India Point Park

India Point Park
by matt-ball                

Submit your Photo
Hall of Fame

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

Reputation
16,263
Top tag
Next privilege 20,000 Rep.
Access 'trusted user' tools
Badges
25 55
Newest
 Necromancer
Impact
~1.3m people reached

Feb
3
comment For those that can afford fancy teleprimes is it preferred to use AF or MF for birds?
@unsignedzero Understood. FWIW Focus peaking is in a different class to DMF without it. DMF requires too much concentration and aiming for anything that's moving with any speed whereas you can track many birds with FP alone "on the fly".
Feb
3
comment For those that can afford fancy teleprimes is it preferred to use AF or MF for birds?
.... My 500mm Minolta AF mirror lens vanished at a concert I was asked to do (and never paid for) Get closer .... :-).
Feb
3
comment For those that can afford fancy teleprimes is it preferred to use AF or MF for birds?
When a long lens is not long enough, get closer. (You know that). It's getting harder to crawl (hunk of Titanium in neck and what it is there to address makes looking up harder than it was )(somewhat), but a weed mat covered hide seems a lot less visible to birds than I'd have expected. | For years I've been dreaming of a lie-prostrate battery powered creeper that would (half) safely cross estuarine areas and beach sand. It will almost certainly never happen :-). The 2x teleconverter hardly seems to be better than cropping my 70-200 (better quality TC needed). ....
Feb
2
comment For those that can afford fancy teleprimes is it preferred to use AF or MF for birds?
... point has moved from where AF left off. | Tracking focus will largely remove the need to do the above IF you can find the target with a long lens in an open sky stably enough for focus to stabilise. Often you can (even with modest eg Sigma 70-200 f/2.8) but when you caqn't FP is your friend.
Feb
2
comment For those that can afford fancy teleprimes is it preferred to use AF or MF for birds?
There may be two birds, or a branch to void for focusing or at eg f/2.8 *or even f/4) DOF may be small enough that you wish to fine tune focus point "on the fly" (so to speak). I find focus peaking utterly marvellous for this sort of task and weep for those whose systems do not provide it. (sort of anyway). Long long long ago my Minolta SRT303b (which did not know what AF meant) had a split image centre focus point which was as accurate as focus peaking but a lot harder to use rapidly for eg birds. FP allows you to sweep the focus "at a venture" when you are not 100% sure which way the focus
Feb
2
comment For those that can afford fancy teleprimes is it preferred to use AF or MF for birds?
What they said - and/but - Use AF to get you about right then on a SOny (I assume A6000 matches this) press AF/Manual swap with camera set tto focus peaking (high and red works best for me). Nudge manual AF and if target is in focus adequately it will usually show focus peaking across target and yoiu can go from there. I do not have the super fancy high end glass that you mention but the above works well if you need it and you'd rapidly find out if it was unneeded. I like the ability to make snap decisions with AF then MF based on input that is hard to feed to the camera any other way. ...
Feb
2
comment Why do camera manufacturers stick with the same awkward control layout imposed by film cameras?
WillC - Thankyou. Watch this space :-) ....
Feb
2
comment Most compact old lens for under $50
Find lenses that suit (there are many) and then get an appropriate e-mount adapter - which are available for many mounts for ebay prices of $10-$20 range.
Jan
19
comment Is the Carl Zeiss 16-80mm good enough for night shots?
.... I have seen examples (in this group) of photos that were never sharp BECAUSE antishake was used with a tripod. With a cheap lighter weight tripod, camera vibration may continue for many seconds after the camera is last touched. I have compared results with a 2 second and 10 second timer and the difference can be substantial - This matters mainly with long duration shots.
Jan
19
comment Is the Carl Zeiss 16-80mm good enough for night shots?
@Danny We all have to learn more, always :-).| The stabiliser should be turned off in any situation where you consider the camera is essentially completely stable. This would be when on a securely positioned quality tripod or when braced so well that it is apparently immovable. The antishake circuitry looks for an "error signal" and if there is extremely little or no shake the amplifier noise is interpreted as shake and the camera introduces motion trying to correct for the non existent noise.
Jan
17
comment How can I use Minolta / Sony AF lenses on Nikon DSLR bodies?
just for interest. I have an A77 Mk1 and recently bought a used NEX-5N. The NEX has substantially better noise performance than the A77. I'll happily use the NEX at 1600 ISO for shots that need to be reasonable quality but not utterly top class and 3200 ISO is often still acceptable. At 1600 ISO the A77 is getting noticeably noisy and at 3200 ISO it's seldom "good quality".
Jan
17
comment Is the Carl Zeiss 16-80mm good enough for night shots?
... where the subject is closish and not large. For general scenes you should be able to use AF on a brighter object - or use manual focus. |AT f/3.5 - f/4.5 depth of field will be limited and choosing to focus at hyperfocal point may help maximise sharpness. | Where AF is badly fooled (as eg I'd expect it to be when focusing through a wire mesh fence) ten manual override and peaking help greatly.
Jan
17
comment Is the Carl Zeiss 16-80mm good enough for night shots?
Those shots all look reasonably good and/or within the range of normal given the various parameters. I do't know if a tripod was used but as around 0.1s in most cases you need either a tripod OR extremely good bracing or good luck. Hand held you cannot guarantee results at that shutter speed. If using a tripod or similar in body antishake should be turned OFF - when there is essentially no motion the antishake will 'hunt' on noise in the error amplifier. | ISO is typically 3200 so you will haqve some degradation from that with the A77 MkII. Manual focus override with peaking will help ...
Jan
14
comment Is this lens fungus?
Looks like fungus. That will decrease contrast (at least) but results may be bearable. || Try my fungus-discouraging UV "trick" in answer Here . May help - but $30 was an OK price if the lens meets your needs. IF the seller said the lens was in good condition you MAY have some comeback but, odds are that at $30 it is not going to be worth the hassle overall.
Jan
13
comment Is the Carl Zeiss 16-80mm good enough for night shots?
As for focal length. For street photography on APSC the 16-80mm is liable to work well in more situations than a 10-20mm. The latter of course has it's place but the wideness limits the range of things it is excellent at.
Jan
13
comment Is the Carl Zeiss 16-80mm good enough for night shots?
A77i is goodish at ISO 800 , bearable at 1600 and usable at 2400 or 3200 if you value a usable image over noise. ie 800 would be daytime max if you cared somewhat. More at night may be OK. f/1.8 is reasonably useful in a city with shop lights, good street lighting etc if you take great care. f/2.8 about as good (1.8/2.8)^2 =~ 1/3 the light. f/3.5 = 4x less light than f/1.8 = 2 stops is getting reasonably marginal.Camera can be braced and you can Ninja breathe but aany subject movement may reduce photos to more art-statements than records. Above that anything can work sometimes.
Jan
13
comment Is the Carl Zeiss 16-80mm good enough for night shots?
What max aperture is the Zeiss. Link?
Jan
11
comment How does a 16-300mm f/3.5-6.3 lens differ from a 50mm f/1.8?
... Now try this with the 16-300mm lens set to 50mm at largest aperture (smallest f number) you can achieve at that focal length (may be 3.5, maybe slightly higher). Compare results. | Keep them both - both have uses which will make you very pleased that you own them.
Jan
11
comment How does a 16-300mm f/3.5-6.3 lens differ from a 50mm f/1.8?
Adding to the rest: To achieve the same quality of image (various measures that you can achieve with the f/1.8g prime lens with a zoom/telephoto lens you would have to pay many times more. The prime will give you a peek into image quality levels unachievable with the other lens. Try taking a portrait at f/1.8, not too close to subject, background some distance behind subject - maybe bushes etc. Focus carefully on area of face of most interest. Try focus on eyes to start. Look at result on a screen at 100% so you can see fine detail. How sharp is hair etc at focus point and elsewhere? ....
Jan
9
comment Sony A7s ii possible overvoltage
It won't address your current problem sadly, and you essentially now know this, but it's still worth noting. | When using equipment of high value with an external power supply it should NEVER be possible to "accidentally" supply excessive voltage or to connect the supply incorrectly. Ideally protective circuits should be used to ensure that an out of spec power supply will not cause problems. || If you are lucky you may have damaged only the voltage conversion and power supply circuitry in the camera but it is by no means certain that this is the case.