[w2ck]

Guys, thank you so much. I appreciate it very much.

This shot was something of a record for me. It involved stacking nearly 4000 frames!

Hi,

Wow. I knew that took some real work, but hadn't thought it was that much! 4000 frames!

I am still into the old fashioned Aim At What Is There and Shoot mode.

Stan

[Pablo Villegas]

Guys, thank you so much. I appreciate it very much.

This shot was something of a record for me. It involved stacking nearly 4000 frames!

---------- Post added 08-25-20 at 08:34 AM ----------




That's a lovely shot - not just technically, but great mood too!

WOW! 4000 frames? My 645D would only last a few shoots.

[texandrews]

Narrabeen Lagoon, in the north of Sydney - taken with a tripod set up on a rotting tree that extended into the water while being harassed by a pelican!

645Z with 25mm DA
[/url][/IMG]

Being harrassed by large birds is no joke, so kudos for getting the shot!

[RICHARD L.]

Maybe the Pelican says "I was harassed by this camera-toting human ..." lol !

Regards

[Ed Hurst]

Hi,

Wow. I knew that took some real work, but hadn't thought it was that much! 4000 frames!

I am still into the old fashioned Aim At What Is There and Shoot mode.

Stan

WOW! 4000 frames? My 645D would only last a few shoots.

Thanks, chaps. This was a record for me. It's not unusual, when I do these urban star trails in bright places, to do 2000-3000 frames. But approaching 4000 is getting silly, even for a madman like me. What I have found is that when shooting towards the point of rotation like this, I have to shoot for longer because the circle is of small radius and doesn't look impressive at all if shot for a short time. Combined with high levels of ambient light (while retaining relatively high ISO and wide-ish aperture), it all adds up to needing many frames.

Thankfully, the actual editing wasn't too arduous, despite the huge number of frames. It's the masking off of extraneous objects (mainly 'planes) in individual frames that takes the time; due to Covid-19, there are far fewer 'planes in the sky right now, so it actually wasn't too bad. The other thing that can be an issue is birds/bats flying around; they tend to be attracted to lights because that's where the insects are, and that leaves messy trails that similarly need to be masked off; but it's winter here and cold (by local standards), so insects are not much in evidence. So it was a pretty easy edit this time. I was shooting across a road, and an occasional high-sided vehicle did come by, but I had my Gitzo extended to about 8 feet off the ground, so was able to see over most passing vehicles (it's a quiet, suburban road, so there were not too many lorries going past).

All-in-all, insane, but much less so than many shoots using far fewer frames because these were so clean (and it's the editing that kills you, not the shooting).


---------- Post added 08-26-20 at 09:19 AM ----------

Hi Ed

Nice shot
See you can't keep the "birds" away with a camera like that..


Dave

Being harrassed by large birds is no joke, so kudos for getting the shot!

Maybe the Pelican says "I was harassed by this camera-toting human ..." lol !

Regards

Yes, although it was a bit hairy, I was very aware that I was the intruder - so did my best to act calmly. But it did make doing a two-row pano (with bracketing) rather difficult... Balancing on a tree trunk on the edge of water with expensive camera gear, while a half-metre beak prodded in my direction wasn't the easiest moment, I must confess! Still, we all do things to "get the shot" that we wouldn't normally dare do, right? Maybe we should start a thread about that... ;-)

[cobbu2]

Wraith Falls, Yellowstone National Park.

Old Honeywell P6x7, SMC Pentax 6x7 55mm f/4
Kodak 320TXP (220), HC-110B

[TDvN57]

Cool capture! You've got the Z and 120 performing at an awesome level.
Thanks for sharing,
barondla

Much appreciated. Thank you.

[w2ck]

Thanks, chaps. This was a record for me. It's not unusual, when I do these urban star trails in bright places, to do 2000-3000 frames. But approaching 4000 is getting silly, even for a madman like me. What I have found is that when shooting towards the point of rotation like this, I have to shoot for longer because the circle is of small radius and doesn't look impressive at all if shot for a short time. Combined with high levels of ambient light (while retaining relatively high ISO and wide-ish aperture), it all adds up to needing many frames.

Thankfully, the actual editing wasn't too arduous, despite the huge number of frames. It's the masking off of extraneous objects (mainly 'planes) in individual frames that takes the time; due to Covid-19, there are far fewer 'planes in the sky right now, so it actually wasn't too bad. The other thing that can be an issue is birds/bats flying around; they tend to be attracted to lights because that's where the insects are, and that leaves messy trails that similarly need to be masked off; but it's winter here and cold (by local standards), so insects are not much in evidence. So it was a pretty easy edit this time. I was shooting across a road, and an occasional high-sided vehicle did come by, but I had my Gitzo extended to about 8 feet off the ground, so was able to see over most passing vehicles (it's a quiet, suburban road, so there were not too many lorries going past).

All-in-all, insane, but much less so than many shoots using far fewer frames because these were so clean (and it's the editing that kills you, not the shooting).


---------- Post added 08-26-20 at 09:19 AM ----------








Yes, although it was a bit hairy, I was very aware that I was the intruder - so did my best to act calmly. But it did make doing a two-row pano (with bracketing) rather difficult... Balancing on a tree trunk on the edge of water with expensive camera gear, while a half-metre beak prodded in my direction wasn't the easiest moment, I must confess! Still, we all do things to "get the shot" that we wouldn't normally dare do, right? Maybe we should start a thread about that... ;-)

Hi,

Yes. Maybe we do need a What Ya Gotta Do To Get The Shot thread...

I'd have a blast reading that one.

All I can think of right now is the shot I didn't get. Time - Mid 1980s. Place - Watkins Glen International Raceway. Sports car event. Mid back straight. Nikon FA with a brandy new 300/4.5 ED lens. Lug nut came flying - right into the front element. No more front element, but I had a shiner. No shot. Well, not that one could make out minus a front element and such.....

Stan

[barondla]

Hi,

Yes. Maybe we do need a What Ya Gotta Do To Get The Shot thread...

I'd have a blast reading that one.

All I can think of right now is the shot I didn't get. Time - Mid 1980s. Place - Watkins Glen International Raceway. Sports car event. Mid back straight. Nikon FA with a brandy new 300/4.5 ED lens. Lug nut came flying - right into the front element. No more front element, but I had a shiner. No shot. Well, not that one could make out minus a front element and such.....

Stan

You are lucky to be alive!

Thanks,
barondla

[w2ck]

Hi,

That wasn't so bad. I drove myself from 84 thru 05. Lots more close calls there. Still, not as close as when I was a volunteer firefighter and medic from 1977 thru 1997. It was pretty catastrophic to my poor lens, though!

Stan

---------- Post added 08-27-20 at 06:18 AM ----------

Hi,

So, in other news this morning, we have a new baby calf here on the farm. I wanted to share a pic, and so took the 645D up the hill. But, she has the baby under the trees in the wooded patch. Can't hardly see it. I think it just had breakfast as it was laying down. Maybe later.

Honestly, I think this is more of a job for the Nikon Df and the 150-600 zoom and a monopod than for the 645D and the 300/4 plus 1.4x TC on a tripod. Y'all wouldn't be happy with a Nikon 135 format shot, though.

Stan

[barondla]

Hi,

That wasn't so bad. I drove myself from 84 thru 05. Lots more close calls there. Still, not as close as when I was a volunteer firefighter and medic from 1977 thru 1997. It was pretty catastrophic to my poor lens, though!

Stan

---------- Post added 08-27-20 at 06:18 AM ----------

Hi,

So, in other news this morning, we have a new baby calf here on the farm. I wanted to share a pic, and so took the 645D up the hill. But, she has the baby under the trees in the wooded patch. Can't hardly see it. I think it just had breakfast as it was laying down. Maybe later.

Honestly, I think this is more of a job for the Nikon Df and the 150-600 zoom and a monopod than for the 645D and the 300/4 plus 1.4x TC on a tripod. Y'all wouldn't be happy with a Nikon 135 format shot, though.

Stan

Congrats on the new calf. Why not compromise and put the 645D and 300 with 1.4X on the monopod?😀 You can also crop quite a bit before reaching DF resolution.

Thanks,
barondla

[w2ck]

Hi,

I had thought about that, too. My thinking is that the Df can boost the ISO more cleanly than the 645D. Actually, I think it does so better than any other camera out there. And, the little guy is in the shade.

Momma laid down late yesterday afternoon and this morning we have a new life in the pasture. I still don't know if it is a boy or a girl as I have yet to see it standing where I can get a good look at the belly. These are beef cattle, so they don't let one get all up close and personal the way dairy cows do.

But, in the end, more so to see how it works out, I stuck the 645D and the A* 300/4 and th e 1.4x TC onto the monopod and Gatored over to the pasture and caught the little guy.

The full shot:


The crop:


Cute little bugger!

My wife will be out there for weeks now with her Nikon D3500 and snap off about ten bazillion shots of it. She loves to shoot them as they grow up. :P

We don't have a name for it yet. My wife will take care of that, too.

Me, I don't name critters destined to become food.

Stan

[RICHARD L.]

Being the sucker that I am, I saw an ad on eBay about this dirt-cheap lens that I couldn't pass. This zoom lens has the worst score of all 645 lenses at 7.00, so I felt like Don Quijote having to right a wrong.

I set-up my 645Z on a heavy Manfrotto tripod, closed the diaphragm at f/16 and took pictures at 55 mm, 80 mm and 110 mm focal lengths. I don't see anything wrong with these pictures, really. And I think a score of 7.00 is kind of unfair.

When used correctly, this can be a very useful tool, like the rest of the 645 lenses. Maybe not a 10 but close to 9.00 or upper 8.00s.

55 mm FL @ f/16

80 mm FL @ f/16

110 mm FL @ f/16

[glinda]

These are some seriously good images.

Having recently posted the pictures above of Mona Vale ocean pool, thought it might be a good moment to post some older shots of them.

The story of Sydney's ocean pools is an amazing one. They stand as monuments to our history and a very current expression of the country's obsession with exercise and the ocean. At various times, there have been attempts made to get rid of them, or to stop paying for maintenance - but they're such a beloved and important part of the country's way of life that anyone taking such a course is taking their political life in their hands.

The pool at Mona Vale (featured in the shots I posted above) - in Sydney's Northern Beaches - was originally built in the 1930s by unemployed men. Thinking about what that must have meant at the time is very moving - perhaps redolent of the current Covid situation, with many people jobless and full of uncertainty. The pool's exposed position has led it to need rebuilding more than once since, but there it still stands, on the edge of the Pacific - often full of people of all ages, even at 4am, often during wild weather. It certainly provides a bracing swim!

I really feel, when I see these pools in stormy weather, that something about Australia's relationship with the elements is being expressed in a bold and beautiful way. My pictures are inspired by this, but really don't come close to doing it justice :-)

(Hope this isn't too many shots to post at once - apologies if it is...)


North Narrabeen pool
[/url][/IMG]
[/url][/IMG]
[/url][/IMG]
[/url][/IMG]
[/url][/IMG]
[/url][/IMG]
[/url][/IMG]


Collaroy pool
[/url][/IMG]
[/url][/IMG]


North Curl Curl pool
[/url][/IMG]
[/url][/IMG]


South Curl Curl pool

[/url][/IMG]


Mona Vale pool again
[/url][/IMG]
[/url][/IMG]


Dee Why pool
[/url][/IMG]
[/url][/IMG]
[/url][/IMG]


Bronte pool
[/url][/IMG]
[/url][/IMG]


Fairy Bower pool
[/url][/IMG]

[RICHARD L.]

Resolution is ruined by diffraction but sometimes a "dreamy image" is what you are after.