October 22, 2014, 06:02:27 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 - emag

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 22
121
Lighting / Re: Flash Newbie: Flash Photography Concept
« on: June 18, 2013, 10:19:16 AM »
Seriously.....

Your camera is not stuck in Av mode, you are (I mean that in a friendly way  :D  Trying to stay with Av while using flash is like using cruise control on the race track, it's too limiting even though it is useful in some situations)  Manual mode is your friend.

1.  Go to the strobist blog  (it's free)

2.  Start with Lighting 101 Archive, get a feel for the basics, then bounce around and read up on some of the more advanced techniques to whet your appetite

3.  Smile as you discover the answers to many of your questions and begin to take your flash photography to the next level

122
Lighting / Re: Flash Newbie: Flash Photography Concept
« on: June 17, 2013, 10:16:39 PM »
Among other sources, a good one for learning flash technique is    http://strobist(dot)blogspot(dot)com/

124
$ 0.10 Canadian Tire money....I'd almost forgotten I had some.  Souvenir of a drive from Chicken, AK, ferry to Dawson City and then down to Whitehorse.  A wonderful time for me after living in the Florida panhandle for 20 years.

125
Lighting / Re: Battery Mystery
« on: June 03, 2013, 09:29:31 AM »
It was just luck of the draw, you got a defective battery, don't over analyze it.  I've gradually replaced all of my batteries with Eneloops, bought in bulk via Amazon.  Very pleased with them.

126
Canon General / Re: Newspaper Dumps Photographers, Wants Video
« on: June 01, 2013, 05:55:31 PM »
Can't remember the last time I bought a newspaper.  I get my news (including local) on a tablet, phone or computer.  I don't see newspapers being much more than a niche in a short time, not much of a future for Jimmy Olsen.  Collateral damage in a changing world.

127
For visual use it may work with your C6 but you might want to consider something better suited for your application.  AP is definitely out of the question.  What is the weight of the largest EP you will be using with the C6?



It's just for visual.  At the same time I have a 60D and C8 on a CG5 shooting fuzzies and galaxies.  I put a 40mm or 25mm in the C6 for folks that want to see the moon or Saturn or whatever.  If it's a very clear night I'll put a 4inch f/5 refractor on there instead.  I was using a Mini-Hitch but sold it and bought the Acratech GP, which is more useful for non-astro photography.  Public stargazes are about the only time the C6 comes out, it was a package deal with the CG5 but otherwise, although it's a fine scope, I just don't have a tremendous amount of use for it.  The small refractor works quite well, I'll probably end up sticking with that and sell the C6.

128
Seemed like an appropriate thread in which to ask this....

Acratech GP owners - what is the heaviest weight you would be comfortable using in the gimbal position?  I plan to use a C6 telescope on it for views of the the moon and planets during public stargazes.  The scope weighs in at 10-11 lbs and the center of gravity is farther from the ball than a camera/lens combo would be, but the ballhead does not seem to be straining with the weight.  It's a featherweight ballhead but I think that may be deceptive.

129
I've used Pbase for years....no complaints.  Strictly a hobbyist, though.

130
I've used a 40D for night sky time lapse a number of times, I spent years doing astrophotograpy with film and do NOT miss film AT ALL.

Tokina 11-16/2.8 (usually set to 3.5).  RokSamBow 14 would be a nice substitute.
ISO 1600 (3200 is noisy), Raw. 
WB either daylight or custom, gets tweaked in PP anyway.      The kinda brownish tinge you can see from long exposures in non-light polluted areas is really the color of the night sky, it seems jet black to our eyes because we can't detect the color and our brain expects it to be black.  The camera doesn't lie.  Incandescent WB can counteract that but affects star colors.

15 seconds exposure, 5 seconds off, yielding 3 exposures per minute
25 seconds exposure, 5 seconds off, yielding 2 exposures per minute
   Off times allow for image saving to card and help a bit to keep sensor heating down
17mm f4 should let you get away with 25 second exposures easily, I'd be more concerned with the IQ of the lens wide open
PP in Lightroom.  A free program that can also be used is Startrails....but you're shots will have to be good, it doesn't do any tweaking, just generates a video or a startrail shot

Hands down, the single toughest issue I have is dew on the lens, it has ruined more sequences than anything else.  Have fun, but understand it can be a gateway to motorized mounts, telescopes and other appurtenances that will suck the life out or your wallet and nights.  Sure is enjoyable, though.....

131
Lenses / Re: When is the New 100-400 Coming?
« on: May 16, 2013, 09:37:37 AM »
I suppose another answer to the question could be....."When Sigma or Tamron release one".   At which time that 'amazing clip' of sales could slow.  ;)
</sarcasm (not directed toward CR)>
<coffee>

132
Lenses / Re: One lens for vacation
« on: May 12, 2013, 02:43:50 AM »
None of the above.  Bring a Pentax Optio WG-2.  You could let the kids use it also with no worries.

133
Software & Accessories / Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software
« on: May 07, 2013, 09:48:13 AM »
As a hobbyist, I use GIMP but prefer Photoshop.  PS will no longer run on my laptop for unknown reasons, but both PS7 (10+ years old?) and CS2 run fine on my desktop.  I've only started using Lightroom (3.2) in the past year and will purchase LR4, but it looks like my Photoshop days will be drawing to a close.  Frankly, I'll miss it.  Adobe is not the 900lb gorilla in the room....it's the only gorilla, but it is soon to be priced beyond practicality for me.  For pro's and artists, it is the cost of doing business and may make more sense.  I would pay $10/mo. for LR but would prefer an annual subscription for less than 120/yr.  Guess we'll see how things work out, but without any real competition Adobe can do what they want for now.

134
Reviews / Re: Review - Google Glass
« on: May 04, 2013, 01:52:38 AM »
So here's another thought - this may be the fantastic street camera..

Along those lines...I often find myself wondering how a particular scene was shot in a film and enjoy watching a documentary showing how it was done.  I'm not talking special effects type scenes, just those that make you wonder "How did they do that?"  Glass would seem to be a useful tool for that type of work.

135
Reviews / Re: Review - Google Glass
« on: May 03, 2013, 05:08:35 PM »
.....but how well does it take a 1.4xIII extender?  :o

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 22