Nidelva river through Trondheim Norway

Nidelva river through Trondheim Norway
by Saaru Lindestokke                

Submit your Photo
Hall of Fame

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

New answers tagged

0

I agree with most of the settings above, but I would make sure to have the shutter set to 30s and the whitebalance at 3000K. Beyond the settings, Southernexposure123 was right about experimentation. Many factors like the moon, light pollution, visibility, and position will affect the shot so just keep trying for a couple nights. If you are interested, I've ...


5

Is there a way to take a same set of images for a panaroma twice Yes. Simply do it a second time. You can be more consistent by using reference markings. For the tripod, that could be the join of tiles on the floor for example, a natural landmark like big stone that your tripod legs are touching, etc. You could also try marking the position the legs ...


0

There is no "Normal" lens flare. Lens flare, however, is normal. It does appear to be flare caused by internal reflections between the lens surfaces and the camera sensor daughter board on the main circuit board. That's my guess based on the following tiny details in the two images you linked to in your reply to Caleb. There are 6 points in both of the ...


0

can anyone give me something concrete? We can't tell you anything definitive because we can only guess at what you're seeing. Please post an example. The way to tell whether it's lens flare or not is to take a series of photos and see how the effect in question changes as you move the camera relative to the bright light sources in the scene. In other ...


2

DO NOT ATTEMPT THIS WITHOUT A SOLAR FILTER which is metal that absorbs harmful levels of electromagnetic radiation that will damage your EYES and maybe your equipment (which can be replaced, unlike your eyes). ND Filters use dyes which do NOT cut the radiation in the dangerous areas of the spectrum. Further, the size of Mercury will be minuscule.


8

Field of View The sun is approximately 0.5° across in the sky. At 200mm on a DX (1.5 crop factor) body, the field of view (FoV) is 6.9° (wide) / 4.5° (high) / 8° (diag). In terms of Sun diameters (☉), the 200mm FoV is 13.4 ☉ wide by 9 ☉ high. According to Wikipedia, Mercury's diameter when viewed from the earth during May transits is 12 arcseconds. In ...


5

Probably not. But it depends on just how dark and what type your ND filter is. It can be very dangerous to both your equipment and your eyes to try and take photos of the sun without the proper precautions! The most damaging portion of direct sunlight to the internals of your lens, camera, and eyes are in infrared, not in the visible spectrum. The UV filter ...


0

One experiment is worth 1000 expert opinions.— Bill Nye, the science guy Go ahead, enlarge a small portion (read inexpensively) of your image to see what you will get.


1

If the object is at fixed distance, has fixed size (and is moving at constant angular speed) and fits frame well: no, you cannot get better photograph of it with focal length reducer. Focal length reducer has three effects: it makes image brighter it reduces the number of pixels which object occupies if it contains glass it looses some small amount of ...


1

The math isn't too complicated. Based on two facts: The sky revolves 360 degrees per 24 hours (roughly) FOV (rectilinear) = 2 * arctan (frame size/(focal length * 2)) We can calculate that it will take roughly 4.488 minutes to cross the sensor (I'm using the larger dimension although I'm not sure how you'll have it oriented), because: FOV = 2 * ...


1

In order to determine the longest shutter time you can use without getting star trails you must calculate the angle of view (AoV) your images have with the setup you are using. With a camera attached to a telescope there are several variables that will affect the angle of view shown in the resulting images. This is a little difficult to calculate because ...


0

I face the same issue. I have a GSO 8" dobsonian scope (1200mm focal length, f/6 focal ratio). I use a nikon d5500. Well, basically short exposures may just not help you here. Although there isnt any reason to worry. Firstly reduce your iso to about 800 to 1000. Its more than enough. If u buy a telephoto eyepiece thats about 32 to 42 mm you get about 290 to ...


1

Using Catia (Mechanical engineering software), I tried to answer your question by retro-engineering the canon parts. I found a 3D model of a canon lens from grabcad.com and isolated the lens mount geometry. I compared its dimensions to the ones of my lenses and found them accurate enough. On the following view, you can see the lens mount. I used brass as ...


6

It's not just the weight of the camera that's a concern, but the torque that it will apply to the mounting ring on the lens (and in the camera, of course). Torque is turning force, and it's calculated by multiplying force (weight, in this case) by distance from the center of rotation. So, if we guess that your camera is 4" deep from the mount to the back of ...


2

The 1D Mark II was 55.5 oz. The 5D Mark III + BG-E11 grip + 2 LP-E6N batteries is about 59 oz. The heaviest flash Canon has sold in the recent past is the 600EX-RT which is 18.5 oz with batteries installed. The WFT-E8A is another 1.35 oz. Add that up and you're at 79 oz. which is about 17 oz. less than a 6 pound CCD camera. The EF mount should be able to ...


1

I don't have the answer for you but the answer is maybe obvious : if it were a classic mechanical problem, I would say that the lens capacity shouldn't exceed the capacity of the body (using no lens collar): If you body can support a 2 kg lens on the body mount, then the same weight is supported by the lens mount ; If your lens comes with a collar for your ...



Top 50 recent answers are included