Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
3,875 replies · 237K views
pinball1970
Gold Member
2025 Award
- 3,852
- 6,184
It was a religious march, I had not heard of it before. I have a few flag ones but they are not as picturesque as the horses!berkeman said:
pinball1970
Gold Member
2025 Award
- 3,852
- 6,184
Nice mural of Geoff Hurst here too.
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
- 3,446
- 3,696
Here's a few pics from about a week and a half ago in downtown San Diego.
Figure 1.
Figure 2.
Figure 3.
Figure 4.
Figure 5.
Figure 6.
Figure 7.
Figure 8
Figure 9.
Figure 10.
Figure 1.
Figure 2.
Figure 3.
Figure 4.
Figure 5.
Figure 6.
Figure 7.
Figure 8
Figure 9.
Figure 10.
- 7,809
- 4,128
I got to spend a sunny afternoon practicing macro (55mm MicroNikkor) and tilt-shift photography (Vivitar 135/3.5), both are lenses I inherited, but this is the first time (for me) using a 135mm lens.
Some macro shots, all @ f/11, 1/1600s, auto ISO, images cropped as I see fit:
Hairy eyeballs are nightmare fuel (for me)...
One image showed a weird artifact- I think the bee took to flight just as the shutter operated, and it looks like a stroboscopic effect on the wings:
Now for the 135mm. There's a lot I like about this lens- it's small, well-made, and has a slightly longer 'reach' compared to my 105mm lens. But it's also slow. In sunlight, that's not a problem- stop down to f/8 and:
But in shade, the slowness is a problem:
For tilt-shift, here's a useful equation: tan(θ)= M * tan(φ). θ is the tilt angle of the lens, M the magnification of the lens, and φ is the angle between the object plane and sensor plane. For 'normal' photography, M is very small. M is not angular magnification but linear magnification: image size divided by object size. I estimated M ranges from 0.005 (15mm focal length) to 0.04 (400mm focal length); obviously these numbers depend on the object distance, the main point is that unless I am doing macro photography (M = 1-ish), the required lens tilt is almost always less than a couple of degrees- even when φ is close to 90 degrees. So.... here's the starting image:
The near objects are close to near focus point (about 5 feet), φ is about 80 degrees, and this was shooting wide-open f/3.5. If I wanted all of the flowers in focus, I would have to stop the lens down to something like f/128, which is 1) not possible since the lens only stops down to f/22 and 2) diffraction from that aperture would dominate the image, meaning everything would be blurry. However, by tilting the lens (in this case, θ was about 8 degrees) and stopping down to f/5.6 gives this:
Not bad! Now, full disclosure- I'm still a n00b with this method, but that second image took almost 20 minutes to compose... a small crowd actually gathered to watch, probably wondering what I was so intently trying to photograph. Like I've said before, tilt-shift is about the opposite of point-n-shoot....
Post-script: when I got home I needed to clean the sensor from all the lens change-outs. I have realized another advantage of mirrorless cameras- cleaning the sensor is trivial because 1) the flange distance is basically zero, so I don't have to reach down into the camera body to access the sensor, and 2) there's no physical object covering the sensor, so I can clean the sensor when the camera is off and also not worry about wrecking the shutter leaves by accidentally contacting them.
Some macro shots, all @ f/11, 1/1600s, auto ISO, images cropped as I see fit:
Hairy eyeballs are nightmare fuel (for me)...
One image showed a weird artifact- I think the bee took to flight just as the shutter operated, and it looks like a stroboscopic effect on the wings:
Now for the 135mm. There's a lot I like about this lens- it's small, well-made, and has a slightly longer 'reach' compared to my 105mm lens. But it's also slow. In sunlight, that's not a problem- stop down to f/8 and:
But in shade, the slowness is a problem:
For tilt-shift, here's a useful equation: tan(θ)= M * tan(φ). θ is the tilt angle of the lens, M the magnification of the lens, and φ is the angle between the object plane and sensor plane. For 'normal' photography, M is very small. M is not angular magnification but linear magnification: image size divided by object size. I estimated M ranges from 0.005 (15mm focal length) to 0.04 (400mm focal length); obviously these numbers depend on the object distance, the main point is that unless I am doing macro photography (M = 1-ish), the required lens tilt is almost always less than a couple of degrees- even when φ is close to 90 degrees. So.... here's the starting image:
The near objects are close to near focus point (about 5 feet), φ is about 80 degrees, and this was shooting wide-open f/3.5. If I wanted all of the flowers in focus, I would have to stop the lens down to something like f/128, which is 1) not possible since the lens only stops down to f/22 and 2) diffraction from that aperture would dominate the image, meaning everything would be blurry. However, by tilting the lens (in this case, θ was about 8 degrees) and stopping down to f/5.6 gives this:
Not bad! Now, full disclosure- I'm still a n00b with this method, but that second image took almost 20 minutes to compose... a small crowd actually gathered to watch, probably wondering what I was so intently trying to photograph. Like I've said before, tilt-shift is about the opposite of point-n-shoot....
Post-script: when I got home I needed to clean the sensor from all the lens change-outs. I have realized another advantage of mirrorless cameras- cleaning the sensor is trivial because 1) the flange distance is basically zero, so I don't have to reach down into the camera body to access the sensor, and 2) there's no physical object covering the sensor, so I can clean the sensor when the camera is off and also not worry about wrecking the shutter leaves by accidentally contacting them.
Last edited: