If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Shooting the moon
On Aug 1, 2018, RichA wrote
(in ): shooting the moon with a DSLR isn't idea, shutter shock, mirror slap are an issue, electronic shutters in mirrorless cameras and higher-end DSLR's are superior, using a telescope means a long focal length and any vibration impacts the image. You can reduce shock by delaying shutter action, mirror-lockup, but most important is using the self-timer to fire the shutter. Set it for 10 seconds, gives the telescope time to stop vibrating from human touch. If your mounting in cheap and sags from the weight of a camera (as opposed to they eyepiece) make sure the finderscope is aligned with the main telescope so you can bring the moon back into view of the sag pushes it out. Take lots of shots, or better, use the video mode of the camera and shoot video. There are programs like Registax free online that will take your video, align the best frames, reject the worst and produce the best shot possible. Also, shoot the moon at half phase when shadows are cast on it, revealing crater detail. Lastly, shoot the moon when it is as high above the horizon as possible and on nights when stars don't twinkle which indicates the atmosphere is steady. If you use a mirror telescope, give it 30 minutes to reach outside temperature so the mirrors aren't distorted. Well this was shot handheld with an X-T2 with the XF100-400mm OIS on, f/10, ISO200, 1/40. https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-5RNX5pv/0/a8adcdb4/O/i-5RNX5pv.jpg -- Regards, Savageduck |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Shooting the moon
In article ,
RichA wrote: shooting the moon with a DSLR isn't idea, shutter shock, mirror slap are an issue, no they aren't. electronic shutters in mirrorless cameras and higher-end DSLR's are superior, they're almost always mechanical. using a telescope means a long focal length and any vibration impacts the image. there are these things called tripods. You can reduce shock by delaying shutter action, mirror-lockup, but most important is using the self-timer to fire the shutter. Set it for 10 seconds, gives the telescope time to stop vibrating from human touch. what human touch? use a remote control (possibly also with remote viewing), and with 10 second exposures, mirror slap is not an issue whatsoever. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
25 days to Nikon throwing the towel as the defender of the DSLR against the onslaught of mirror-less.
On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 22:22:06 -0400, nospam
wrote: In article , RichA wrote: One reason I never liked using lower-end DSLRs. I tried a Nikon D5100 and a cheap kit lens and the moment the light dropped a bit, it hunted like blind hound. user error. Yes, pointing and half-pressing is so technically-daunting. and yet you ****ed it up somehow. a d5100 can focus in *very* low light (-1 ev, according to nikon's specs), so if the light only 'dropped a bit', there should be *no* issue whatsoever with focusing or hunting, at least as far as the camera goes. that leaves one other possibility. Maybe two? Pentax AF sucks in any light, but I've had better performance with some lenses than others. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
25 days to Nikon throwing the towel as the defender of the DSLR against the onslaught of mirror-less.
In article , Bill W
wrote: One reason I never liked using lower-end DSLRs. I tried a Nikon D5100 and a cheap kit lens and the moment the light dropped a bit, it hunted like blind hound. user error. Yes, pointing and half-pressing is so technically-daunting. and yet you ****ed it up somehow. a d5100 can focus in *very* low light (-1 ev, according to nikon's specs), so if the light only 'dropped a bit', there should be *no* issue whatsoever with focusing or hunting, at least as far as the camera goes. that leaves one other possibility. Maybe two? Pentax AF sucks in any light, but I've had better performance with some lenses than others. that's true, however, expecting super-fast focusing with a 'cheap kit lens', perhaps an 18-55mm f/4-5.6, with it at 55mm f/5.6, would definitely be user error. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
25 days to Nikon throwing the towel as the defender of the DSLR against the onslaught of mirror-less.
On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 23:13:13 -0400, nospam
wrote: In article , Bill W wrote: One reason I never liked using lower-end DSLRs. I tried a Nikon D5100 and a cheap kit lens and the moment the light dropped a bit, it hunted like blind hound. user error. Yes, pointing and half-pressing is so technically-daunting. and yet you ****ed it up somehow. a d5100 can focus in *very* low light (-1 ev, according to nikon's specs), so if the light only 'dropped a bit', there should be *no* issue whatsoever with focusing or hunting, at least as far as the camera goes. that leaves one other possibility. Maybe two? Pentax AF sucks in any light, but I've had better performance with some lenses than others. that's true, however, expecting super-fast focusing with a 'cheap kit lens', perhaps an 18-55mm f/4-5.6, with it at 55mm f/5.6, would definitely be user error. Yep, my problems were with Pentax kit lenses. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
25 days to Nikon throwing the towel as the defender of the DSLRagainst the onslaught of mirror-less.
On 2018-08-02 05:13, nospam wrote:
In article , Bill W wrote: One reason I never liked using lower-end DSLRs. I tried a Nikon D5100 and a cheap kit lens and the moment the light dropped a bit, it hunted like blind hound. user error. Yes, pointing and half-pressing is so technically-daunting. and yet you ****ed it up somehow. a d5100 can focus in *very* low light (-1 ev, according to nikon's specs), so if the light only 'dropped a bit', there should be *no* issue whatsoever with focusing or hunting, at least as far as the camera goes. that leaves one other possibility. Maybe two? Pentax AF sucks in any light, but I've had better performance with some lenses than others. that's true, however, expecting super-fast focusing with a 'cheap kit lens', perhaps an 18-55mm f/4-5.6, with it at 55mm f/5.6, would definitely be user error. No, it would be seller error. -- Cheers, Carlos. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
25 days to Nikon throwing the towel as the defender of the DSLRagainst the onslaught of mirror-less.
On 2018-08-01 15:00, Whisky-dave wrote:
On Wednesday, 1 August 2018 11:12:10 UTC+1, Carlos E.R. wrote: On 2018-08-01 11:34, Whisky-dave wrote: On Monday, 30 July 2018 13:56:09 UTC+1, Carlos E.R. wrote: On 2018-07-29 22:01, nospam wrote: In article , Carlos E.R. wrote: so that could be a definite improvement. I do astrophotography, and finding the red moon on the eyepiece the other day was impossible. If you do astrophotography then yuo yuo really should understand how old you're photos really are, even if taking pictures of the moon you are seeing it as it was 1.25 seconds ago. And No amount of clever electronics in a camera will change that. LOL. That has no importance at all. X-) Really ? Really. Why should I care that the moon I see is one second "old"? And that the light from stars are years old? for example, try using a digital viewfinder in extremely low light. either it blacks out because the light level is too low, the frame rate drops to compensate or it amplifies what it can 'see' and the viewfinder is too noisy to be of much use. with an optical viewfinder, your eyes adjust. As I wrote above, I was in exact this situation and my experience was different. All humans and most creatures on the planet have eyes that adjust to differnt light levels, if you're in the dark for a significant amount of time you're eyes can become very senative to light. Yes, but not enough. But not enough for what exactly ? Well, my eyes could barely see the red moon in the twilight. And later in the night the red moon was difficult to find. There is no quick button to disable it. I thought most camera you could blank the display, you just have to know how to do it. In a menu. So there is a button but you don't think of it as a quick button or quick to access ? No, it is an option in one of the menus. Several keypresses. -- Cheers, Carlos. |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
25 days to Nikon throwing the towel as the defender of the DSLR against the onslaught of mirror-less.
In article , Carlos E.R.
wrote: One reason I never liked using lower-end DSLRs. I tried a Nikon D5100 and a cheap kit lens and the moment the light dropped a bit, it hunted like blind hound. user error. Yes, pointing and half-pressing is so technically-daunting. and yet you ****ed it up somehow. a d5100 can focus in *very* low light (-1 ev, according to nikon's specs), so if the light only 'dropped a bit', there should be *no* issue whatsoever with focusing or hunting, at least as far as the camera goes. that leaves one other possibility. Maybe two? Pentax AF sucks in any light, but I've had better performance with some lenses than others. that's true, however, expecting super-fast focusing with a 'cheap kit lens', perhaps an 18-55mm f/4-5.6, with it at 55mm f/5.6, would definitely be user error. No, it would be seller error. nobody is selling anything, so no. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
25 days to Nikon throwing the towel as the defender of the DSLRagainst the onslaught of mirror-less.
On 7/30/2018 5:10 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 30, 2018, PeterN wrote (in article ): On 7/29/2018 5:32 PM, Savageduck wrote: On Jul 29, 2018, nospam wrote (in ) : for example, try using a digital viewfinder in extremely low light. either it blacks out because the light level is too low, the frame rate drops to compensate or it amplifies what it can 'see' and the viewfinder is too noisy to be of much use. with an optical viewfinder, your eyes adjust. Actually you should try that experiment with a good quality Sony, or Fujifim MILC, you might be surprised at what you can see. With both my X-T2, and X-E3 with a fast lens such as the 16mm f/1.4, 35mm f/1.4, or 56mm f/1.2, and the EVF/LCD set via menu to *Preview PIC. Effect* ON. You will find that in extremely low light, light so low that one would think that capturing an image was impossible. The result through the EVF, or on the LCD is such that you would think that you had a night vision scope. Any adjustments to the EV comp dial are immediately visible, as are any adjustments to shutter speed, aperture, or ISO. All very much WYSIWYG. It is possible to see your subject in the darkness, and make a useful capture at an ISO as low as ISO 1600. Use ISO 6400, or higher, and the scene in the EVF/LCD is even brighter. As I said, almost like a night vision scope, your eyeball cannot do that with an OVF. If you use manual focus, focus peaking makes things simple, and accurate even in impossibly low light, while you are not seeing too much in the darkness through your optical viewfinder. No matter how much your eyes might adjust when looking through an OVF all you will see is darkness. The camera might be capable of capturing that image, but it will not be easy. Certainly in good light for action sport photography the DSLR is still the tool of choice. However, the MILCs are rapidly narrowing that performance gap, and for some action sport photographers shooting Sony, or Fujifilm, that gap has already closed. The other big advantage that the Canon/Nikon DSLRs have is the inventory of legacy long glass, and even now, Sony and Fujifilm are narrowing that gap. ...and my D300S hasn’t been used for 18 months when I can capture sport images such as this with my X-T2. https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-w8DxFTk/0/7707b86c/O/i-w8DxFTk.jpg Not exactly an example of low light. Aah! you noticed. It was intended to demonstrate that an MILC is capable of being useful for sport photography. As is my D800, although it was not designed for sports photography. https://www.dropbox.com/s/qi83igj6a45hasn/Westminster%20Agility%20Trial%20beg.jpg?dl=0 -- PeterN |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Olympus hasn't thrown in the DSLR towel yet it would seem | David J Taylor[_16_] | Digital SLR Cameras | 2 | January 28th 12 08:11 PM |
The sale of super belt. Hat towel brand products | jim | Digital Photography | 0 | November 21st 07 03:31 PM |
Olympus throws in the towel....on quality | Rich | Digital Photography | 5 | January 28th 07 12:23 AM |
Lexar throws in the towel | RichA | Digital SLR Cameras | 10 | June 11th 05 10:47 PM |
store every photo ever without throwing them away! | billybeer | In The Darkroom | 3 | December 4th 04 07:24 PM |