Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > SELENOGRAPHERS LOVE THE 20D !!!

Reply
Thread Tools

SELENOGRAPHERS LOVE THE 20D !!!

 
 
Eric Miller
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-13-2006

"Annika1980" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) ups.com...
> >What I glean from this, assuming that by "underexpose" you mean that you
>>changed the shutter speed from 1/50 to 1/100 (changing to 1/25 would have
>>increased exposure by one stop, not decreased), is that you shot this at
>>1/100 @ f/16.

>
>>Is that what you were trying to say?

>
> It was my understanding that there would be no math in the course of
> these debates.
>


LOL


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Annika1980
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-13-2006
>What I glean from this, assuming that by "underexpose" you mean that you
>changed the shutter speed from 1/50 to 1/100 (changing to 1/25 would have
>increased exposure by one stop, not decreased), is that you shot this at
>1/100 @ f/16.


>Is that what you were trying to say?


Truthfully, my thought process when I took the pic was like this:
"Let's see, 1/100 @ f/16 .... that's 1/200 @ f/8. Take 3 stops away
(100, 50, 25), yep, that's it .... we'll go with 1/25 @ f/8."

I forgot all about f/11 in there, but hey .... it was cold, it was
dark, and it was late! Gimme a break!
I have found digital to be much more "****up-tolerant" than film work.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Barry L. Wallis
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-14-2006
Annika1980 wrote:
>>>http://www.pbase.com/image/55901147

>
>
>>OK. Nice shot. Now tell me how you managed to get a shot at f/8 with a
>>f/5.6 lens and stacked 2x and 1.4x teleconverters.

>
>
> Ah, nice catch!
> The 20D reads the info from my Canon 1.4x and bumps the aperture up to
> f/8. It can't read the info from my Vivitar 2x so it still gives the
> shutter speed based on f/8. The camera won't let me set the aperture
> any wider than this with the 1.4x attached to that lens. So I suppose
> what you are saying is that using both TCs the exposure isn't really
> f/8. That may be true, but I don't worry too much about it.
>
> So in determining the manual exposure for this pic I started with 1/100
> @ f/16, which is the same as 1/400 @ f/8. Figuring the TCs will cost
> me 3 stops, I set the exposure manually to 1/50 @ f/8. Then I
> purposely underexpose by 1 stop giving the final reading of 1/25 @ f/8.
>


Ok, I'm new to all this, but you took this picture while the birds were
in flight at 1/25? I must be missing something that is extremely obvious
to everyone else.

--
- Barry
 
Reply With Quote
 
no_name
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-14-2006
Barry L. Wallis wrote:
> Annika1980 wrote:
>
>>>> http://www.pbase.com/image/55901147

>>
>>
>>
>>> OK. Nice shot. Now tell me how you managed to get a shot at f/8 with a
>>> f/5.6 lens and stacked 2x and 1.4x teleconverters.

>>
>>
>>
>> Ah, nice catch!
>> The 20D reads the info from my Canon 1.4x and bumps the aperture up to
>> f/8. It can't read the info from my Vivitar 2x so it still gives the
>> shutter speed based on f/8. The camera won't let me set the aperture
>> any wider than this with the 1.4x attached to that lens. So I suppose
>> what you are saying is that using both TCs the exposure isn't really
>> f/8. That may be true, but I don't worry too much about it.
>>
>> So in determining the manual exposure for this pic I started with 1/100
>> @ f/16, which is the same as 1/400 @ f/8. Figuring the TCs will cost
>> me 3 stops, I set the exposure manually to 1/50 @ f/8. Then I
>> purposely underexpose by 1 stop giving the final reading of 1/25 @ f/8.
>>

>
> Ok, I'm new to all this, but you took this picture while the birds were
> in flight at 1/25? I must be missing something that is extremely obvious
> to everyone else.
>


Two different threads conflated. Click the link and see this one's not
the birds; it's the moon.

Click on the moon and it'll take you to his gallery, where you can find
the cranes & see they were at 1/500.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Barry L. Wallis
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-14-2006
no_name wrote:
> Barry L. Wallis wrote:
>
>> Annika1980 wrote:
>>
>>>>> http://www.pbase.com/image/55901147
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> OK. Nice shot. Now tell me how you managed to get a shot at f/8 with a
>>>> f/5.6 lens and stacked 2x and 1.4x teleconverters.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Ah, nice catch!
>>> The 20D reads the info from my Canon 1.4x and bumps the aperture up to
>>> f/8. It can't read the info from my Vivitar 2x so it still gives the
>>> shutter speed based on f/8. The camera won't let me set the aperture
>>> any wider than this with the 1.4x attached to that lens. So I suppose
>>> what you are saying is that using both TCs the exposure isn't really
>>> f/8. That may be true, but I don't worry too much about it.
>>>
>>> So in determining the manual exposure for this pic I started with 1/100
>>> @ f/16, which is the same as 1/400 @ f/8. Figuring the TCs will cost
>>> me 3 stops, I set the exposure manually to 1/50 @ f/8. Then I
>>> purposely underexpose by 1 stop giving the final reading of 1/25 @ f/8.
>>>

>>
>> Ok, I'm new to all this, but you took this picture while the birds
>> were in flight at 1/25? I must be missing something that is extremely
>> obvious to everyone else.
>>

>
> Two different threads conflated. Click the link and see this one's not
> the birds; it's the moon.
>
> Click on the moon and it'll take you to his gallery, where you can find
> the cranes & see they were at 1/500.



Of course, you're right I wasn't paying attention.

--
- Barry
 
Reply With Quote
 
Eric Miller
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-15-2006

"Annika1980" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) ups.com...
> >What I glean from this, assuming that by "underexpose" you mean that you
>>changed the shutter speed from 1/50 to 1/100 (changing to 1/25 would have
>>increased exposure by one stop, not decreased), is that you shot this at
>>1/100 @ f/16.

>
>>Is that what you were trying to say?

>
> Truthfully, my thought process when I took the pic was like this:
> "Let's see, 1/100 @ f/16 .... that's 1/200 @ f/8. Take 3 stops away
> (100, 50, 25), yep, that's it .... we'll go with 1/25 @ f/8."
>
> I forgot all about f/11 in there, but hey .... it was cold, it was
> dark, and it was late! Gimme a break!
> I have found digital to be much more "****up-tolerant" than film work.
>


Damn. I have that lens and thought you might have found a hack . . .

Eric Miller


 
Reply With Quote
 
ShibbyShane@gmail.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-22-2006
I'm fairly new to the technical aspects of photography, but doesn't
stacking teleconverters degrade the image quality? It seems like it
would to me. Awesome photo though.

 
Reply With Quote
 
David J. Littleboy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-22-2006
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> I'm fairly new to the technical aspects of photography, but doesn't
> stacking teleconverters degrade the image quality? It seems like it
> would to me. Awesome photo though.


My reading of Roger Clark's pages* on this is that a lens has an inherent
ability to resolve detail that is unchanged by teleconverters. So if your
lens outresolves your sensor (or film), you can stack TCs until the image
from the lens is enlarged to the point that it matches the sensor's
resolution.

*: http://www.clarkvision.com/index.html
(You'll have to dig through there, but there's so much good stuff there that
it's worth digging.)

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan


 
Reply With Quote
 
Annika1980
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-22-2006
>I'm fairly new to the technical aspects of photography, but doesn't
>stacking teleconverters degrade the image quality? It seems like it
>would to me. Awesome photo though.


Yes, it does degrade image quality a bit, but the alternative (getting
a lot closer) would cost millions.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Love love love imuaplease@gmail.com C++ 0 06-03-2009 02:53 AM
I love my Xeon, I hate my Xeon, I love my Xeon... wewa Windows 64bit 9 11-10-2005 06:39 PM
SELENOGRAPHERS LOVE THE 20D !!! Annika1980 Digital Photography 8 10-28-2004 11:49 PM
BRIDES LOVE THE 20D !!! Annika1980 Digital Photography 11 10-19-2004 12:46 PM
Win a love actually Love Pack MaG DVD Video 0 05-05-2004 04:48 PM



Advertisments