April 20, 2014, 05:52:43 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 - Lloyd

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
Landscape / Re: Total Lunar Eclipse - #1 of 4 - April 2014
« on: April 16, 2014, 01:23:58 PM »
Dear friends.
Thousand thanks for all GREAT PHOTOS of the RED MOON.  Sorry. Past two nights were  Thunderstorm and raining night for my home town( Apex, NC., USA.)---No Red Moon in the cloudy sky.
Well, Here are my RED MOON by Post processing/ Photoshop----Ha, Ha, Ha.

I hate it when people try to pass off a photoshop image as an original.  Again Surapon, you don’t fool me.  I found the original photograph that you lifted this image from on the Daily Planet website and posted it below.  It shows not the red moon, but you returning from your home world.  I will not let you keep up this deception through some clever cropping of a lifted photo.  This has to stop.

Landscape / Re: Total Lunar Eclipse - #1 of 4 - April 2014
« on: April 16, 2014, 11:54:45 AM »

I was taking the photos on fairly solid, but a little wet, ground.  I had two tripods set up.  One was for the 800mm fd lens and the other was for the Tamron.  Unfortunately, the head I was using for the 800mm was unable to solidly hold the lens at the high angle I needed when the moon was in the full eclipse position.  Therefore, I used only the 150-600 for the red moon shots.  The tripod I used for the Tamron was not as solid as the one for the 800, but I don't think that camera shake was the issue.  I used a remote trigger (the CamRanger) so no vibration from that and was using live view. There was no real wind out at the time.

I have done several star photos before with other lenses (including the 800, a Canon 70-200 2.8 and a variety of wide angle lenses) and have not had had the stars come out in such a squiggly pattern before.  Blurred yes, but consistently squiggly like this no.  I first attributed the moon blur to the duration of the shutter, the length of the lens and the movement of the moon.  However, that does not explain the squiggly stars.  I need to go out again and try some star photos with the better tripod and with VC (IS) on and off to see if I can repeat the effect.

Thanks for help in brain storming this issue.

Kindest Regards, Lloyd

Sports / Re: Your favourite motorsports events
« on: April 16, 2014, 12:20:10 AM »
Here are a few photos from the 2014 MotoGP races in Austin at the Circuit of the Americas.  The rest can be found at http://www.pbase.com/lebthree/2014_motogp_austin Some of the photos are easier on the eyes than others.

Landscape / Re: Total Lunar Eclipse - #1 of 4 - April 2014
« on: April 15, 2014, 11:42:52 PM »
Thanks for the confirmation that it is likely the IS.  And dcm, thanks for the link to the Tamron manual.  I always wondered why they included these manuals with products. 

And jrista with regard to the composites, now you are just showing off.  Good work.

Kindest Regards, Lloyd

Landscape / Re: Total Lunar Eclipse - #1 of 4 - April 2014
« on: April 15, 2014, 10:49:23 PM »
The bad.  Let me know what you think is the cause of this.  It only occurred on the 5diii with the Tamron 150-600.  I don't think the tripod moved this much and I don't think it is from the shutter, but it could be.  Most all of the Tamron ones exhibited this shake when I was taking longer exposures.  The first one is really odd as it duplicated the shaken star all over the frame. The first was a 20 sec exposure and the 2nd was a 3.2 sec exposure.  I had the Tamron version of IS on. I was also using the CamRanger to activate the shutter.  Any thoughts?

Landscape / Re: Total Lunar Eclipse - #1 of 4 - April 2014
« on: April 15, 2014, 10:42:23 PM »
The good

Landscape / Re: Total Lunar Eclipse - #1 of 4 - April 2014
« on: April 15, 2014, 06:06:18 PM »
Equatorial mounts are a lot easier to use than that. They sound very technical, but they are actually simple and elegant devices. All you would really need to do is use the hand controller, set it to lunar time tracking (vs. sidereal, which is the default used for stars), pick the moon to point, center (there is always a bit of pointing error), and start imaging. Once you set it, you can pretty much forget it. The only extra bit of work is the meridian flip...once the moon passes the meridian (from east to west crossing the imaginary "12 o'clock line" overhead), you need to tell the mount to goto the moon again, and it will flip the mount to the inverse orientation...then you can image for the rest of the night.

Jrista, you have failed to convince me that an attempt by me to mount the equator would in any way be seen as elegant.  Plus, I live in Texas and such an act is probably illegal.  I am also concerned that if I tried one of those meridian flips, I would end up in the hospital.  Take care, thanks for the tips and keep posting those great photos.

Landscape / Re: Total Lunar Eclipse - #1 of 4 - April 2014
« on: April 15, 2014, 03:58:30 PM »
Some great shots by Jrista and Slyham.

I have not had time to fully sort through the photos I took last night with my 800mm and the 150-600, but most of the ones taken during the full eclipse had too much motion blur.  As the moon got darker, I just increased exposure time.  This was a mistake.  The moon moves rather quickly across the sky and the longer exposure introduced blur.  On the small screen of the camera they looked deceptively okay, but when I downloaded them to the computer you could tell the moon had moved a good bit even during a one second exposure.

I just now did a little research on the issue and saw a web site which recommended that for lunar photography you should take 250 and divide it by the mm of your lens to get the maximum exposure time to avoid blur.  See http://www.amlunsoc.org/photography.htm   For my 800mm lens, that would be no more than a 30th of a second and about a 40th of a second for the 600mm.  (this seems to be similar to the 500 or 600 rule applied to star photography) Or I could do it right like jrista and get an equatorial tracking mount.  Unfortunately, I would also need Mr. Spock to help me operate it.

It is a good thing there may be a few more of these events coming up.  Time to crank up the ISO and open up the lens if I am going to use the long lenses to photo the next one.

As I understand 4k,  the most interesting feature for 4k would be the ability to zoom into the 4k recording when editing for a 1080p final.  For example, let’s say I was shooting a wedding on my own.  I could put up a 4k camera in the rear with a wide field of view and a wide depth of field and let it run on its own for the duration of the wedding.  I could then shoot close up videos on my 5Diii at various angles with a narrow depth of field of the bride, groom etc.  Then when it came time to edit,  I could zoom into the 4k as needed to get close-ups since I am only outputting to 1080p.  Of course, since I am not a pro, all of this would depend on getting a reasonably priced 4k camera and the ability to record long durations of video on some reasonably priced medium.   It is that reasonably priced thing that is probably the rub for me.

Photography Technique / Re: Shoot from the rearend of the subjects.
« on: April 03, 2014, 10:24:19 PM »
Testa Rossa

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Upgrading from 1D3 - need filming Camera
« on: April 01, 2014, 04:13:35 PM »
I am an amateur and recently videoed a wedding inside a fairly well lit chapel.  I used my 5d3, a friend’s 5d2 and my 60d.  I had much more flexibility with either of the 5d’s due to their larger sensor and the available lighting.  It was hard for me to get a good noise free video with the available light on the 60d.    I rarely use the 60d anymore after using the 5d3. Even shooting wildlife I prefer to crop with the 5d3 as opposed to taking advantage of the “extra reach” of the 60d.  This is both due to the quality of the 5d3 and because I am often faced with lower light which favors the larger sensor.  I would think it would be even harder to use the 60d for stills if I had been using a 1 series camera.  I don’t know enough about the 6D to give you any comparison.
There are a lot of great threads here on African safaris that may give you some better insight into your dilemma.  If you would need to sell the 1D3 to finance a 6D, you may be limiting yourself in that it seems that you will want to have a second camera with you on your trip both for a backup and so you can have a wide angle on one body and a telephoto on the other.   If I was fortunate enough to find myself in your situation, I would probably bring the 1D3 because I already had it, I am familiar with it, I like the results I get with it and I assume it has better weather sealing than the 60d or t3i/t4i.  If you keep the 1D3 and go to the used market for your second camera you can probably get one in a number of cameras within your budget, including a 5d2, and sell it upon your return with very little loss.   

Good luck, have a great trip and be sure to post photos when you get back.


There is something lacking in the feather detail on all three examples. It makes the bird seem lifeless. Is that bird a
Norwegian Blue?

Software & Accessories / Re: Alternatives to RRS MH-02 Monopod Head?
« on: March 28, 2014, 02:58:20 PM »
I have had the Sirui P-326 ( http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/822252-REG/Sirui_BSRP326_P_326_6_Section_Carbon_Fiber.html ) for over a year and have used it in combination with my rather heavy old manual focus 800mm.  It is rated for 22lbs, weighs hardly anything and retracts to a very small package. It was steady enough to be used with the 800mm at F1 to get the following photo and the first half of the photos posted here.http://www.pbase.com/lebthree/2013_austin_f1&page=all

Note that because of the 6 sections it does not deploy quickly.  The only drawback I had with it was related to an old head I had lying around that I put on it.  I recently added the RRS MH-02 LR http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/s.nl/it.A/id.5709/.f  which at 16.2 oz weighs more than the 0.9 lb monopod.   The MH-O2 is overkill for this monopod and significantly adds to its length when retracted, but I hate buying things twice and thought it would be useful if I decided I needed a beefier monopod setup in the future.   Also the RRS stuff retains its value. 

It should be noted that it is one thing risking my old 800mm on a light cheap monopod, as opposed to putting a high value Canon super tele at risk.   If I had a lens costing more than 5k I think just for peace of mind I would go with a honking Gitzo 5561 or RRS equivalent.   Also once you are lugging around one of these super telephotos what is a few extra pounds.

Also, more power to Sheldon above for being able to use a ball head on a monopod.  I do not have the dexterity to manage that especially with a long lens.  When the ball head is loosened and the camera and lens starts to flop around you don’t have a lot of leverage with a monopod to manage the situation.

Photography Technique / Re: photographing motorsport particularly F1
« on: March 25, 2014, 06:11:41 PM »
So I've got some tickets to the shanghai Formula 1 in april and plan to give the tamron 150-600 a good workout on the 5Dmk3

I am looking forward seeing your results.  I have also recently purchased the tamron 150-600 and want to try it out at the Austin F1.  Last year I brought my old manual focus Canon 800 and had fun using it.  However, I did not have as much fun carrying it. 

I am also a newbie to panning a F1 car and last year was my first attempt.  One thing I found helpful was to focus your attention on the driver's helmet and as you pan attempt to keep it in the same location in the view finder.  Most of the driver's helmets are brightly colored and give you a good reference point.

Here are two of my attempts both taken with my 5diii at 1/160s f/11.0 at 105.0mm iso100.

Of course when you get really good you can pull off the ultimate pan ;D

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5