difference at all between 4 and 5 tho.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2014 18:02:57 GMT
Thats a tough one to call the first although brightest looks the worst (lines on flag pole)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2014 18:25:13 GMT
I voted for the first one, only because dynamic range seems better. The target determines the settings. If your goal was the castle (or whetever that is) than image one. If cloud detail was your goal than I say image 3. It all depends on what part of the image was your primary focus.
Regards,
Hemmi
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2014 19:22:17 GMT
I honestly think that you should retake the images so that there is only one variable instead of two.
Tim
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2014 20:46:16 GMT
First one for me Johhno, more pleasing the eye for me.
|
|
|
Post by davy on Mar 17, 2014 22:06:15 GMT
2nd for me
|
|
|
Post by johnno on Mar 17, 2014 23:16:54 GMT
Maybe I should've not put No.1 in has its a bit brighter than the others due to the weather it was changing all the time, but all the photo's have the same camera settings and the same focus, was using a 80mm-200mm lens. But some are different grabbers. going to let this run a bit longer has up to now I'm surprised on what you think is the better image. Myself I was looking for sharpness of the image.
The Focus was set to the building to the left of the tower on the roof red rig tiles
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2014 3:15:32 GMT
Which grabbers for which images?
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Man on Mar 18, 2014 15:27:38 GMT
I chose number 1. Hard to tell with the others because I am sooooo tired. Only had a few hours sleep in the last few days.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2014 18:15:24 GMT
What up Ken why no sleep? You and the biker crew out causing havoc all night or something?
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Man on Mar 19, 2014 5:45:20 GMT
What up Ken why no sleep? You and the biker crew out causing havoc all night or something? Nah Chris, some very important personal stuff.
|
|
|
Post by johnno on Mar 20, 2014 18:56:44 GMT
Ok. here it is all using Miloslick No. 1-4-5 images are with this grabber www.ebay.co.uk/itm/231112776208?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1439.l2649No. 2 image is with hauppauge usblive2 no. 3 image is with ezcap Chinese copy. I went for No.2 has there was more definition and sharpness all round in the image. . Ezcap was 2nd. image 1-4-5 came last to me has it was blurred when I was using miloslick in full screen maybe because of the image size you could not tell much difference.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2014 11:12:26 GMT
Judging by the definition of the upper branches of the tree, 1, 4 and 5 are definitely softer. So since the camera didn't change (and neither did the focus) I'd reckon they were bandwidth-limited. After that for sharpness, it's a toss-up between 2 and 3.
However 2 & 3 have slightly smaller pictures than the other 3 - but not enough to make a difference for astronomy.
|
|