Turnstone

[Bill53]

Re: Turnstone

Superb shot Stan.

Bill.

[antoeknee]

Re: Turnstone

Thanks Riggers and Wayne



the dof with a long lens is quite narrow therefor it is better to shoot at a smaller aperture to ensure front to back sharpness, most lens also perform better closed down a little which is why i prefer to shoot at f 7.1 or f8 if the light is good enough. Come the winter though and low light Then I will open the aperture to keep the shutter speed up without going to too high an ISO. With the 300f4 and converter that means f 5.6 or if i am using the converter with my 70-200 f2.8, then f4. Unless i have no other choice, if i were using just the 70-200 i would try and avoid f 2.8 if i could as the dof would be much too narrow

Stan

Your mention of f7.1 brings something to mind. Might just be my use of film cameras but always seem to choose whole stops i.e. f8, f11, etc.

[Stan]

Re: Turnstone

Your mention of f7.1 brings something to mind. Might just be my use of film cameras but always seem to choose whole stops i.e. f8, f11, etc.

I dont think there are any issues with in between stops as far as apertures are concerned as everythin happens within the lens itself but with ISO someone did some testing a while ago and found the inbetween ISO's were more noisy then full stops so with that I stick to full stops

Stan

[the black fox]

Re: Turnstone

nice shot stan,though i think its slightly blown on the whites ,and could have been pulled back in p/p .interesting thread though as it goes with my findings with canon you definitely need to set your exp comp to + 1/3 to get it near "right" yet with the older nikons i used it was always -1/3 .
and just reading the through the digital field guide i got free with my 7d at the back of the book it advocates exposing well into the right + side as thats recoverable in p/p whereas recovering the blacks just leads to noise . got to agree and there is a noticeable difference so far in the RAW files from canon to nikons its taking some getting used to .

[Riggers]

Re: Turnstone

Thanks again for the advice. I had no idea about the in between stops for ISO, which is interesting as I often find myself using 1250 when 800 is not enough.

[antoeknee]

Re: Turnstone

I dont think there are any issues with in between stops as far as apertures are concerned as everythin happens within the lens itself but with ISO someone did some testing a while ago and found the inbetween ISO's were more noisy then full stops so with that I stick to full stops

Stan

As you say no issues with in between stops its just my familiarity with full stops. Just can't get out of the habit! Must admit old habits die hard and still select iso of 100, 200, 400, etc.

[Stan]

Re: Turnstone

nice shot stan,though i think its slightly blown on the whites ,and could have been pulled back in p/p

if you look at the histogram the exposure is almost spot on and no blown highlights, there are however some areas of white that have little detail, so that may be what makes you think they are blown

As you say no issues with in between stops its just my familiarity with full stops. Just can't get out of the habit! Must admit old habits die hard and still select iso of 100, 200, 400, etc.

As I said i too like to stick with the full stops, although out today i shot a couple at ISO 1000 (slapped wrists )

Stan

[mikep]

Re: Turnstone

Interesting thread, and a very good shot Stan.

I think the whites are OK, and not blown. White feathers in sunlight sometimes appear blown, but they just aren't showing too much definition... it's probably what your eye saw on the day anyway!

Very nice, well done.

Mike.

[Stan]

Re: Turnstone

White feathers in sunlight sometimes appear blown, but they just aren't showing too much definition...

thats right Mike - some of the feathers of the egret look the same but are not blown

Stan