20D: IN THE DARK !!!

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Annika1980, Sep 23, 2004.

  1. Annika1980

    Annika1980 Guest

    Annika1980, Sep 23, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Annika1980

    Annika1980 Guest

    Annika1980, Sep 23, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Annika1980

    jbruceb Guest

    Re: IN THE DARK !!!

    Absolutely sensational! Makes me want to get the same camera. Nice moon
    shot too.


    "Annika1980" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > http://www.pbase.com/image/34152731
    >
    > This is a long (almost 9 minutes) exposure that I took last night using
    > only
    > the light from the moon.
    >
    >
     
    jbruceb, Sep 23, 2004
    #3
  4. Annika1980

    adm Guest

    "Annika1980" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Here's my lighting setup for that pic:
    > http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/34152890
    >


    Nice moon shot - the EXIF data says 400mm - is that correct or did you also
    have a TC attached ?
    >
     
    adm, Sep 23, 2004
    #4
  5. Annika1980

    Paul J Gans Guest

    Annika1980 <> wrote:
    >Here's my lighting setup for that pic:
    >http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/34152890


    I'm impressed (by both shots, actually). But how did you
    get the 20D to focus on the moon? There's usually not
    enough contrast for the autofocus to work, at least in
    my experience.

    ---- Paul J. Gans
     
    Paul J Gans, Sep 23, 2004
    #5
  6. Annika1980

    Alan Browne Guest

    Paul J Gans wrote:

    > Annika1980 <> wrote:
    >
    >>Here's my lighting setup for that pic:
    >>http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/34152890

    >
    >
    > I'm impressed (by both shots, actually). But how did you
    > get the 20D to focus on the moon? There's usually not
    > enough contrast for the autofocus to work, at least in
    > my experience.


    Oy! Just because there is an autofocus doesn't mean you _must_ use it. (I
    wouldn't be surprised if Bret says this was manually focused).

    If the moon is centered on an AF area, in any case, my AF works (Maxxum 9) ...
    but again this is a subject I wouldn't have the AF activated on.

    Cheers,
    Alan

    --
    -- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource:
    -- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
    -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--
     
    Alan Browne, Sep 23, 2004
    #6
  7. Annika1980

    Eric Gill Guest

    Paul J Gans <> wrote in news:civams$bbp$:

    > Annika1980 <> wrote:
    >>Here's my lighting setup for that pic:
    >>http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/34152890


    Hey, Paul!

    > I'm impressed (by both shots, actually). But how did you
    > get the 20D to focus on the moon? There's usually not
    > enough contrast for the autofocus to work, at least in
    > my experience.


    I've not had any problem, which is sort of surprising, since the only long
    lens I've got right now is the rather lame Canon 75-300 IS. Point and shoot
    (tripod not optional).

    http://www.nightskycreative.com/Luna-001.jpg

    In fact, that was with the 10D body, since I haven't had the chance to try
    the 20D on the sky yet.
     
    Eric Gill, Sep 24, 2004
    #7
  8. Annika1980

    Paul J Gans Guest

    Alan Browne <> wrote:
    >Paul J Gans wrote:


    >> Annika1980 <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>Here's my lighting setup for that pic:
    >>>http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/34152890

    >>
    >>
    >> I'm impressed (by both shots, actually). But how did you
    >> get the 20D to focus on the moon? There's usually not
    >> enough contrast for the autofocus to work, at least in
    >> my experience.


    >Oy! Just because there is an autofocus doesn't mean you _must_ use it. (I
    >wouldn't be surprised if Bret says this was manually focused).


    >If the moon is centered on an AF area, in any case, my AF works (Maxxum 9) ...
    >but again this is a subject I wouldn't have the AF activated on.


    Thanks. But as I've said in previous posts in another thread,
    I have a dog of a time manually focussing my 300D. Running
    the lens to the limit doesn't work either. Infinite focus seems to
    be just short of that.

    A decent focussing screen seems to me to be the major thing
    missing in most dSLR's.

    ---- Paul J. Gans
     
    Paul J Gans, Sep 24, 2004
    #8
  9. Annika1980

    Annika1980 Guest

    >From: Alan Browne

    >Oy! Just because there is an autofocus doesn't mean you _must_ use it. (I
    >wouldn't be surprised if Bret says this was manually focused).
    >


    This was manually focused since I was using the 2x TC. Without the TC the 20D
    had no probs focusing on the moon.
     
    Annika1980, Sep 24, 2004
    #9
  10. Annika1980 wrote:
    > http://www.pbase.com/image/34152731
    >
    > This is a long (almost 9 minutes) exposure that I took last night using only
    > the light from the moon.


    Amazing Bret - I didn't realize you could expose digital for that long!

    Gary Eickmeier
     
    Gary Eickmeier, Sep 24, 2004
    #10
  11. Re: IN THE DARK !!!

    "Annika1980" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > http://www.pbase.com/image/34152731
    >
    > This is a long (almost 9 minutes) exposure that I took last night using

    only
    > the light from the moon.


    Nice shot. It must have been a very calm night - no breeze at all to cause
    motion in the flowers. Nice moon shot too.
     
    Peter A. Stavrakoglou, Sep 24, 2004
    #11
  12. Annika1980

    Mark M Guest

    "Paul J Gans" <> wrote in message
    news:civuc8$j5j$...
    > Alan Browne <> wrote:
    > >Paul J Gans wrote:

    >
    > >> Annika1980 <> wrote:
    > >>
    > >>>Here's my lighting setup for that pic:
    > >>>http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/34152890
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> I'm impressed (by both shots, actually). But how did you
    > >> get the 20D to focus on the moon? There's usually not
    > >> enough contrast for the autofocus to work, at least in
    > >> my experience.

    >
    > >Oy! Just because there is an autofocus doesn't mean you _must_ use it.

    (I
    > >wouldn't be surprised if Bret says this was manually focused).

    >
    > >If the moon is centered on an AF area, in any case, my AF works (Maxxum

    9) ...
    > >but again this is a subject I wouldn't have the AF activated on.

    >
    > Thanks. But as I've said in previous posts in another thread,
    > I have a dog of a time manually focussing my 300D. Running
    > the lens to the limit doesn't work either. Infinite focus seems to
    > be just short of that.


    Actually, "infinity focus" goes just *beyond* that--if you mean that you're
    just cranking it out as far as it will allow. They give some extra room
    there for fluctuations in temperature which can effect focus.

    If you really can't autofocus on the moon, there may be something wrong with
    your camera. This should not be a problem. You should at least be able to
    focus ONCE on the edge of the moon (where light meats the dark edge). -Then
    simply switch your len to manual focus and leave it there for the rest of
    your shots.
     
    Mark M, Sep 24, 2004
    #12
  13. Annika1980

    Annika1980 Guest

    >From: Gary Eickmeier

    >http://www.pbase.com/image/34152731


    >Amazing Bret - I didn't realize you could expose digital for that long!


    Sure! All you need is a locking remote shutter cable. I don't know what the
    longest practical exposure time you could make is, and I'm sure I don't have
    the patience to find out.
     
    Annika1980, Sep 24, 2004
    #13
  14. In article <uvL4d.39197$>,
    Gary Eickmeier <> wrote:

    > Annika1980 wrote:
    > > http://www.pbase.com/image/34152731
    > >
    > > This is a long (almost 9 minutes) exposure that I took last night using only
    > > the light from the moon.

    >
    > Amazing Bret - I didn't realize you could expose digital for that long!
    >
    > Gary Eickmeier


    Some CMOS sensor cameras can take long exposures without too many leaky
    pixels. CCD sensors overheat without custom cooling equipment.

    I've taken very long exposures of the night sky so the stars appear to
    spin. Another experiment was to photograph rooms of my apartment
    illuminated by only the electronic displays of appliances.
     
    Kevin McMurtrie, Sep 24, 2004
    #14
  15. Annika1980

    Bob Williams Guest

    Annika1980 wrote:
    > http://www.pbase.com/image/34152731
    >
    > This is a long (almost 9 minutes) exposure that I took last night using only
    > the light from the moon.
    >
    >


    Not bad! Not bad at all.
    How well does the color match the original flower?
    Is there some kind of color shift at such long exposures?
    Bob Williams
     
    Bob Williams, Sep 24, 2004
    #15
  16. Paul J Gans wrote:
    []
    > A decent focussing screen seems to me to be the major thing
    > missing in most dSLR's.
    >
    > ---- Paul J. Gans


    I thought that was supposed to be one of their major advantages over
    point-and-shoot?

    I was impressed with the Minolta A2's ability to superimpose a variety of
    graticules on the view through the EVF. Quite reminded me of the
    interchangeable screens on my Nikon F3!

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Sep 24, 2004
    #16
  17. Annika1980

    Alan Browne Guest

    Kevin McMurtrie wrote:

    >
    > Some CMOS sensor cameras can take long exposures without too many leaky
    > pixels. CCD sensors overheat without custom cooling equipment.


    Will the overheating permanently damage the CCD or just add noise to the image?

    How long does it take to reach a damaging heat level?

    --
    -- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource:
    -- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
    -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--
     
    Alan Browne, Sep 25, 2004
    #17
  18. Annika1980

    Paul J Gans Guest

    Annika1980 <> wrote:
    >>From: Alan Browne


    >>Oy! Just because there is an autofocus doesn't mean you _must_ use it. (I
    >>wouldn't be surprised if Bret says this was manually focused).
    >>


    >This was manually focused since I was using the 2x TC. Without the TC the 20D
    >had no probs focusing on the moon.


    Thanks. I'll have to give it a try.

    ---- Paul J. Gans
     
    Paul J Gans, Sep 26, 2004
    #18
  19. Annika1980

    Paul J Gans Guest

    Mark M <> wrote:

    >"Paul J Gans" <> wrote in message
    >news:civuc8$j5j$...
    >> Alan Browne <> wrote:
    >> >Paul J Gans wrote:

    >>
    >> >> Annika1980 <> wrote:
    >> >>
    >> >>>Here's my lighting setup for that pic:
    >> >>>http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/34152890
    >> >>
    >> >>
    >> >> I'm impressed (by both shots, actually). But how did you
    >> >> get the 20D to focus on the moon? There's usually not
    >> >> enough contrast for the autofocus to work, at least in
    >> >> my experience.

    >>
    >> >Oy! Just because there is an autofocus doesn't mean you _must_ use it.

    >(I
    >> >wouldn't be surprised if Bret says this was manually focused).

    >>
    >> >If the moon is centered on an AF area, in any case, my AF works (Maxxum

    >9) ...
    >> >but again this is a subject I wouldn't have the AF activated on.

    >>
    >> Thanks. But as I've said in previous posts in another thread,
    >> I have a dog of a time manually focussing my 300D. Running
    >> the lens to the limit doesn't work either. Infinite focus seems to
    >> be just short of that.


    >Actually, "infinity focus" goes just *beyond* that--if you mean that you're
    >just cranking it out as far as it will allow. They give some extra room
    >there for fluctuations in temperature which can effect focus.


    >If you really can't autofocus on the moon, there may be something wrong with
    >your camera. This should not be a problem. You should at least be able to
    >focus ONCE on the edge of the moon (where light meats the dark edge). -Then
    >simply switch your len to manual focus and leave it there for the rest of
    >your shots.


    I've not tried it. I've had trouble focussing at infinity manually
    with the 300D. The focus screen isn't really set up for it.

    N.B. I live in New York City and as far as I can tell there are
    NO stars in the sky and the moon, on the rare occasions when we
    see it, is blurred by pollution haze. So I'm waiting until I
    can get out of town...

    ---Paul J. Gans
     
    Paul J Gans, Sep 26, 2004
    #19
  20. Annika1980

    Gadgets Guest

    > N.B. I live in New York City and as far as I can tell there are NO stars
    > in the sky and the moon


    The home of Kodak and so limiting, must be frustrating...

    So I guess shots like these from my front doorstep annoy you then! :)
    http://jaswebpics.com/moon.jpg

    D70 300 f4 with 2x, cropped but not resampled, shot as jpg.
    Without the 2x, the D70 had troubles with AF, but MF is easy to judge with a
    nice sharp screen, just awkward when you're pointing up and harder than the
    larger viewpoint of a 35mm...

    Cheers, Jason (remove ... to reply)
    Video & Gaming: http://gadgetaus.com
     
    Gadgets, Sep 26, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Robert

    Dark 20D picture

    Robert, Oct 5, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    286
    Joseph Meehan
    Oct 5, 2004
  2. A

    20D, 17-85IS Lens, Dark Corners Of Photo

    A, Dec 18, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    17
    Views:
    549
    Chuck
    Jan 18, 2005
  3. Tod
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    534
    measekite
    Mar 2, 2005
  4. Marge

    Dark Pictures-Canon 20D

    Marge, May 6, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    498
    Zippy
    May 13, 2005
  5. Joseph Meehan

    Dark Pictures-Canon 20D

    Joseph Meehan, May 6, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    319
    Joseph Meehan
    May 6, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page