SELENOGRAPHERS LOVE THE 20D !!!

"Annika1980" wrote in message
oups.com...
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.

Eric Miller

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.

"Annika1980" wrote in message
oups.com...
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.


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?

Eric Miller

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.

"Annika1980" wrote in message
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

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.

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

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

"Annika1980" wrote in message
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

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.