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 Community Talk, Chatter & Stuff General Photography Talk 
Thread started 24 May 2008 (Saturday) 21:41
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

What happened?

 
DerekRob
Goldmember
2,535 posts
Joined Jul 2007
Location: no where
     
May 24, 2008 21:41 |  #1
bannedPermanent ban

IMAGE: http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y98/Docpeplvr/steelguitar/ed900ea3.jpg


Tv mod

iso 100

Shutter speed 1/2000

uv filter + macro


Is it because the iso was 100 when we didn't need such a low iso? The sun was full on when you can by the photo.


And this is me by the way



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
eddarr
There's Moderators under there....
Avatar
8,907 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Aug 2007
Location: Las Vegas
     
May 24, 2008 22:29 |  #2

Looks like it was in manual focus and not focused on the subject. The dobro is reasonable clear around your knees.


Eric

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DerekRob
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
2,535 posts
Joined Jul 2007
Location: no where
     
May 24, 2008 22:31 |  #3
bannedPermanent ban

eddarr wrote in post #5590626 (external link)
Looks like it was in manual focus and not focused on the subject. The dobro is reasonable clear around your knees.

Is it because of the macro filter?


and I've used the auto focus feature.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
eddarr
There's Moderators under there....
Avatar
8,907 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Aug 2007
Location: Las Vegas
     
May 24, 2008 22:41 |  #4

You had an add on macro filter on front of the lens? That would definitely be it. It was trying to focus about a foot in front of the lens.


Eric

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DerekRob
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
2,535 posts
Joined Jul 2007
Location: no where
     
May 24, 2008 22:46 |  #5
bannedPermanent ban

eddarr wrote in post #5590689 (external link)
You had an add on macro filter on front of the lens? That would definitely be it. It was trying to focus about a foot in front of the lens.

I did, So the iso was ok though?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gdykstra
Goldmember
Avatar
1,330 posts
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 190
Joined May 2007
Location: Duluth, Georgia
     
May 24, 2008 22:53 |  #6

Here is your Exif data, your shutter speed was 1/200 not 1/2000. But that should not have made a difference for this shot. Why would you use a macro filter?

Exif IFD0

* Camera Make = Canon
* Camera Model = Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTi
* Picture Orientation = normal (1)
* X-Resolution = 72/1 = 72
* Y-Resolution = 72/1 = 72
* X/Y-Resolution Unit = inch (2)
* Last Modified Date/Time = 2008:05:24 06:14:52
* White Point Chromaticity = 313/1000,329/1000 = 0.313, 0.329,
* Primary Chromaticities = 64/100,33/100,21/100,7​1/100,15/100,6/100 = 0.64, 0.33, 0.21, 0.71, 0.15, 0.06,
* Y/Cb/Cr Coefficients = 299/1000,587/1000,114/​1000 = 0.299, 0.587, 0.114,
* Y/Cb/Cr Positioning (Subsampling) = co-sited / datum point (2)

Exif Sub IFD

* Exposure Time (1 / Shutter Speed) = 1/200 second = 0.005 second
* Lens F-Number/F-Stop = 67/10 = F6.7
* Exposure Program = shutter priority (4)
* ISO Speed Ratings = 100
* Exif Version = 0221
* Original Date/Time = 2008:05:24 06:14:52
* Digitization Date/Time = 2008:05:24 06:14:52
* Components Configuration = 0x01,0x02,0x03,0x00 / YCbCr
* Shutter Speed Value (APEX) = 500948/65536
Shutter Speed (Exposure Time) = 1/200 second
* Aperture Value (APEX) = 359683/65536
Aperture = F6.7
* Exposure Bias (EV) = 0/2 = 0
* Metering Mode = average (1)
* Flash = Flash fired, compulsory flash mode
* Focal Length = 55/1 mm = 55 mm

* FlashPix Version = 0100
* Colour Space = 65535
* Image Width = 3888 pixels
* Image Height = 2592 pixels
* Focal Plane X-Resolution = 3888000/877 = 4433.3
* Focal Plane Y-Resolution = 2592000/582 = 4453.61
* Focal Plane X/Y-Resolution Unit = inch (2)
* Custom Rendered = normal process (0)
* Exposure Mode = auto exposure (0)
* White Balance = auto (0)
* Scene Capture Type = standard (0)
* Unknown tag: Tagnum = 0xa500 ===> data = 22/10


Model Mayhem (external link) | Website (external link) 5D Mark III|5D Mark II|TSE 17mm f/4.0 L|24-70L f/2.8|85L f/1.2 II|135L f/2.0|70-200mm f/2.8L IS II|400mm f/5.6L|100mm f/2.8 Macro|15mm f/2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
eddarr
There's Moderators under there....
Avatar
8,907 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Aug 2007
Location: Las Vegas
     
May 24, 2008 22:53 |  #7

You want to use as low an ISO as possible to get a good shutter speed. So yes.


Eric

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DerekRob
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
2,535 posts
Joined Jul 2007
Location: no where
     
May 24, 2008 22:56 |  #8
bannedPermanent ban

Ok and I've read on this forum it was a good idea to use a macro filter when you shoot in tv mode and or portret mode.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
eddarr
There's Moderators under there....
Avatar
8,907 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Aug 2007
Location: Las Vegas
     
May 24, 2008 23:07 |  #9

Boy would I like to see who said that. I think you may have had a brain fart. No filter is best used when shooting in tv or portrait mode. The camera mode has nothing to do with filters or lens. And definitely not a macro filter. They are about the worst thing you could put in front of a lens.


Eric

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jra
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,568 posts
Likes: 35
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Ohio
     
May 24, 2008 23:08 |  #10

I would agree....drop the macro filter.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DerekRob
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
2,535 posts
Joined Jul 2007
Location: no where
     
May 24, 2008 23:11 |  #11
bannedPermanent ban

So drop the macro filter and the uv filter? or keep the uv filter?

I have a shoot tomorrow and I really need a crutch for shooting indoors in a medium size room with ok lighting.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
eddarr
There's Moderators under there....
Avatar
8,907 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Aug 2007
Location: Las Vegas
     
May 24, 2008 23:17 |  #12

If it is a quality UV filter you can leave it on. It will do a decent job of protecting the lens.

Shoot in manual if you are used to it. Otherwise, shoot in AV at around f/6.0 with as low an ISO that will keep the shutter speed above 1/125 or so. If the shutter speed is to slow then increase the ISO.


Eric

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DerekRob
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
2,535 posts
Joined Jul 2007
Location: no where
     
May 24, 2008 23:21 |  #13
bannedPermanent ban

eddarr wrote in post #5590835 (external link)
If it is a quality UV filter you can leave it on. It will do a decent job of protecting the lens.

Shoot in manual if you are used to it. Otherwise, shoot in AV at around f/6.0 with as low an ISO that will keep the shutter speed above 1/125 or so. If the shutter speed is to slow then increase the ISO.

I can do and I'm not used to m mode yet.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DerekRob
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
2,535 posts
Joined Jul 2007
Location: no where
     
May 25, 2008 00:30 |  #14
bannedPermanent ban

eddarr wrote in post #5590626 (external link)
Looks like it was in manual focus and not focused on the subject. The dobro is reasonable clear around your knees.

I'm surprised you knew what a do-bro was, Thats cool.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Glenn ­ NK
Goldmember
Avatar
4,630 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Oct 2006
Location: Victoria, BC
     
May 25, 2008 01:15 |  #15

The most common and descriptive name for a "macro filter" is "closeup lens". I have a Canon 500D (pricy as hell), and it really limits the maximum focus distance of any lens. On my 24/105 at a FL of 105 mm, the maximum focus distance is about three feet; at 24 mm, it's about eight feet. Obviously neither are anywhere near infinity.

Regarding the UV filter; if it's high quality, then it will seldom cause problems (seldom, not never). The B+W filters are high quality (as are another German brand - Rodenstock - I have two of each).

I also hope you are using the lens hood - always. A little bit of light on a UV filter (particularly a cheap one), or light on the lens, and you'll encounter lens flare.


When did voluptuous become voluminous?

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

1,729 views & 0 likes for this thread, 7 members have posted to it.
What happened?
FORUMS Community Talk, Chatter & Stuff General Photography Talk 
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 was a spammer, and banned as such!
2863 guests, 168 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.