There is a good chance they were PP and don't let it psyc you out...if it makes you feel your camera is not doing the job, go to a camera store and ask to take in store photos to compare your quality to the 5DII, and yes some difference will exist, but remember your camera don't cost $2k for a body, or there abouts. :-) L3
heliplot wrote:
I had the opportunity to shoot a table shot (shot of a table next to a window, silverware, white tablecloth, glass ware, candles, plates, saucers, greenery, etc, with my t3i, using a 50 1.4 lens the other day, tripod, a lot of time to do white balance and I shot 15 or 20 shots with different settings (ISO), (Fstop). and all my pictures came out very nice. At the same time, someone else shot the same scene with a 5dmkII, and some of the photos had a nice glow that none of my photos had. I realize that this is about 5% of the info needed to accurately determine a good reason for the difference. I guess my question is more general, and I cant send the two photos in question just yet, maybe in a few days... I think the 5d had a 50 1.8 lens (but I may be wrong). Those shots (5d) might have been run through pp prior to my seeing them, so that might be the answer. I did not do any touch-up with my t3i shots. My t3i shots were well lit, but were lacking that subtle (or not so subtle) glow that really made the 5d shot look good. Question, could the difference have been in the sensor size diff in the two cameras, or an ISO setting, or fstop setting, or a diff in pp. This is a crazy question to try and frame with typed words??? My question, what are the possible issues that caused the diff in the "glow" effect...lens?, settings? sensor size?, untrained photographer vs a trained one??? (I know the latter could be the answer)...thanks in advance for any thoughts.
I had the opportunity to shoot a table shot (shot ... (
show quote)