 | HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE |
Oct 18, 2011 21:03 | #16
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Oct 18, 2011 21:04 | #17 Well, f22 that explains it. Primary Gear - M6 Mark II; Σ f/1.4 Trio (16, 30, 56) - Σ 150-600mm f/5 - 6.3 C
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Snydremark my very own Lightrules moment More info | Oct 18, 2011 21:05 | #19 sega62 wrote in post #13270882  I think I used manual and the viewfinder!!!! But I see that I was f22 on most of em! I'll post some more bad pics!!! I don't think we need any more examples...the culprit is pretty self explanatory, I think - Eric S.: My Birds/Wildlife
LOG IN TO REPLY |
emelvee Goldmember  1,871 posts Joined Apr 2009 Location: E-town, Canada More info | Veemac wrote in post #13270479 If you can only get 1/30 at f/2.8 and ISO 6400, that rink must be lit like a dungeon. A monster lens isn't going to do you any good - it'll just get you highly blurred shots that are zoomed in much closer. Canon makes a 200mm f/2, but it costs over $5,500 and is only one stop faster than what you're currently shooting - so instead of 1/30, you'd be able to shoot at 1/60 - still nowhere near fast enough to stop action in a hockey game. This. Canon RP | Canon 6D | 70-200 f/2.8 I | 50mm f/1.4 | 16-35mm f/2.8 II | 580EX II x 2
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Oct 18, 2011 21:05 | #21 tracknut wrote in post #13270896 These three images are taken between ISO 2000-3200, and at f20-f22! No wonder you have no light. Try it again, open those lenses up all the way, that'll get you a few stops of light, bring your ISO up to 6400, and use whatever that all gives you to bump your shutter speed up. Dave Sorry Dave, you are right but I will see the players so small, my question is if I use a 100-400 is from Canon and I zoom, I will need a lot of light!!!!
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Oct 18, 2011 21:06 | #22 wfarrell4 wrote in post #13270918 So why were you at f22? I really f$/% up!
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Oct 18, 2011 21:07 | #23 mjHession wrote in post #13270915 Well, f22 that explains it. Yep, I noticed that too, tomorrow I will do better!
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Oct 18, 2011 21:09 | #24 emelvee wrote in post #13270922 This. And yeeesh, f/22?!!? No wonder! Stop down to 2.8 and your shots should be looking fine! Any particular reason you had your lens so closed up? Yeah, I forgot to dial the right aperture!
LOG IN TO REPLY |
tracknut Goldmember  1,740 posts Likes: 3 Joined Jun 2005 Location: Folsom, California More info | Oct 18, 2011 21:09 | #25 I'm sorry, but there's something you're missing about aperture. Not sure exactly what it is though... Performance/sport dog photographer
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Oct 18, 2011 21:13 | #26 tracknut wrote in post #13270952 I'm sorry, but there's something you're missing about aperture. Not sure exactly what it is though... Your maximum aperture on one lens was f4, and the other was something like f5.6 or so. You've got a lot of light you're loosing on those lenses if you set the aperture to f22. And that has no bearing on the size of the players? Yes, the 100-400 zoom will get you up closer, and it opens up to f5.6 as well, so that's certainly better than f22. But I don't actually know that f5.6 is going to give you enough exposure.... but it's certainly a lot better than f22. Dave You are right, I don't know I come I made that mistake, maybe I forgot...
LOG IN TO REPLY |
wfarrell4 Goldmember  2,551 posts Likes: 1 Joined Jun 2011 Location: NJ More info | Oct 18, 2011 21:14 | #27  Permanent bansega62 wrote in post #13270977 You are right, I don't know I come I made that mistake, maybe I forgot... Maybe. Don't forget next time. Smaller number = bigger hole = profit. Will: flickr
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Oct 18, 2011 21:16 | #28 emelvee wrote in post #13270922 This. And yeeesh, f/22?!!? No wonder! Stop down to 2.8 and your shots should be looking fine! Any particular reason you had your lens so closed up? How about the word idiot, would that suit's me fine!!!
LOG IN TO REPLY |
CameraMan Cream of the Crop  More info | Oct 18, 2011 21:16 | #29 sega62 wrote in post #13270882 I think I used manual and the viewfinder!!!! But I see that I was f22 on most of em! I'll post some more bad pics!!! Don't bother because if you shot them at f22 then that is your problem. The aperture needs to open WAY up. Then you might actually be able to get 1/250 shots instead of the 1/30 you were getting at f22. You could probably drop the ISO down a bit too to maybe 800. Photographer
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Oct 18, 2011 21:17 | #30 wfarrell4 wrote in post #13270987 Maybe. Don't forget next time. Smaller number = bigger hole = profit. Sure will, I should be in a trio with Beavis and Butthead!
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member is ealarcon 1048 guests, 151 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
