Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Fri Aug 01, 2014 12:31 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 17, 2008 4:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 12:48 pm
Posts: 8022
Location: UK
Old-shaker-hand, no objections to your edit of my pic. I find it interesting as that brings out more crater detail. I have already messed around with the levels to get what I posted. It was even "flatter" before. But I guess I didn't explore the range as aggressively.

As for the contrast comment, maybe contrast wasn't the best word I could have used but essentially I was saying the difference between light and dark was relatively high.

There seems to be a lot of cloud moving in at the moment, so not optimistic on having another go tonight. But I do notice it's setting relatively late in the morning so maybe I'll get one tomorrow.

_________________
Canon DSLRs: 7D, 5D2, 1D, 600D, 450D full spectrum, 300D IR mod
Lenses: EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 28-80 V, 70-300L, 100-400L, TS-E 24/3.5L, MP-E 65, EF-S 15-85 IS
3rd party: Zeiss 2/50 makro, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300 f/2.8 OS, Celestron 1325/13
Tinies: Sony HX9V.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 18, 2008 2:19 am 
popo wrote:
Old-shaker-hand, no objections to your edit of my pic. I find it interesting as that brings out more crater detail. I have already messed around with the levels to get what I posted. It was even "flatter" before. But I guess I didn't explore the range as aggressively.

Well the details of the craters also depend on how much shadow the angle of the sun light creates. In a full moon shot like mine it is not possible to get many beautiful craters. On the other hand when the moon is full it also gets such small dynamic range that it’s possible to expand it in a quite rude way (like I did). If you try the same wild expansion on a non-full moon shot then most of the craters should disappear.

popo wrote:
As for the contrast comment, maybe contrast wasn't the best word I could have used but essentially I was saying the difference between light and dark was relatively high.

Well it can’t pay off to start a debate on who say what, when and why. I also find that it can be hard to give an easy description of what a curve tool did even if it easy to see that the difference is big.

popo wrote:
There seems to be a lot of cloud moving in at the moment, so not optimistic on having another go tonight. But I do notice it's setting relatively late in the morning so maybe I'll get one tomorrow.

Some days ago I look out of my window and saw a beautiful moon just waiting to be captured. But when I came out of my door it was raining … newer tried this before … newer the less in that situation I could not help thinking: TYPICAL! Anyway I just took a sharp shot of the moon, clicking on it gives the 100% crop:
Image
I even think the 100% crop looks good (didn’t use the OS this time). I essentially don’t know the optical quality of your telescope. But since you got a nearly twice as big a FL you should be able to get a similarly sharp image with the double amount of details.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 18, 2008 7:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 12:48 pm
Posts: 8022
Location: UK
Another nice shot there :)

I didn't get another chance last night, cloud :( But I have a package waiting for me to collect at the post office. It should be my T-ring and remote for Olympus so I can see how that compares with the Sony next time.

_________________
Canon DSLRs: 7D, 5D2, 1D, 600D, 450D full spectrum, 300D IR mod
Lenses: EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 28-80 V, 70-300L, 100-400L, TS-E 24/3.5L, MP-E 65, EF-S 15-85 IS
3rd party: Zeiss 2/50 makro, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300 f/2.8 OS, Celestron 1325/13
Tinies: Sony HX9V.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 18, 2008 11:29 am 
popo wrote:
Another nice shot there :)

Thanks. I think it short of marks the limit of how detailed I can get a single shot with my setup. I guess image stacking is the next step :)

popo wrote:
I didn't get another chance last night, cloud :( But I have a package waiting for me to collect at the post office. It should be my T-ring and remote for Olympus so I can see how that compares with the Sony next time.

Sorry about the clouds! So you are planning to play your DSLR’s out against each other … looking forward to see your results ;) Thus I do think the SONY has got the upper hand due to its better ISO handling.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 18, 2008 12:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 12:48 pm
Posts: 8022
Location: UK
I attempted a few shots this morning, but the clouds were too fast and too many, so I didn't get a good shot in the small window I had.

Got the package now, and confirm I have my Olympus T-ring and remote control for it. Combined with MLU that should pretty much eliminate camera shake which I can't do on the Sony.

I don't think there is much in noise performance between the A350 and E510. Although the Sony has a bigger sensor, it also has many more pixels. So the density is roughly the same. With photographic lenses, I get better moon pics out of the Olympus than the Sony. I haven't managed to determine if that is due to the lens or the Camera. Maybe a bit of both... I suspect the Olympus applies more sharpening while the Sony leans towards smoothing.

_________________
Canon DSLRs: 7D, 5D2, 1D, 600D, 450D full spectrum, 300D IR mod
Lenses: EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 28-80 V, 70-300L, 100-400L, TS-E 24/3.5L, MP-E 65, EF-S 15-85 IS
3rd party: Zeiss 2/50 makro, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300 f/2.8 OS, Celestron 1325/13
Tinies: Sony HX9V.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 18, 2008 12:07 pm 
That's one of the rare times I've heard people praise Sony for it's good high ISO handling ;)


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 18, 2008 12:46 pm 
popo wrote:
I attempted a few shots this morning, but the clouds were too fast and too many, so I didn't get a good shot in the small window I had.

Got the package now, and confirm I have my Olympus T-ring and remote control for it. Combined with MLU that should pretty much eliminate camera shake which I can't do on the Sony.

I don't think there is much in noise performance between the A350 and E510. Although the Sony has a bigger sensor, it also has many more pixels. So the density is roughly the same. With photographic lenses, I get better moon pics out of the Olympus than the Sony. I haven't managed to determine if that is due to the lens or the Camera. Maybe a bit of both... I suspect the Olympus applies more sharpening while the Sony leans towards smoothing.

Very interesting … no real favourite … now I’m really keen to see what results you get :D


pgtips wrote:
That's one of the rare times I've heard people praise Sony for it's good high ISO handling ;)

He, he, well I did only say better with respect to Olympus … hopefully this won’t start up a flame war ;)


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 18, 2008 9:10 pm 
Old-shaker-hand wrote:
0eyvind wrote:
Old-shaker-hand wrote:
Well I too find that shoot down the moon on a photo is really interesting! Maybe it’s because moon photos gives a felling of looking into another world. I recently took this shot using my telelens (700mm):

The shot is not super sharp (using crappy tripod – forced me to put OS on), but as desktop wallpaper it looks really great.


Did you invert it, or was it taken like this? Great shot!

Thanks a lot, but no I did not invert it; I removed the colours and expanded the dynamic range. The problem about moon pictures is that the pixel representing the moon has got a low variance of brightness levels. So in a picture histogram the pixel package representing the moon occupies only a smaller part of the brightness levels. By consequence the moon looks pail/washed out. So I simply use a curve tool so that the moon fills out all the greyscale levels from black to white. So basically I have just expanded the number of used brightness levels making the details more viewable – I think it looks much better![/quotq]

Well acaully if i could've thought out myself that the background woul've been white then, i wouldn't have had you answering.

But thanks, intereseting workflow.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 10:16 am 
0eyvind wrote:
Well acaully if i could've thought out myself that the background woul've been white then, i wouldn't have had you answering.

But thanks, intereseting workflow.

Well, I actually read it as if you wanted to know what techniques I used. But anyway it is always good to ask and remember; there are no stupid questions, only stupid people … hehe just kidding … naturally it all depends on what you are capable to get out of the answers. So now you can prove yourself by bringing us …. A SACRIFICE!!! But you don’t need to find us a shrubbery … only THE MOON ;)


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2012 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.
/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs

Webdesign by Alphabase IT
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group