Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Discussion Astronomy & Celestial 
Thread started 07 May 2012 (Monday) 23:49
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

Failed, shooting the sun

 
Gary ­ McDuffie
Goldmember
Avatar
3,022 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Scottsbluff, NE USA
     
May 07, 2012 23:49 |  #1

I hope this is the place to post this. If not, feel free to move it. NEWBIE ALERT! :)

With the new sunspot cycle, I wanted to be able to shoot the sun. I have other reasons to be able to look directly at it, but I thought I would photograph it in the process.

I went to the local welding supply and bought a piece of welding glass. It is marked "optically correct", but I know for this purpose it might not be good enough. At $4, it certainly isn't a costly experiment.

The problem came when I held the glass in front of my 100-400 and tried to focus. I cannot find a focus point at all. It looks out of focus no matter what I do with it. Is this a function of the wavelength of the light? Or what?


Gary
"I'm not much of an artist, but I like to document certain things that I see."
----------
5DII, 7D, some L, Manfroto one and three legged devices, shooting & learning bit by bit via POTN

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hollis_f
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,649 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 85
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Sussex, UK
     
May 08, 2012 06:41 |  #2

Aaargh! You held a bit of glass in front of your £1000 lens while it was pointing at the sun? :eek::eek: You do know how much damage you could have done if you'd have allowed that bit of glass to drop?

Here's a link explaining how to make a safe filter.


Frank Hollis - Retired mass spectroscopist
Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll complain about the withdrawal of his free fish entitlement.
Gear Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Gary ­ McDuffie
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
3,022 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Scottsbluff, NE USA
     
May 08, 2012 07:44 |  #3

hollis_f wrote in post #14397786 (external link)
Aaargh! You held a bit of glass in front of your £1000 lens while it was pointing at the sun? :eek::eek: You do know how much damage you could have done if you'd have allowed that bit of glass to drop?

Here's a link explaining how to make a safe filter.

Yep, sure do. It's called being careful.

Thanks for the link.


Gary
"I'm not much of an artist, but I like to document certain things that I see."
----------
5DII, 7D, some L, Manfroto one and three legged devices, shooting & learning bit by bit via POTN

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ohata0
Senior Member
561 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 12
Joined Jan 2011
     
May 09, 2012 04:42 |  #4

hollis_f wrote in post #14397786 (external link)
Aaargh! You held a bit of glass in front of your £1000 lens while it was pointing at the sun? :eek::eek: You do know how much damage you could have done if you'd have allowed that bit of glass to drop?

Here's a link explaining how to make a safe filter.

It does damage to the lens as well? I've always heard not to shoot at the sun because it would damage the sensor (or your eyes if you're looking through the viewfinder). I think it mentions that in the manual.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hollis_f
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,649 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 85
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Sussex, UK
     
May 09, 2012 11:04 |  #5

ohata0 wrote in post #14403541 (external link)
It does damage to the lens as well?

It has the potential to do so. There's a lot of heat being concentrated at the rear of the lens.


Frank Hollis - Retired mass spectroscopist
Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll complain about the withdrawal of his free fish entitlement.
Gear Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sapearl
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
16,946 posts
Gallery: 243 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 2873
Joined Dec 2005
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
May 09, 2012 11:06 |  #6

Gary - have you tried to just manually focus the lens on infinity? I'd be really nervous about the heat factor Frank mentions. If you must do this, perhaps shooting off a tinted mirror would be safer.


GEAR LIST
MY WEBSITE (external link)- MY GALLERIES (external link)- MY BLOG (external link)
Artists Archives of the Western Reserve (external link) - Board

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pwm2
"Sorry for being a noob"
Avatar
8,626 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2007
Location: Sweden
     
May 09, 2012 11:34 |  #7

ohata0 wrote in post #14403541 (external link)
It does damage to the lens as well? I've always heard not to shoot at the sun because it would damage the sensor (or your eyes if you're looking through the viewfinder). I think it mentions that in the manual.

The lens has a viewing angle. Much of the light within this circle will be projected to the image circle in the camera. So if you aim a lens directly at the sun, you project lots of energy at the sensor.

But the front element of a tele lens will pick up light for a much wider angle than the viewing angle of the lens. The lens normally tries to "eat" this light by having it absorbed inside the lens. That is why the sides inside the lens are matte-black. Because reflections inside the lens would result in loss of contrast in the photo. And that is a big reason why we have hoods when shooting towards light sources.

But in the end, the sun pours out about 1kW/m2 of energy. And the lens elements tries to project that light into a quite small circle somewhere inside the lens or inside the camera.

Another thing you should consider is that some light are visible. But lots of the light from the sun are outside the visible range. You have IR and UW light too. Not visible but transmitting energy. So a filter that does only filter the visible light but lets through the short UV light or the long IR waves can project an image that looks ok, while at the same time projecting huge amounts of heat.

That means that it may look eye-safe or camera-safe, while the amount of energy that reaches the camera sensor or your eyes are way above the safe levels.

Lots of people with spotting scopes have had very bad oops moments because they have been carrying their scopes over the shoulder without any lens cap.

In the end, any use of optical instruments requires the user to think twice with regards to the sun.

Having a lose filter held by hand means that the filter is only there when you think about it and intentionally point your lens at the sun. What about when you fool around with your camera while trying to mount it on the tripod? What if you point it at the sun then? In what direction will the camera point before you put the filter in front of the lens and start aiming the camera?


5DMk2 + BG-E6 | 40D + BG-E2N | 350D + BG-E3 + RC-1 | Elan 7E | Minolta Dimage 7U | (Gear thread)
10-22 | 16-35/2.8 L II | 20-35 | 24-105 L IS | 28-135 IS | 40/2.8 | 50/1.8 II | 70-200/2.8 L IS | 100/2.8 L IS | 100-400 L IS | Sigma 18-200DC
Speedlite 420EZ | Speedlite 580EX | EF 1.4x II | EF 2x II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SteveInNZ
Goldmember
1,426 posts
Likes: 89
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
     
May 09, 2012 15:24 |  #8

+1 to the warnings. Big, bright, hot, ouch !. Not good.

Aside from that, you need a fairly light-tight seal between your solar filter or welding glass and the lens. Otherwise you get stray light bouncing around between the lens and the filter and it's nearly impossible to get a real image. Your camera was probably trying to focus on that.


"Treat every photon with respect" - David Malin.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Gary ­ McDuffie
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
3,022 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Scottsbluff, NE USA
     
May 09, 2012 19:38 |  #9

C'mon, folks. Let's give a little credit here. The camera is rotated away from the sun by at least 45 degrees during any time the filter is removed. As for leakage, the filter is much larger than the largest element of the lens. Yes, I have manually focused on infinity, on cloud edges, etc. In fact, I've varied the focus all over that end of the range, and it does not work. Someone mentioned the other wavelengths of lights, and that was my original question. Does anyone actually know the answer? Or is everyone just happy saying it is a bad idea? I really feel it must be mostly related to wavelength of the light passing through, because binoculars will focus. They will easily go to hyper-infinity, where the 100-400 won't. Maybe that's what it takes.


Gary
"I'm not much of an artist, but I like to document certain things that I see."
----------
5DII, 7D, some L, Manfroto one and three legged devices, shooting & learning bit by bit via POTN

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SteveInNZ
Goldmember
1,426 posts
Likes: 89
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
     
May 09, 2012 20:21 |  #10

Does anyone actually know the answer?

Yes, it's no.
You're welcome.


"Treat every photon with respect" - David Malin.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Gary ­ McDuffie
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
3,022 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Scottsbluff, NE USA
     
May 09, 2012 21:48 |  #11

Then what? Anyone know?


Gary
"I'm not much of an artist, but I like to document certain things that I see."
----------
5DII, 7D, some L, Manfroto one and three legged devices, shooting & learning bit by bit via POTN

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sapearl
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
16,946 posts
Gallery: 243 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 2873
Joined Dec 2005
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
May 09, 2012 21:57 |  #12

Gary McDuffie wrote in post #14407325 (external link)
...........I really feel it must be mostly related to wavelength of the light passing through, because binoculars will focus. They will easily go to hyper-infinity, where the 100-400 won't. Maybe that's what it takes.

Gary, you've got me stumped here and that's why I'm asking.

How is it than you can manually focus your binocs to hyper-infinity, but you can't manually focus the 100-400 to do the same. Am I missing something obvious here?


GEAR LIST
MY WEBSITE (external link)- MY GALLERIES (external link)- MY BLOG (external link)
Artists Archives of the Western Reserve (external link) - Board

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Gary ­ McDuffie
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
3,022 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Scottsbluff, NE USA
     
May 09, 2012 22:55 |  #13

The 100-400 won't go beyond infinity like the binocs will.


Gary
"I'm not much of an artist, but I like to document certain things that I see."
----------
5DII, 7D, some L, Manfroto one and three legged devices, shooting & learning bit by bit via POTN

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sapearl
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
16,946 posts
Gallery: 243 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 2873
Joined Dec 2005
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
May 10, 2012 05:39 |  #14

Gary McDuffie wrote in post #14408324 (external link)
The 100-400 won't go beyond infinity like the binocs will.

Ok - I see what you're saying now. And even when you set it AT infinity things are still out of focus?


GEAR LIST
MY WEBSITE (external link)- MY GALLERIES (external link)- MY BLOG (external link)
Artists Archives of the Western Reserve (external link) - Board

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pixelbasher
Goldmember
Avatar
1,827 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Feb 2009
Location: Lake Macquarie, AUS
     
May 10, 2012 06:33 |  #15

I find my 100-400 does go past infinity......or it appears so. If I set it to past infinity the moon for example is OOF, and I have to pull it back a bit to make it focus.. Is this what is being talked about here?


50D. 7D. 24-105L. 100-400L. 135L. 50 1.8 Sigma 8-16
flickr

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

3,893 views & 0 likes for this thread, 7 members have posted to it.
Failed, shooting the sun
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Discussion Astronomy & Celestial 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

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!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is semonsters
1080 guests, 115 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.