April 16, 2014, 04:53:04 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 - jrista

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 214
1
Lenses / Re: Sigma vs Zeiss vs Canon
« on: Today at 02:48:30 AM »
But but what about the people who want a good quality 50mm and are willing to pay appropriate money?

And don't you think lots of people will buy the Sigma?

Canon DOES have the 50/1.2 lens. You can't deny the quality of that lens, despite it's spherical aberration, which as it so happens to be, is a DESIRABLE trait in a portrait lens for many photographers. Not everyone screams for perfect corner to corner sharpness. Sometimes, having soft corners is beneficial to guiding your viewers eyes to the subject...which tends to be near the center of the frame.

I've always admired photos taken with the Canon 50/1.2 and 85/1.2 lenses. They have a specific aesthetic appeal that is just WONDERFUL for portraiture specifically, and for a variety of other types of photography as well (such as street.) I find it ironic how so many people write off the Canon 50/1.2 and 85/1.2 lenses as if they don't even qualify to be included in the lineup for comparison.

So, what about the people who want quality? Canon offers a VERY high quality 50/1.2 lens that offers STUNNING and very aesthetically appealing results. You should give it a try sometime. Oh, and you'll spend about half as much on that as you would on an Otus...you won't get razor sharp corners, but it's HALF as much as an Otus.

So. Am I to infer that if Canon comes out with 50/1.2 II that is sharper and has better corner to corner sharpness then you would not DESIRE to use it?

I'm sure a lot of people would. I'm also sure that a lot of the people who currently love the soft-focus traits of the current 50/1.2 would be bummed if Canon copied the Otus design with razor sharp focus corner to corner. It's better to have a DIVERSITY of lenses with different traits, than for all manufacturers to make exactly the same things that behave exactly the same way.

I think the center performance of the 50/1.2 and 85/1.2 needs to be improved...in the grand scheme of things, it's a bit soft, and doesn't need to be. I do, however, hope Canon keeps the soft focus traits in place if they release a 50/1.2 II and 85/1.2 II. If I want a lens with perfect sharpness, I can always get the Otus...if Canon copies the Otus, then I'm suddenly left WITHOUT the option of buying a lens that purposely leaves in a certain amount of spherical aberration for artistic flare.

2
Landscape / Re: Total Lunar Eclipse - #1 of 4 - April 2014
« on: Today at 12:13:38 AM »
And jrista with regard to the composites, now you are just showing off.  Good work.

LOL. Yeah, a little.

Thanks. ;)

3
Landscape / Re: Total Lunar Eclipse - #1 of 4 - April 2014
« on: April 15, 2014, 10:58:26 PM »
Two more composites:




4
Landscape / Re: Total Lunar Eclipse - #1 of 4 - April 2014
« on: April 15, 2014, 10:57:14 PM »
That definitely looks like IS messing with your stability, Lloyd. You gotta turn IS off when doing astrophotography with a camera lens.

The good looks great! You got Spica and Mars along with the eclipsed moon. I was hoping to do that, but decided I didn't want to interrupt my imaging sequence to do it.

5
Landscape / Re: Total Lunar Eclipse - #1 of 4 - April 2014
« on: April 15, 2014, 04:43:37 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.


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.

6
Lenses / Re: Sigma vs Zeiss vs Canon
« on: April 15, 2014, 03:52:27 PM »
But but what about the people who want a good quality 50mm and are willing to pay appropriate money?

And don't you think lots of people will buy the Sigma?

Canon DOES have the 50/1.2 lens. You can't deny the quality of that lens, despite it's spherical aberration, which as it so happens to be, is a DESIRABLE trait in a portrait lens for many photographers. Not everyone screams for perfect corner to corner sharpness. Sometimes, having soft corners is beneficial to guiding your viewers eyes to the subject...which tends to be near the center of the frame.

I've always admired photos taken with the Canon 50/1.2 and 85/1.2 lenses. They have a specific aesthetic appeal that is just WONDERFUL for portraiture specifically, and for a variety of other types of photography as well (such as street.) I find it ironic how so many people write off the Canon 50/1.2 and 85/1.2 lenses as if they don't even qualify to be included in the lineup for comparison.

So, what about the people who want quality? Canon offers a VERY high quality 50/1.2 lens that offers STUNNING and very aesthetically appealing results. You should give it a try sometime. Oh, and you'll spend about half as much on that as you would on an Otus...you won't get razor sharp corners, but it's HALF as much as an Otus.

7
Landscape / Re: Total Lunar Eclipse - #1 of 4 - April 2014
« on: April 15, 2014, 03:46:47 PM »
Wow jrista! That's a really awesome triad shot! Well done sir.

What equipment do you shoot with? Especially which tripod head? I've got a decent enough Benro with ball-head, and it worked, sorta, but I kept wishing it was geared in some way or another to fine tune.

Thanks. :)

I used a Canon 7D, EF 600mm f/4 L II lens, but the equipment that really allowed me to get the kind of detail I did during totality was the Orion Atlas equatorial tracking mount. I did not have to jack my ISO way up to 3200 or 6400 to get images during totality...I kept it at ISO 100, tracked in lunar time, and simply increased my exposure times. At full moon, my shutter was 1/250th. At maximum totality, it was 8s to 15s. Since I was tracking the moon itself, I could expose for that long of a time without experiencing blur due to the moon transiting across the frame.

8
Landscape / Re: Total Lunar Eclipse - #1 of 4 - April 2014
« on: April 15, 2014, 03:42:56 PM »
Here are mine taken with my T1i and 55-250 mm.

Great shots, nice and crisp.

9
Landscape / Re: Total Lunar Eclipse - #1 of 4 - April 2014
« on: April 15, 2014, 03:41:43 PM »
I finally managed to get some processing on my images done. Out of 200 frames, I've picked 17 that encompass the total sequence from first shadow to last shadow. Still working on that composite. In the mean time, here is my Totality Triad composite, all spiced up:

Well, that's mildly...freaking awesome!  Can I buy a print of that off ya?

Sure! I am actually trying to build a storefront site for my photography. I don't have it rolling yet, but I'll send you the link when I do. I guess I could do something ad-hoc, through paypal, if you really wanted a print right now. I use a nice high quality printer that can ship directly from print lab to my customers. Just let me know.

10
Landscape / Re: Total Lunar Eclipse - #1 of 4 - April 2014
« on: April 15, 2014, 03:38:48 PM »
jrista, you really have mastered astrophotography and these shots are amazing!

Thanks. I've been imaging the moon a LOT longer than I've been doing deep sky astrophotography, and I'm more of a master of the moon than I am of astrophotography. Maybe at some point I'll be as good with AP as I am with the moon, but at the moment, I'm still a noob compared to some astrophotography wizards.

11
Landscape / Re: Total Lunar Eclipse - #1 of 4 - April 2014
« on: April 15, 2014, 03:29:46 PM »
That's beautiful shot jrista :)

I have never photograph the moon before. Last night, I gave it a try. Result I got is "indescribable"  :-\ :-\ :-\

That pretty much looks just like what mine would have, except I didn't bother to try knowing how bad it would be.  :-[

Thanks jrista for starting this thread, and any additional tips/tricks/how to's would be much appreciated!  I have no delusions (or particular interest) in being a great astrophotographer, but it would seem that just a nice shot of the moon should be within reach skill-wise and equipment-wise for most of us with a little help from our friends here.  Still 3 more chances!

Thanks!

I'm happy to share my expertise as well. I actually learned a few things myself last night. I'll put some more information together in another thread, so we can keep this one more of a "Share Your's" kind of thread.

Quick note on the other chances...while one or two of them will be visible from the US, for about half or so, the eclipse will occur at moonrise or moonset, so you'll really only be able to see about half of it...and it will be pretty low in the horizon. It's still definitely possible, but it will be tougher to get good detail, and you will have to be ready to go as soon as the moon rises (or well before it sets) to get the shots. For the fourth, I don't think it will be visible from the US at all, however if you live elsewhere, then check the times and dates and see if you'll get a good view.

12
Landscape / Re: Total Lunar Eclipse - #1 of 4 - April 2014
« on: April 15, 2014, 02:10:29 PM »
I finally managed to get some processing on my images done. Out of 200 frames, I've picked 17 that encompass the total sequence from first shadow to last shadow. Still working on that composite. In the mean time, here is my Totality Triad composite, all spiced up:


13
Landscape / Re: Total Lunar Eclipse - #1 of 4 - April 2014
« on: April 15, 2014, 11:52:33 AM »
Ah, looks like they come in cycles. There was a 300 year gap up through 1908. Looks like the total cycle time is 565 years, so we'll have a bunch for a couple centuries, then another lull. I don't know what I read before, but I'm not even sure it actually projected future cycles...I guess I just assumed that it was a rarer event based on the history of Tetrads.

Anyway, here is one of my shots, taken as the moon was entering the umbra:

That's beautiful shot jrista :)

I have never photograph the moon before. Last night, I gave it a try. Result I got is "indescribable"  :-\ :-\ :-\

Derp. You need to use live view to dial in the exposure, or at least start with a pretty high shutter speed and work your way down to the point where the histogram just separates from the right-hand edge. For a full moon, you can start with 1/500th second, and work down from there. A full moon that is within the umbra, however, might need anywhere from 0.5s to 20s of exposure time...you just kind of have to experiment. It depends on how deeply within the umbra the moon passes (last night the moon passed through one edge of the umbra, missing the dead center, so it did not get as dark as it can...a total eclipse that passes right through the center of the earths umbra can get so dark as to be difficult to even see, like a new moon.)

Also, you have to make CERTAIN you are using Manual (M) mode...you can't really photograph the moon with any automatic modes, as there is simply too much contrast for evaluative metering to choose the right settings. Spot metering mode, metered off the moon itself, might do it, but it's still best to go full manual.

14
Landscape / Re: Total Lunar Eclipse - #1 of 4 - April 2014
« on: April 15, 2014, 05:08:03 AM »
I think you did a great job, Drizzt! Especially considering you used an Opteka mirror lens, and at f/16!

BTW, the blue star is Spica, one of the key stars in the constellation Virgo. It's blue, rather than orange, simply because it isn't Mars. :P

The other star, I suspect, is 76 Virginis, assuming that your image is from the beginning of the eclipse rather than the end.

15
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Dissuade me to get a Rolleiflex
« on: April 15, 2014, 04:43:33 AM »
Bet you never use it  ;)
I have shoot roughly 50 rolls on a Lubi replica. But the things is so random and poorly manufactured that this is just for fun. But the way to shoot is addictive.

You did say 'dissuade me' !

~My Grandfather used a Rolleiflex in the '30s and '40s, a 'Standard' I think, and I still have the remarkable pictures that he took in the English Lake District - among others - on colour transparency. Very rare in 1936.

Mint f2.8 versions do seem to go for very high prices. If it's your thing; great. Personally I miss film like a hole in the head.
My Rolle has been sitting on a shelf gathering dust for at least 10 years...

You should sell it! You could make anywhere from $300 to $3000! :P

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 214