April 20, 2014, 05:40:21 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 - Quasimodo

Pages: 1 ... 35 36 [37] 38 39 ... 54
541
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Advice for night skyline photography
« on: November 02, 2012, 11:42:02 AM »
6) How on earth do I manage windy conditions with long exposures?  Last night, the wind was such that I was stuck with non-ideal settings (1/3 to 1/5 second exposures, ISO 1600, F/7.1, etc,) when I'd ideally like multi-second exposures at a lower ISO.  Is there a tip or trick other than tripod positioning and using my body as a windshield?  (Use smaller lenses?  :D)

Bigger and better tripod is all I can suggest. When in doubt, set one in concrete :P . Barring that, some (most?) decent tripods you can hook a counterweight to the column, or add a rock-bag around the legs to lower the centre of gravity (my Vanguard 283ct came with a rock-bag and has a hook on the column too). Keep the legs as short as possible, on multi-angle legs tilt them out. Basically, the lower to the ground the better (as long as you can still get the shot).


I was shooting in the night last weekend, and I had brought a very sturdy tripod. In my case I was using a 800 F5.6L plus 2xIII teleconvertor (I was there to shoot the moon which was almost full, and ended up shooting city elements, before the dammned moon showed up through the skies (three hours freezing in the wind and below 0 degrees celsius)). What I experienced is that no matter how sturdy a tripod you have, you will get shake due to the wind and the lenght of the lens. I saw this because I was shooting at x 10 in liveview. My buddy and I ended up with our parkas jackets held out to the side to cover the lens, while at the same time using 10 sec. delay to get the shot.

Even then it did not get perfect... I will enclose one of them (as you see I have not done any pp to it yet, not sure if I will bother either). The night was a success for my part, since the damned moon showed up, and I got the shot I wanted @ 1600mm. I will enclose this also.

G.

542
5D MK III Sample Images / Re: Moonbow!
« on: October 30, 2012, 08:00:29 PM »
Quasi, what are the full stats on that shot?

thanks

5D II, 800 F5.6L + 2x III teleconverter, @F11, ISO 100, Spot Metering, AV Mode, One Shot. Plus a very sturdy tripod and a Gimbal? head. 10 second delay (which with the speed of the earth made me put the focus point on the middle on the far right side, and by the time the shot was taken, it had passed the middle of the moon). It was also a bit windy, so my friend and I had to cover/shelter the lens from that additional shake. In addition three hours in minus three degrees celsius (waiting for the clouds to go away :)

543
5D MK III Sample Images / Re: Moonbow!
« on: October 30, 2012, 04:28:22 PM »
I am starting to think the green streak is a meteorite - I think I am going to play the lottery today.

Andy

It rather looks like a landing Reptilian spaceship. It's even more rare than a meteorite, so bid double pot today. :D
Andy, lovely picture. What were your settings? I tried taking one 4 years back with my 300D and failed miserably :P

And I agree with marekjoz, definitely an alien ship   ;)

I am not sure about the settings Andy used, and I agree that it is a very cool picture, as is Crashers shot. When I shoot the moon I use spot metering (on clear nights), AV and last friday for this shot it was F11, which was the lowest combination I could get with the teleconverter :)

544
Technical Support / Re: Color Space: sRGB vs AdobeRGB
« on: October 22, 2012, 01:26:14 PM »
Thank you Mikael :)

545
Technical Support / Re: Color Space: sRGB vs AdobeRGB
« on: October 20, 2012, 09:34:23 AM »
So are you saying that it does not matter if my cameras are set on sRGB or AdobeRGB, because I am shooting in Raw? and that everything can be fixed in post? While opposed to Jpg. where the setting on the camera is more limiting wheter you have your camera set on sRGB or AdobeRGB?
That's how it works, a raw file doesn't have a color profile as such and you can also fix white balance later with raw. When I say "as such" the camera can still embed the camera settings that applications like LR will use by default, but changing it later doesn't have any implications.

I guess the easy way to think of it is that raw is a capture of what the camera sensor has captured at that point in time and all that will ever be available even in a 100 years. Meanwhile in that 100 years monitors and printers will probably have progressed much further and today's gamuts will be considered obsolete.

Thank you:)

546
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Full Frame Sharper Than Crop?
« on: October 20, 2012, 09:32:02 AM »
I suspect it may simply come down to the size of the photosites on a crop sensor. They tend to be smaller than those on full-frame sensor and thus the laws of physics and diffraction come in to play sooner on a crop sensor.

For a fuller and more in-depth answer just hang on, I see our friend Neuro on the horizon with his usual top-notch explanations for the witchcraft that is optical physics.

Pah! Just as I type this, there he comes!


I have a question also. Diffraction. I have read about it, and there are several places that warns against closing the lens too much (some say you should not go to F22, but stay at F16 due to diffraction. Does anyone have a practical example on how this would alter a picture, besides a theoretical argument? Otherwise, when shooting landscape for instance, why would one not go minimum aperture all the time, given that you control the other factors?



Whilst it was only speculation on my part, check out the examples here:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/u-diffraction.shtml

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography.htm

Also the table near the top of the page here http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-7D-Digital-SLR-Camera-Review.aspx gives values for apertures where diffraction might start to creep in. Note that they say it may not be visible depending on what size and how you view the image.


Ok, thanks. I will look at them :)

547
Technical Support / Re: Color Space: sRGB vs AdobeRGB
« on: October 20, 2012, 06:34:37 AM »
Shooting RAW gives you the full options in post so that gives you the most flexibility and future proofing options.

What is important to realise is that there is still only 255 steps between colours in either colour space (8bit jpeg), adobe rgb having more of a step between each colour. This is only important when you tweak the curves and potentially stretch and get banding in areas like sky. This is why capturing raw, converting to 16 bit depth and choosing srgb or adobe rgb to edit is best, choosing which one really depends on the final display (monitor or print).

Just my 2p!

So are you saying that it does not matter if my cameras are set on sRGB or AdobeRGB, because I am shooting in Raw? and that everything can be fixed in post? While opposed to Jpg. where the setting on the camera is more limiting wheter you have your camera set on sRGB or AdobeRGB?

548
Canon General / Re: How to work around Canon shipping restrictions at B&H
« on: October 20, 2012, 05:29:03 AM »
Today, equipment bought in Europe are covered by the warranty here, but not the US bought items. Hence, the risk has gotten higher, since you now have to ship the equipment to the U.S. if anything goes astray.

So if I live in Norway, take my camera with me to Los Angeles for a four week holiday and have an issue with it early on in the trip, I can't have it repaired under warranty at Canon service center in Irvine, California? (Irvine is part of the greater Los Angeles metropolitan area.) If so then that sucks. Rinse and repeat if I change the country in which I live within the warranty period of newly purchased Canon equipment.

Not sure if it goes that way. If you bought it in Norway, I am not sure what kind of warranty you would be covered under during your holiday. It is rather that for equipment bought in the US taken back to Norway that are not covered in Europe anymore (a thing they implemented two years ago to stop people from buying in the US).


So if I live in California, take my camera with me to Europe for a four week holiday and have an issue with it early on in the trip, I can't have it repaired under warranty at Canon service center Europe?

I am really not sure. I know it was implemented to prevent us from buying in the US, but if you are a resident....?

549
Technical Support / Re: Color Space: sRGB vs AdobeRGB
« on: October 20, 2012, 05:17:25 AM »
When you have (for example) a JPEG file, each pixel is characterised by 'red', 'green' and 'blue' numbers.

The colour-space defines how these numbers map to an actual colour - it is what allows you to determine that { 90, 90, 10 } represents a particular shade of 'burnt-yellow', for example. sRGB and AdobeRGB are just different ways of mapping those numbers to actual colours. AdobeRGB is a mapping that can encompassed a much broader range of colours - including colours that can not be represented in sRGB at all.

Every method you have for displaying your images will have some limitations on the colour space. For example, a printer may be limited by the ink colours that it has, and a monitor by the particular characteristics of its phosphor or LCD filters.

Generally, it is easier to display sRGB images - partly because the smaller range of colours means that more output format can show the image as you intended, and partly because for historical reasons sRGB is widely used. However, some output formats (or image processing software) may be able to use a broader range of colours than sRGB can represented - in which case using AdobeRGB is a better bet.

Note that if you shoot in RAW, the CR2 files have a colour space that is defined by the colour-filter array on the camera sensor - the broadest colour space possible, but specific to any given make/model of camera. However, when you process the RAW files you can choose to re-map this to sRGB, AdobeRGB or any other space that you choose.

Interesting. I always shoot in Raw exclusively on my 5D II and 1Ds III (are there differrences on these two sensors in what type of color they can receive in Raw on the sensor?). My main question is this: Would it not make sense to always shoot in AdobeRGB? As I understand it, you can always change the colorspace in post-processing in program such as CS or Lightroom, thus giving you the best, and enabling you to use it the way you want, as opposed to the opposite where you shoot in sRGB because you wanted to produce for web, and then find out that you would like to do more with the picture (apart from the extra space the AdobeRGB takes, which is not relevant for me)?


550
Canon General / Re: How to work around Canon shipping restrictions at B&H
« on: October 20, 2012, 12:12:34 AM »
Today, equipment bought in Europe are covered by the warranty here, but not the US bought items. Hence, the risk has gotten higher, since you now have to ship the equipment to the U.S. if anything goes astray.

So if I live in Norway, take my camera with me to Los Angeles for a four week holiday and have an issue with it early on in the trip, I can't have it repaired under warranty at Canon service center in Irvine, California? (Irvine is part of the greater Los Angeles metropolitan area.) If so then that sucks. Rinse and repeat if I change the country in which I live within the warranty period of newly purchased Canon equipment.

Not sure if it goes that way. If you bought it in Norway, I am not sure what kind of warranty you would be covered under during your holiday. It is rather that for equipment bought in the US taken back to Norway that are not covered in Europe anymore (a thing they implemented two years ago to stop people from buying in the US).

551
Canon General / Re: How to work around Canon shipping restrictions at B&H
« on: October 19, 2012, 11:55:10 PM »
I find it interesting to read this thread. I live in Norway, and like most europeans know, the U.S. and Canadian prices are very low compared to the rest of the world, Japan included. B&H, Adorama and others have priced several of their Canon products the last few years so cheaply that running a camerastore in other parts of the world becomes very hard. It's a known fact that for the most high end products from Canon, a person can order a round trip with hotel to New York, buy the stuff you wanted and still have saved money. An example: Last Christmas B&H had an offer for the 17mm TS F4.0L to a price of 12.500 NOK, while in Norway the same lens costs 21.500 NOK (3795 usd today currency exchange). A roundtrip from Oslo - NY cost about 4400, and plus cheap lodging you have saved money, had weekend in NY, and that is just one of the lenses. The only risk you run is that the customs in Norway may force you to produce proof that this lens was bought in Norway previous to your trip. If caught, you need to pay taxes that equals the price of Norway. Until two years ago the US warranty was also valid for Norway. Not so anymore. Today, equipment bought in Europe are covered by the warranty here, but not the US bought items. Hence, the risk has gotten higher, since you now have to ship the equipment to the U.S. if anything goes astray.

552
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Full Frame Sharper Than Crop?
« on: October 19, 2012, 05:11:50 PM »
I suspect it may simply come down to the size of the photosites on a crop sensor. They tend to be smaller than those on full-frame sensor and thus the laws of physics and diffraction come in to play sooner on a crop sensor.

For a fuller and more in-depth answer just hang on, I see our friend Neuro on the horizon with his usual top-notch explanations for the witchcraft that is optical physics.

Pah! Just as I type this, there he comes!

I have a question also. Diffraction. I have read about it, and there are several places that warns against closing the lens too much (some say you should not go to F22, but stay at F16 due to diffraction. Does anyone have a practical example on how this would alter a picture, besides a theoretical argument? Otherwise, when shooting landscape for instance, why would one not go minimum aperture all the time, given that you control the other factors?

553
Lenses / Re: Canon 800mm F5.6L IS USM experiment
« on: October 13, 2012, 06:04:02 PM »
I need a zoom lens that covers that range. :)  (Plus I'd like circular fisheye on the wide end.)
Very cool, thanks.

Thanks. I just told a friend the other day that my dream walkaround lens should be 14-500 F2.8L IS II USM, and that the weight should not exeed the 70-200 II, and the price should not be higher than the latter lens, lol :)

554
Lenses / Re: Canon 800mm F5.6L IS USM experiment
« on: October 13, 2012, 06:01:19 PM »
I know that view, from Akershus Festning  ;) you from Norway?

Yes from Oslo, Norway. It's not from Akershus Festning, but higher up (right above Sj√łmansskolen on Ekeberg:)

555
Lenses / Re: Canon 800mm F5.6L IS USM experiment
« on: October 13, 2012, 04:09:14 PM »
Last two :)

Pages: 1 ... 35 36 [37] 38 39 ... 54