July 28, 2014, 04:51:56 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - sagittariansrock

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 78
1
I have a question: in the link posted http://petapixel.com/2012/12/24/how-to-scan-your-film-using-a-digital-camera-and-macro-lens/
the author says 4-6 shots are required for a 35mm image, but he is using a Zeiss Makro Planar, and a 1:3 magnification.
What I don't understand is, unless the magnification is greater than 1:1, why would I need to take multiple images and stitch. Can someone clarify?
Thanks!


Ah

The author is stitching multiple photos in order to extract the most detail from each negative/slide.  The explanation:

"Using an higher reproduction ratio is more time consuming (you’ll need more shots to cover the same area), but as a result you will be able to extract the most detail from the film. Here are some examples showing my Canon setup at various reproduction ratios, compared to the results of a well-respected flatbed scanner, the Epson v700..."

The exact numbers depend on the size of the negative/slide compared to the size of the digital sensor.  Using 1:1 for a 35mm negative would require stitching multiple shots on an APS-C sensor camera, or just a single shot on a full-frame digital camera.


Ah, 35mm film on an aps-c camera- that makes sense!
Thanks for the clarification :)

2
Lenses / Re: Which Bokeh Monster?
« on: July 27, 2014, 02:11:12 AM »
85L II + 135L are both wonderful lenses. If money is not an issue, 85L II is the way to go for portrait. The 85L II has earned the title "King of Portrait".

Photo below was taken with 85L II @ f1.2.

As someone who loves bokeh (and to whom money might not be a huge issue), you should definitely try out the 200/2 IS. I did when I visited B&H recently, and I was blown away.
I took some very uninspiring photos within the camera shop, but reviewing them in my computer I was just awestruck- in spite of having ogled at online galleries of the lens. So try it out if you can. Kids playing outdoors- will give you plenty of room, AF is lightning fast for action too, and IS helps with indoor concerts and school plays etc.; plus you can relive having your 300/2.8 with a 1.4x TC III.

Bad idea, my G.A.S is bad as many CR members here ;D

About this: 24-70 II + 135L + 200 f2 + 300 f2.8 IS II + rumor 100-400 or Tammy 150-600 for outdoor :P

I agree with you 100%, the 200 f2 is simply awesome. As of right now, I LOVE what I have. Shooting with 2 bodies, missing shots is almost impossible.

It's not G.A.S. if you use it. You have plenty of room to use a 200/2. ;)
And we will get to see pics ;)

+1.

Re 200 2.0 - You know you want one Dylan777 ;)
I'm officially broke after 400mm + 1dx. I've declared that I'm done for 2014  ;D

I will hope for your sake that they don't release the 12/4-24 until 2015 then... ;)

3
Lenses / Re: Brenizer Method Photos/Tips
« on: July 26, 2014, 05:58:48 PM »
Hi everyone, I've only recently begun shooting with this method, and I'm totally LOVING the results I'm getting!

I'm wondering, however:  I shoot using my 135L on a 5DM3.  Does anyone here use the 85mm?  I've noticed that with the 135, I'm shooting probably more photos than I need to, but that's because I'm scared I'm going to miss an area (those of you who shoot these photos know what I'm referring to). 

Should I get an 85L just for this type of shot?  I actually don't have one, but I'd love to have one.  Maybe this is the catalyst to push me into that camp.

I've also tried it with my 70-200mm 2.8L m2 at approximately 85mm, but I'm more nervous because of the zoom ring.

Thoughts?  Also, if you have good Brenizer Method photos, please share!

One of the things Brenizer suggests is making sure you have the entire primary subject in one of the shots. This prevents any stitching issues within the main subject. It is very difficult to achieve that with the 135mm. So yes, I think an 85mm FL is necessary. You might be able to make do with a 50/1.2 or even better, the Sigma 85/1.4.
I am waiting for Canon to come up with the 85/1.4 USM (day-dreaming...)

I'm with you there.  I've noticed that it's tough to NOT include the subject in the follow-up shots when using the 135L.  That's the primary reason I'm getting that 85.

One of the reasons I'm holding off slightly is to see what Sigma comes out with.  Their new 50 and 35 are awesome (I use both and love them deeply), so I'm kinda holding out for their rumored 85 1.4 Art.

I'm sure the 85 Art will be awesome. The Sigma 85 is already pretty great, adding firmware support to resolve focusing errors will remove the one Achilles heel.

4
Lenses / Re: Which Bokeh Monster?
« on: July 26, 2014, 05:57:00 PM »
85L II + 135L are both wonderful lenses. If money is not an issue, 85L II is the way to go for portrait. The 85L II has earned the title "King of Portrait".

Photo below was taken with 85L II @ f1.2.

As someone who loves bokeh (and to whom money might not be a huge issue), you should definitely try out the 200/2 IS. I did when I visited B&H recently, and I was blown away.
I took some very uninspiring photos within the camera shop, but reviewing them in my computer I was just awestruck- in spite of having ogled at online galleries of the lens. So try it out if you can. Kids playing outdoors- will give you plenty of room, AF is lightning fast for action too, and IS helps with indoor concerts and school plays etc.; plus you can relive having your 300/2.8 with a 1.4x TC III.

Bad idea, my G.A.S is bad as many CR members here ;D

About this: 24-70 II + 135L + 200 f2 + 300 f2.8 IS II + rumor 100-400 or Tammy 150-600 for outdoor :P

I agree with you 100%, the 200 f2 is simply awesome. As of right now, I LOVE what I have. Shooting with 2 bodies, missing shots is almost impossible.

It's not G.A.S. if you use it. You have plenty of room to use a 200/2. ;)
And we will get to see pics ;)

5
Lenses / Re: Brenizer Method Photos/Tips
« on: July 26, 2014, 03:42:18 PM »
Hi everyone, I've only recently begun shooting with this method, and I'm totally LOVING the results I'm getting!

I'm wondering, however:  I shoot using my 135L on a 5DM3.  Does anyone here use the 85mm?  I've noticed that with the 135, I'm shooting probably more photos than I need to, but that's because I'm scared I'm going to miss an area (those of you who shoot these photos know what I'm referring to). 

Should I get an 85L just for this type of shot?  I actually don't have one, but I'd love to have one.  Maybe this is the catalyst to push me into that camp.

I've also tried it with my 70-200mm 2.8L m2 at approximately 85mm, but I'm more nervous because of the zoom ring.

Thoughts?  Also, if you have good Brenizer Method photos, please share!

One of the things Brenizer suggests is making sure you have the entire primary subject in one of the shots. This prevents any stitching issues within the main subject. It is very difficult to achieve that with the 135mm. So yes, I think an 85mm FL is necessary. You might be able to make do with a 50/1.2 or even better, the Sigma 85/1.4.
I am waiting for Canon to come up with the 85/1.4 USM (day-dreaming...)

6
Lenses / Re: Which Bokeh Monster?
« on: July 26, 2014, 03:39:42 PM »
85L II + 135L are both wonderful lenses. If money is not an issue, 85L II is the way to go for portrait. The 85L II has earned the title "King of Portrait".

Photo below was taken with 85L II @ f1.2.

As someone who loves bokeh (and to whom money might not be a huge issue), you should definitely try out the 200/2 IS. I did when I visited B&H recently, and I was blown away.
I took some very uninspiring photos within the camera shop, but reviewing them in my computer I was just awestruck- in spite of having ogled at online galleries of the lens. So try it out if you can. Kids playing outdoors- will give you plenty of room, AF is lightning fast for action too, and IS helps with indoor concerts and school plays etc.; plus you can relive having your 300/2.8 with a 1.4x TC III.

7
Photography Technique / Re: Getting photos home from overseas
« on: July 26, 2014, 12:54:08 PM »
I appreciate the many replies.  To get a thorny issue out of the way first, where I travel and for how long is my business.

Now then, Neuro's math is of course spot-on but consider shooting video (perhaps with a GoPro as well for the walking parts) and the data load grows quickly.  Planning for that much data is planning conservatively, I don't suggest that every day will make for full cards.  Some days will be so of course, some will be train rides all over the place - you should see how much coverage Eurail has!

I have been to Europe before, but it was with work and I had only film point & shoots to work with; this time I mean to get it right.

In the meantime the staff work continues; it isn't planning the invasion of Europe... Well I guess it is.  Anyway I'll have a look at that Hyperdrive mentioned, anything which simplifies my life gives me more time to look out the window and enjoy myself.

Jim

Get it right, and please share with us. Looking forward to it.

8
CPL's work ok too if its not too bad
cuts down on smog haze a little too...

If I understand correctly, the long exposure here gets rid of random movements due to the heat shimmer. Similarly long exposures get rid of people when shooting a building. How would a CPL help? (I know how it cuts down haze and reflections, I mean how would it help in this specific instance). Adding it will be beneficial, obviously.

9
Thanks so much for all the insightful replies; still somewhat undecided. It is tough to buy something like this sight unseen.

Sorry, forgot to put the image in my post. See the second person (5'6") with the TVC-24 and TVC-24L. The L is much taller, of course, but with only three sections extended it's the same as the 24. With all the sections extended it is much taller than you want, and partially opening one section and leveling the tripod- well, just try it with your manfrotto and see how it feels- it felt very clunky to me.
It seems the 23 might not be a bad choice...

10
I have come to the point that I want to upgrade from my current tripod. I have a Manfrotto 190CXPRO4 with an 054 head converted to A/S that is getting pretty beat up. I use it primarily for landscape and night photography. Heaviest rig is a 5D3 and 100-400. I am a 5' 4" older lady, and don't need a bunch of height or weight.

So I need advice from the RRS gurus out there. What height of legs should I consider? I like the travel-friendly TVC-24, but am afraid that it would be too short even for me on uneven ground. Would it?

What RRS [or other] ballhead? I used to have a BH-40 but it seemed to have a lot of creep. Maybe I was too afraid of over-tightening. A screw-knob clamp might be better than a lever for me, since I have plates and L-brackets from everybody.

Thanx in advance for your help!



IMO the TVC-24 will not be too short for you, and if you use the excellent leveling head, it will raise the camera further and mitigate some of the issues with (slightly) uneven ground.
In the image below, you can see the second guy from left (5'6") using a TVC-24 while slightly bending forward.
Couple of things I have noticed:
1. It is better to have the camera a bit lower than otherwise- it sucks if I can't peek at the top LCD because it is too high.
2. It is a major pain if you don't want to extend the legs all the way- it takes a lot of time to set it up and level. (for example, when you are extending all 4 sections, but one section part way; if you are extending three sections and keeping one unextended that works okay, but I think if you do that with the 24L it will be as low as the 24).

11
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DXO uh-oh?
« on: July 26, 2014, 04:29:04 AM »
Why does everyone respond to dilbert's nonsense? Can't we just ignore his posts and hope he goes away? It would make this forum much more enjoyable.

I think he is quite good at writing short baited posts, and provoking people to respond with lengthy explanations as to why his arguments make no sense.
For all I know, he might not even have an opinion about DxO and DR, just writes those posts for a nice laugh ;)

12
I am following the posts carefully. So far, it seems a macro lens with a DIY setup to stabilize the negatives in front and a diffuser with a remotely triggered flash to backlight it is the best setup.
The jury is still out on the processing of the negatives.

I have a question: in the link posted http://petapixel.com/2012/12/24/how-to-scan-your-film-using-a-digital-camera-and-macro-lens/
the author says 4-6 shots are required for a 35mm image, but he is using a Zeiss Makro Planar, and a 1:3 magnification.
What I don't understand is, unless the magnification is greater than 1:1, why would I need to take multiple images and stitch. Can someone clarify?
Thanks!

13
Thanks for the tip. As you said, it makes sense after learning about it.

14
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DXO uh-oh?
« on: July 25, 2014, 01:24:22 AM »
And this thread went the predictable route quickly enough...

15
Lighting / Re: Anything Strobist
« on: July 25, 2014, 12:50:34 AM »
Nice Yokaew! All of your shots. Hoping for more.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 78