52 week photo thread.

OldCrow wrote in post #19193946
I like the second one the best.

Thanks. I think I do too. I'm photographing it almost every day as it blooms. More images to follow as it opens up.

OldCrow wrote in post #19193944
Looks like a successful experiment to me.

Overall, the A9 does better than the higher megapixel A7R4. Sometimes more megapixels are not a good thing. At the 600mm focal length the A7R4 requires a very steady hand and higher shutter speeds.
When the weather clears, I plan to use a tripod and see how that works.

Wk 7 -- Valentine Hearts

6/52

Prevailing winds ? Odd that it only seems to have affected that one tree. There are a few more trees up-slope to the right that look normal. I think the rust-colored band on the near hills is the slurry line from last summer's wildfire - 119K acres, 187.5 square miles, $37million to fight, a little over 6 weeks to full containment.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2kB5​QHj

7/52
Outside

7/52
From a couple hours ago.

7/52

More shots of the Amaryllis. A week later we now have 4 blooms and one more on the way.

I made this an experiment of sorts to compare two different 85mm lenses. Same camera on tripod, same manual focus point, ect. Both images were shot at f/16, 1.3 seconds, ISO 100, and I initially applied the same processing in Light Room.

One surprise, other than the difference in rendering, was that the Zeiss lens caused the camera to read the White Balance differently and pushed the WB warmer to the point where the white accents were yellow.

Something to explore further next week.


First image was with a 12 year old Canon 85L II

Timphoto wrote in post #19196118
7/52

One surprise, other than the difference in rendering, was that the Zeiss lens caused the camera to read the White Balance differently and pushed the WB warmer to the point where the white accents were yellow.

Both look good. On my screen there is not much difference. Could the WB issue be due to coatings or lack there of?

OldCrow wrote in post #19196189
Both look good. On my screen there is not much difference. Could the WB issue be due to coatings or lack there of?

Good question, I don't know and I'm uncertain how I could determine the effects of Canon coatings versus Zeiss coatings.

When I posted this late last night I failed to mention that the camera was in AutoWB mode. In LightRoom I did match the Zeiss image WB to the Canon image WB.

As shot, the Canon WB temperature was 3050 and the Zeiss WB was 5050.

This was shot under the kitchen lights - eight high lumen 3500K LED's - but who knows how accurate and consistent the Kelvin rating is on those lights.

Looking back through multiple shots with different shutter speeds and F stops, most of the image AWB is around 3250.

Lot's of variables. The next opportunity I have to experiment some more, I'll set the WB for a fixed amount and then switch lenses and see what happens.

Here's the Zeiss image without the WB corrected:

8/52

Wk 8 -- Water Beads

Beautiful shot

AngelofDepth wrote in post #19198241
Beautiful shot

Thank you.

8/52

Intake

Image hosted by forum (1089215) © SpiderMonkey THIS IS A LOW QUALITY PREVIEW. Please log in to see the good quality stuff.

Wk 9 -- Weathered

8/52