Larry Colen wrote:
Thanks all for your comments.
Ann, I did some pixel peeping on other photos in the set looking for evidence
of tripod shake. I think that one problem I'm having is accurately focusing
the 20/1.8 in the dark. I suspect that infinity is not exactly infinity.
That's true - and I'd have difficulty focusing in the dark for sure!...
I used to set the focus a bit shy of infinity whenever I couldn't see what
I was doing...
On my cameras auto focus won't work in that light, and I didn't bring my laser
pointer.
Pointing directly at the moon it wouldn't have made a difference, but do
polarizers have the same effect at night on darkening the blue of the sky? Can
they be used to bring out the stars better?
no clue, but I wouldnt think so...
Here's one where I used the burn in brush in lightroom to darken the sky:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/5193155990/
To do this right, I suspect I'd need to know a lot more photoshop.
And, for those that are interested some more shots from the set:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157625430541230/
well even though it is soft - I think this one is a lot more interesting
than your night with stars shot
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/5193161970/in/set-72157625430541230/
I think it is really difficult to get an intersting shot at night with
stars... they so often only look like bits of dust one needs to spot out
on a print :-)
Not sure I'm much help here..
ann
On Nov 20, 2010, at 5:55 AM, Larry Colen wrote:
I was driving home from dancing in SF, and seeing the mist and clouds lit by the
moon over some water I was compelled to stop and take a few pictures. At one point
when I was bracketing two cameras (K20 and Kx) two lenses (16-50 & 20/1.8),
several isos and exposures, my first thought was that if I had a K-5 this would be
so much easier because I'd at least know which camera body to use. Then I realized
that for this shot I didn't need a K-5, I needed a 645D. Then I realized what I
really needed was Ralf's nightscape skills.
Where my thoughts ended up, while waiting for the 30 second exposures, plus the
30 second dark fields, is that what I'd really like to see is what Ralf could
do at night with a 645D, and that if Pentax were smart, they'd loan Ralf a 645D
for a few weeks, just to see what one could do for night time landscapes.
I need to go to bed rather than going through all of my n-dimensional
bracketing from three different shooting locations, but after a quick scan,
this seems to be one of the more promising shots:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/5191532097/
K20, ISO 400, 16-50 at 16mm f/2.8 30 second exposure. Which matches my
previous experience that the sweet spot at night is a 30 second exposure with
the K20 at ISO 400.
For the Bay Area Folks, this is shot from the frontage road, just north of
Black Road (Bear Creek exit off Hwy 17).
If there's interest, I could post my full bracketing of one of the shots. The
last one I took ran into problems because the lens started fogging up.
--
Larry Colen [email protected] sent from i4est
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
--
Larry Colen [email protected] sent from i4est
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
