07 May 2008
Here's my first post in Swedish. Not sure if I will do this more often in the future. We'll see.
Ja ... I helgen var jag och Jenny ner till Silvana och Henriks bröllop i Oskarshamn. Det kändes som en väldigt högtidlig och stor dag.
Jag fick äran att fota alltihop och i morse lyckades jag äntligen få upp bilderna till mitt Flickr-konto. För den som vill kasta sig över bilderna direkt har jag samlat dem i en ... um ... samling, här. Jag kan rekommendera att klicka på "Detail" i varje set, för att se lite större småbilder.
Vi hyrde en bil och åkte mot Oskarshamn redan på fredag kväll. Jenny och jag fick bo i Silvana och Henriks lägenhet tillsammans med ett trevligt gäng från Gotland. S & H själva hade flyttat in hos Henriks föräldrar över helgen.
Lördagen, bröllopsdagen, började för vår del kl 10.30 hos frisören. Silvana och hennes syster tillika tärna Madeleine, fick håret fixat under cirka fyra timmar.
Att få håret fixat innebär tre saker har jag nu förstått: Hårsprej, hårsprej och hårsprej.
(Alla bilder från frisören här.)
Brudparet och tärnorna for sedan till en fotograf för att ta studiobilder. Under tiden bytte Jenny och jag om på Villabacken. Därefter bar det av till ett stenbrott i närheten av Påskallaviks kyrka där vigseln skulle äga rum.
På tio minuter avverkade vi förmodligen Sveriges hittills snabbaste bröllopsfotografering. Tur att alla inblandade var så avslappnade och spralliga trots tidspressen! Följande tre bilder är nog mina favoriter därifrån:
Tyvärr var ljuset ganska hårt, men med 30 minuter kvar till vigseln hade jag inte sinnesnärvaro nog att börja mixtra med den reflektor jag fick låna på jobbet.
(Alla bilder från stenbrottet här.)
Mot kyrkan. Med ungefär tio minuter till godo hann jag ordna med blixtar och testa det jag behövde testa innan brudparet gjorde entré.
(Alla bilder från vigseln här.)
Utanför kyrkan fick brudparet ta emot allas gratulationer. Och lite ris.
(Alla gratulationsbilder här.)
Sedan gick färden tillbaka till Oskarshamn med M/S Solkust.
(Alla bilder från båten här.)
Dagen avslutades i Elajohallen där vi bjöds på en välorganiserad, god och rolig bröllpsfest!
(Alla bilder från festen här och här.)
Vi kom hem vid halv tvåtiden på natten.
På söndagen gick vi på en skön picknick i Oskarshamns stadspark. Solskenet gjorde gott.
(Picknickbilder här.)
För att ha varit min första bröllopsfotografering kändes allt skapligt lyckat. Mina enda tabbar var att jag lyckades sänka kameran efter ringväxlingen och därmed missade den första kyssen, och att jag senare var för långsam upp på läktaren när brudparet skulle ut. Plus det med reflektorn då. Ok, tre tabbar.
Labels: photography
17 April 2008
Yesterday I was in a shooting mood and bought some interesting vegetables and fruit to shoot when I was at Hemköp.
I set up a provisional studio
on one of my chairs. I just used a large sheet of white paper that I happened to find in a photo frame. For lighting I used my desk light and a second smaller light.
I hunted down the correct exposure to make the paper only just overexpose in the brightest corner, and then shot in manual mode.
I used my Sigma 17-70mm, Canon 50mm and Canon 70-300mm lenses. I liked the results best from the 50mm, so I ended up sticking with that lens most of the time. (Except for the real close-ups where I used the 70-300mm + a close-up lens.) And most of the time I had the 50mm set at f/2.8 which seems to be this lenses sweet spot
.
If you want to see more of the shots I've put my favourites in a set at Flickr.
Labels: canon, photography, Sigma
15 April 2008
I bought the latest issue of Digital Camera (or to be more precise: the Swedish translation DigitalFoto) and found an article on simple macro shots you can take at home.
I saw a photo of a match being lit and decided to have a go at cloning the shot.
It was difficult getting the exposure right. To begin with I was over-exposing wildly and I had to go as far down as 1/1000th at f/8, ISO 200 before I got it right. I had no idea that a match was so bright — that's brighter than a clear blue sky or at least roughly the same.
After having set fire to almost a whole box of matches I ended up with 19 shots which were keep-worthy. The following two were the coolest hottest:
The weird flame in the second shot is from the match I used to light the upright match, as I was pulling it back.
I took the shots against a black background but that really hadn't been necessary. The matches were so bright that any indoor background would have looked black.
For the record I used my EF 70-300mm lens with close-up lens 500D screwed on.
The next project on my list is to have a go at weird fruits and vegetables.
Labels: photography
On the Sunday evening I went out to shoot the old trains I had found one week ago. There was plenty of — er — old stuff to be found.
I tried developing this close-up of a buffer both as a colour shot and as black and white. I preferred the black and white version because I think it gives you that heavy clonky metal feel.
This old engine was stripped of all the machinery and completely vandalized. It was packed with that eerie feeling of old abandoned places.
Not sure what kind of machine that was on the goods wagon. It could have been the engine of the engine, but it really didn't look like an engine to me.
The drivers cabin of the engine was ripped to pieces. All windows were smashed and the seats and instruments were broken.
This gauge was broken off and lying on the dashboard.
The engines must have been badly isolated. The drivers apparently had electric heaters for their feet.
More gauges.
Since most of the subjects were shaded and the light was getting low I underexposed all the shots by one to two stops to avoid the washed out look you otherwise can get in shade.
These were only a few of all the shots from the train yard. The rest are in a set at my flickr account.
Labels: photography
14 April 2008
After I bought my new memory card I found several reviews of the card saying it didn't work properly. So I decided to test mine to see that it works properly.
- First I filled it with old photos from my archive. No problems.
- Then I deleted a few, and put it in my camera. I seemed to be able to see all the photos, and I could also take a few shots to fill the remaining space.
- Finally I put it through a few disk tests. I used the Windows disk check thing and a program called CDCheck. The latter seems to work for any kind of disk. Neither of them found any problems.
Conclusion: Works for me!
Labels: photography
09 April 2008
Today I got the 16GB Compact Flash card that I ordered a few days ago. I just wrote about the crazy weather but this is almost even more insane: 16GB now cost me less than half of what my two 2GB cards cost me two years ago. And back then I had a serious discount since I bought them at the shop I worked at, Allradio. That means that the price per GB is now less than a tenth of what it was two years ago!
Eager to try it out (why? don't know) I put my 16GB card in my camera, formatted it and ... Oh! It now only had 8GB of space.
It turns out, the Canon EOS 30D doesn't cope with (formatting) cards larger than 8GB. And when the card had been formatted down to 8GB it couldn't be reformatted to 16GB. Not in the camera, not in Windows.
After hunting around for a while, giving up, and then hunting around some more, I found a solution: A small program called USB_Format. Just unzip it and run it, and it should let you reformat your memory card in your card reader to it's proper size.
Now I just have to remember not to format the card in the camera. But that shouldn't be so hard. I don't usually format, I tend to Delete all
instead.
Labels: canon, photography
The weather has been really wacky the last couple of days in Eskilstuna. Today I switched back to my winter jacket and boots, and put on gloves and a hat for work. I'm glad I did too, since the wind speed gave a chill effect of what felt like -20° C. What happened to the record breakingly early spring? No one knows.
Labels: Eskilstuna, photography
05 April 2008
I was bored this morning and felt like some photography, but I just couldn't think of anything to shoot, especially since it was around 10 and the light was very bright and sharp.
So I decided to do some location scouting instead. I packed my camera bag and went for a slow bike ride, more or less randomly around Eskilstuna. Tried to go where I had never gone before.
First I came across Eskilstuna Art Museum. Although I had read about it at work I hadn't really understood where it was.
At the entrance there was this cool piece of art1:
It is made out of sheets of glass stacked on top of each other, and I'm guessing that the naked girl visible in the block is cut out of all the sheets.
Later on I found a train yard with loads of old rusty engines and wagons. But I didn't bother taking any pics in the harsh light. Instead I'll go back some evening.
Then I found this fellar (?) fluttering about. He was unusually patient when he finally settled down though.
Well, it wasn't that much, but at least I got some fresh air... :)
1) I don't take to art very easily so this should be considered quite the compliment.
Labels: canon, Eskilstuna, photography
18 March 2008
I've been going through my photos and putting together a collection of my favourites. I'm quite pleased with the outcome. It looks very colourful when they're all put on the same page:
To get the large versions of the photos, click View as slideshow
at the top of the page.
Labels: flickr, photography
Sigma just announced the new Sigma 50mm 1:1.4 EX. Since I'm a bit disappointed with the performance of my Canon EF 50mm f/1.4, this might be an interesting alternative if the price is right. (I find the Canon 50mm 1.4 is only usably sharp from about f/2.2.)
Edit: Just realized I published a quick sharpness test of the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 last year.
Labels: lenses, photography, Sigma
15 January 2008
After having spent many, many hours keywording all my photos using Lightroom, I have now uploaded all the photos to Flickr. (Here's why I didn't go with Zooomr.)
Obviously I had to get a Pro account for unlimited uploading and storage. With the dollar being so cheap though it was a steal at SEK 160.
The uploading of my ~4,600 photos took roughly four whole days and nights on my ... umm, modest Internet connection. (2 Mbps down, 256 kbps up.)
Now I have a wonderful, searchable, keyworded archive of all the photos that I've taken with my dear EOS 30D. Here, for instance, is a search for leaf
:
Both Flickr and Zooomr have pretty nice AJAX style uploading. Flickr's would only (?) take 400 or so photos in one go. I uploaded the photos as private, but allowed friends to see them all. I have then gone through them all and (so far) selected 673 photos that I've made public.
One really nice thing is that I can write captions for the photos in Lightroom, and when I export the photos the caption is saved to the IPTC info, which Flickr reads and understands. Three cheers for standards and compatibility!
Labels: flickr, photography, zooomr
14 January 2008
Even though I had already paid for a Pro account at Zooomr, I ended up going with Flickr for my online archive/backup.
I usually go with the underdog, which would be Zooomr in this case. Mainly because the underdog usually works harder and more often thinks out of the box in order to win people over.
Zooomr does have free, unlimited photo hosting. And you only pay once to get a Pro account, not anually as with Flickr. But Zooomr has a few annoyances that put me off it.
- Zooomr doesn't cope with Swedish characters (å, ä and ö) in the IPTC tags of uploaded photos.
- Zooomr doesn't display EXIF data in a readable way.
When half the point of uploading the photos was to make them searchable, those bugs are pretty serious. I've spoken to Kristopher, the founder and developer behind Zooomr, and it didn't sound like the EXIF bug was very high up on their to-do-list. So Zooomr will have to wait for now.
If and when they fix those two bugs (which were the only bugs as far as I could see) I might decide to make a second backup on Zooomr. The (future) possibility to sell photos on Zooomr (Marketplace
) definitely sounds interesting anyway. Until then I'll at least be following the Zooomr blog closely. The upcoming Zooomr Mark IV (aka 2008) release might be just what I need. Who knows.
Labels: flickr, photography, zooomr
05 January 2008
Since I only use Lightroom for keywording my JPEG photos, I want to be able to save my keywords to the JPEGs without changing the actual image at all.
The fact that Lightroom by default modifies the look of JPEGs even though I haven't touched a single slider is pretty annoying, but now I have found the solution.
When exporting the photos (Ctrl+Shift+E) you can choose to export the original image data untouched by lightroom's mischievous fingers. To do this, select the "Original" option under File settings -> Format, in the Export dialogue.
Then, when I hit Export, the images will be saved in a new location. They will be exact copyies of the original, but they will be keyworded just as I want them, with synonyms, etc.
You may think: Why doesn't he just hit Ctrl+S to save the keywords to the original files? Well, because that action won't save keyword synonyms, and it doesn't obey the checkboxes Include on export
and Export parents
. So I'd get all my keyword categories saved to the photos as well (for instance Colour and shape
), which I really don't want there...
Labels: lightroom, photography
10 November 2007
Sorry for not following up on my previous post earlier. I made a screencast to show you what I've been up to since then. In fact, I made two, because Jing wouldn't let me record more than 5 minutes of video in one go.
But to cut a long story short, I've discovered Adobe Lightroom. It's great, apart from one or two minor drawbacks.
I hope Adobe will fix the problem with keyword synonyms for v1.3!
Labels: lightroom, photography
05 September 2007
I've had this idea for a while now, to upload every single photograph in my archive to Zooomr. (Zooomr is a free photo hosting service with no limits!)
There are two reasons I want to do this: It would give me an online backup of all my photos. (In case my computer gets stolen and my parents house burns down. At the same time.) Secondly, it would allow me to tag and organize the photos better than with any (cheap/free) software I've found so far.
(FastStone is a great photo viewer, but doesn't allow tags. Google's Picasa almost lets you tag photos, but it's more a matter of filing the photos into different albums. I want tags! How hard can it be? If you know of any photo organizers that have a tagging, please let me know! My email address is in the right hand column.)
I first tested Zooomr quite a while ago, and it seemed like a nice system. But I never got round to actually uploading all my ~4200 photos. Until now.
This morning I had a bit of spare time (just like I have every morning...) so I got started on the serious uploading.
I could have uploaded all the photos to my free account, without paying anything. But I felt I wanted to show my support for their awesome service, so I paid $20 for the symbolic Pro
membership. ($20 is nothing in Swedish money these days. I might even donate some more if I really like what I see...)
Well, so far so good. Zooomr's uploading page is wonderful. You can select loads of images at a time and upload them in one (slow) swoop:
(It complained when I tried to select all 492 photos from December 2006, but happily did 164 from June 2006.)
You can also choose to apply a certain set of tags to all the images you are uploading. These can of course be edited later if you should happen to mark 164 photos with the wrong tag. Like I did.
I'll write soon again with more thoughts on Zooomr when I've used it a bit more.
Labels: photography, zooomr
02 June 2007
I've sort-of been wanting a really wide angle lens for a while. You can do so many cool things with them, and they're actually quite useful as well. For instance, you can easily make really goofy portraits:
The widest lens I've had before was 17 mm, so going down to 10 mm makes quite a difference. Especially in tight spaces and for landscapes. So, having had what felt like my first ever real pay check a few days ago, I ordered a Sigma 10-20mm 1:4-5.6 (and a UV filter to go in front of it). It arrived yesterday. Included was a great carrying pouch and a lens hood.
[@Tommy: Den finns med Nikonfattning också.]
After work and dinner I went out and played with it for four hours :) in town.
First I headed for the historic parts of the town. Basically a large collection of 17th century smithies, now functioning as a tourist attraction with restaurants, etc.
This bell tower worked quite well from below I thought. Sadly you can't actually make out the bell here:
Close to the old smithies I found what looked like a half deserted factory building.
Just as I was going to leave, I saw this bracelet haning on a hinge on the fence:
The last three photos were taken with my old 75-300mm lens.
Then I headed back home, but got stuck at the church which looked pretty good against the blue sky.
There were plenty of cool cars rolling around, so I had a go at improving my panning skills. Not sure what the first one is though... some kind of Chevy perhaps?
By now it was so dark I decided to go back into town to have a shot at some lit-up fountains that I pass every day going to work.
Going there, the view of the river was pleasing to the eye. I was lucky enough to get a horde of jackdaws in the shot.
And a last shot of the church from across the river before I went home. This time I actually did go home.
I'm getting close to 10,000 photos now. My camera has made 9949 exposures, and out of those I've kept 3604, or 36%. Sadly I haven't printed very many, but I'm planning on making a few enlargements soon to put up on my bare walls.
Labels: canon, Eskilstuna, lenses, photography, Sigma
22 May 2007
Meet Wilma, Jenny's cat. She likes to sit in Jenny's bicycle basket. For two reasons.
She loves to use the mesh for sharpening her claws. And she seems to like the view.
I don't tend to be an animal person, but Wilma really is the perfect cat. She's just the right mixture of playfulness, cuddliness and hunter instinct.
Meet Benji. (I think that's his name, but I may have misheard him.)
Benji, as you can see, is a disgusting fly. No playfulness, cuddliness or hunter instinct. Like many of his cousins, Benji couldn't tell a pane of glass from air. So, let's move on.
This weekend I finally did what I was hoping to do last May, but couldn't because my camera was delayed from Canon.
A photo session with the Fritillary in Vaksala. The photo above was one of the best in (front of) my eyes. Don't believe me? Check the rest.
At home, some tulips dad got on his 50th birthday were wilting. For some reason I was lying on the floor beneath them and spotted this angle:
Oh yes, I think I was lying on the floor because I was using the DVD player. Not that I don't believe in remotes, but I often end up on the floor when operating the video or DVD.
I quite like this photo blogging thing. I might do it more often. Time will tell.
Labels: photography
18 February 2007
A couple of weeks ago I got myself a vertical (battery) grip for my Canon EOS 30D. It's wonderful!
It stops you from having to flap your elbow around when shooting vertical shots, and since the normal grip is made longer you can use your whole hand to support the camera.
Especially when I'm using an external flash or my EF 70-300mm IS it feels so much better to hold.
I can agree with those who say that it feels plasticky. It does feel less solid than the camera itself, but I would still recommend it to anyone who uses an external flash or a heavy lens (or both).
Labels: canon, photography
22 January 2007
I often think flash photos look unnatural. Flat and cold. Having an external flash which you can swivel to bounce the light off a ceiling or wall gets rid of the flat light, but you may still find the light looks unnaturally cold. This tip will give flash photos the feeling of being shot in ambient light.
The solution lies in adjusting the white balance setting of your camera. The trick is to manually set your white balance to 7000 K. (Or even higher – experiment!) By doing this your flash photos will end up a shade warmer than if you set the white balance to flash
. When the camera is set to 7000 K it will interpret the light from the flash as slightly warm/yellow, since it has a colour temperature of 6000 K.
Hover the photo below to see the (slight!) difference this makes.
I know this is possible on the Canon EOS 30D, Canon EOS 5D, Nikon D200, Nikon D80 and the more expensive SLRs, but it may also be possible on some serious
compacts. Fiddle around with your menus and settings and see what you find!
Edit: Here are some good articles on white balance and colour temperature:
Labels: canon, photography
16 January 2007
In response to this thread over at photo.net I decided to test my copy of the Canon EF 50mm 1:1.4 USM at various apertures.
The question posted in the thread is basically Can the Ef 50mm be used at f/1.4, or is it only sharp at f/2.8?
.
Since it is late at night here, my test subject is rather boring. It's a Volvo brochure laid out flat on my floor:
However, the tiny text is good for showing lens sharpness.
I shot test pictures at f/1.4, f/2.0, f/2.8, f/4.0, f/5.6 and f/8. Here are the obligatory 100% crops. I should add that the images where shot with sharpness set to 3 (out of 7) and contrast at -4 in my 30D.
F/1.4
As you can see, at f/1.4 the edges are slightly soft. The edges are sharper at f/2.0, and even sharper at f/2.8:
F/2.0
F/2.8
From f/2.8 and up, the results are pretty similar:
F/4.0
F/5.6
F/8
So, to answer the question: The Canon EF 50mm 1:1.4 USM is not as sharp at f/1.4 and f/2.0 as it is at f/2.8 and above, but I'd say it is definitely usable.
Labels: canon, lenses, photography
30 December 2006
Here's a tip for those of you who have one of Canon's digital EOS cameras (30D, 5D, 1D Mark II, 400D) and possibly others too:
Turn the contrast down to -4.
This may sound strange. Won't that make my pictures grey and boring?!
you might think.
No, it won't. But it will bring out more detail in highlights and shadows. It gives the impression of increasing the dynamic range in the photos, even though – technically – it doesn't.
Below are two example photos. The shown image is at contrast 0. Hover the image to see contrast -4.
So ... the last few days or so I've been re-developing all my (~2200) raw image files with the contrast set to -4.
:-)
Labels: canon, photography
18 October 2006
This evening I went to a basketball game (my first ever) with a couple of friends from my journalist class (Kajsa, Silvana, Hanna & Linda). I had decided to try out sports photo journalism, and to see if my lenses would be of any use at an indoor game.
In the end I managed to get a few decent shots. My friends encouraged me to try and sell the photos to the local paper in the city of the team that lost (Länstidningen Södertälje), so when I got home I called them up. Said I had pictures of one of their players on a stretcher. And that was that! I'm getting 800 SEK for it, about $ 110, which feels great considering I only really went for fun!
Hopefully I'll be able to see the picture tomorrow when I'm sorting the morning newspapers at school. (I'm on duty this week!)
Labels: photography
23 August 2006
On Tuesday I got myself two new lenses: the EF 70-300mm 1:4-5.6 IS USM (phew!) and the EF 50mm 1:1.4 USM.
I've been wanting the EF 50 1.4 for a long time, since it opens new opportunities in low light. On the 30D (with the 1.6x crop making it equivalent of 80 mm focal length with 35mm film) it also works great as a portrait lens.
I previously had the EF 75-300 1:4-5.6 III, which I got in a kit with my EOS 300 and an EF 28-90mm 1:4-5.6. This combination was great for learning, but neither of the lenses were any wonders of sharpness, so now I've replaced them both for lenses which can make the most of the 8 megapixels in my 30D. (I have the Sigma 17-70mm 1:2.8-4.5 as my standard zoom.)
With the 70-300 IS I'll feel more comfortable using the 300 mm end, since the 70-300 IS is very sharp throughout the zoom range, as opposed to the EF 75-300mm that I owned before. Both sharpness and chromatic aberrations when shooting at 300 mm are much better/less severe with the new lens, thanks to a UD
lens element (made with Ultra-low Dispersion glass).
Then, of course, the 70-300 also has image stabilizing which can truly work wonders in low light. Or what can you say when you get a sharp picture at the equivalent of 112 mm with a shutter speed of 1/8 sec?
I'll be adding some images I took with the 70-300 on Monday to my Photography website.
Edit: I have now added two new galleries at my photography website, Now
and Then
.
Labels: canon, lenses, photography
08 August 2006
The shop I work at now has the Sony Alpha 100 (DSLR-A100) in stock. After having just felt it briefly, here are some thoughts:
- 10 MP &ndash good!
- Higher noise levels than Canon EOS 350D and 30D &ndash not so good!
- Anti-shake built in &ndash good1!
- Price: SEK 9900/USD 1340 (in Sweden) – as expected!
- Included lens: 18–70 – good zoom range!
- Plasticky feeling – not so good!
- SATDOT – Shake-All-The-Dust-Off TechnologyTM – good!
- Shutter release placed behind the controller wheel thing – not so good2!
- Constantly auto-focusing left right and center - can someone please tell me this is possible to switch off!
1) However, having the stabilizer in the lens has one apparent advantage: You can see the effect, and thus it is easier to make the most of the motion dampening. Try a Canon lens with IS, and you'll see what I mean.
2) This was one of the first things that struck me – the shutter release is in the wrong place!
All in all it seems a fairly good camera. Personally, I still don't regret getting the 30D, which for 40% more money feels much more robust. I think it was worth it. Actually, it's basically just the look and feel of the 30D that makes me prefer it over the Alpha 100. Not everone else will feel the same, of course. If I could have had one of the Alpha 100's features on my 30D it would have been the anti-shake.
Labels: canon, photography
05 June 2006
One of the main problems with digital SLRs is their tendency to collect dust on the sensor. Every time you change lenses you risk getting more dust on the sensor.
I noticed dust on my sensor the other day when taking pictures of lightning, since I was using a very small aperture – f/22. (The dust only shows up in pictures taken with a small aperture.)
I thought I'd investigate how small apertures you can use without the dust becoming visible.
I simply shot a series of photos of my white wardrobe door, out of focus, at different aperture sizes.
I decided to make a little animation, running from f/4.5 to f/36:
It seems as if you won't see the dust at all if you stick to f/8 or lower, and in most scenes you would probably not be able to find the dust at f/11 either. At f/16 you might see the dust in large single-coloured areas. Apertures f/22 and up should be used with care, since you risk getting very sharp black dots in the picture.
The good thing is that you seldom need more than f/8 or f/11 to get the depth of field you want, at least on crop
SLRs such as the 30D and 350D. In other words, you shouldn't miss those very small apertures much.
Labels: photography
04 June 2006
The full title of this should have been Canon EF 28-90mm 1:4-5.6 vs. Sigma AF 17-70mm 1:2.8-4.5 at ~35 mm
, but it got rather long.
I've just done a small series of shots at f/4, 5.6 and 8 with the Canon and the Sigma, at 35 mm focal length.
As you'll see, this test displays more than anything why it's worth spending some more money on getting a sturdy tripod. Even though I didn't intentionally change the camera's position, it has quite obviously moved between the shots.
Below are 100% center crops. The Canon 28-90 is on the left, the Sigma 17-70 is on the right. Oh, and I should say that the Sigma ended up at 36 mm, and the Canon at 35 mm. First up, f/4:
Then we have f/5.6:
Finally, f/8:
Edit: I just realized that I forgot to write some kind of conclusion. The Sigma is a lot sharper at f/4, but it doesn't get much sharper at f/5.6 and f/8. The Canon is, in comparison, pretty soft
at f/4, but improves significantly to f/8. At f/8 the main difference between the two seems to be the colour. The Sigma looks slightly more saturated. I did have the camera WB set to Cloudy
, so the difference shouldn't be because of the AWB treating the photos differently.
Labels: canon, lenses, photography, Sigma
Yesterday we had a thunderstorm, so I decided to try and catch a flash of lightning with my new 30D. I had been thinking of this previously, so I already had a plan:
- Rig the camera on my tripod, overlooking the
active
parts of the sky.
- Set it to the smallest aperture, or something like f/16 depending on how dark it is.
- Set the camera to ISO 100.
- Set it to JPEG quality for improved buffer size.
- Set the drive mode to high frame rate.
- Use the shutter-release (RS-80N3) to lock the camera in drive mode, clicking away like mad.
Having the low ISO and small aperture made each exposure ~0.8 seconds, which was almost enough for the CF card to keep up. (A Sandisk 2GB Ultra II, if you're wondering.) I later adjusted the camera to over-expose by 2/3 of a stop to get even longer exposures, ~1.3 secs. At this rate the JPEGs were written to the card as fast as they were being shot.
Having the camera set in drive mode with long shutter speeds meant that the camera was taking in light perhaps 2/3 of the time, or more. That means that the chances of a lightning strike ending up in a picture were fairly large.
About 20 minutes later I had 1,000 pictures to sift through. I caught four flashes, but none of the pictures are very awe-invoking. In fact, the last one you can barely see at all...
Well, this one is very small, but still one of the clearer sparks.
A very weak one. Didn't find it when looking through the photos the first time...
The best one. Click and zoom into this one, it's quite nice up close.
This one is very weak, but if you look at the high-res version you can see that it extends quite far over to the left. Pretty cool.
Obviously, these shots are pretty lousy as lightning photos go... But I had a good time anyway, and I now know that the technique works fairly well. Although, having used up 1% of my shutter's expected life-span I wish I'd got some better shots... :-)
If you've got a digital SLR I suggest you try this sometime. (Perhaps when you've got a thunderstorm.) Do stand somewhere safe though.
An ND filter would allow you to get even longer exposures, so as to reduce the number of frames somewhat and increase the chances of catching a flash on film ... um ... CMOS. It might also allow you to use a slightly larger aperture, to reduce visible sensor dust.
It would probably have been easier to do this if it had been a little darker, too. A darker scene would also have made for more impressive-looking shots I guess.
I did notice, after 700 odd shots, that the shutter had slowed noticeably. The exposures were still 1.3 secs, so the write speed shouldn't have been the problem. In fact, the buffer was empty, so write speed can't have been the problem. So I'm not sure why the camera did this. It was perhaps getting over-heated or something. So if you do try this, keep an eye on your camera and abort the experiment if you see smoke coming out from between the seals or the lens mount... :-)
Labels: photography
03 June 2006
I've had my 30D for about a week now, so it's time to put up some first shots
. Here are some that I had the pleasure to take during the last week. All were shot in raw and have been developed using Canon RIT, with the Faithful
picture style and sharpness at +3.
Snail on wet grass. The close focusing of the Sigma 17-70mm is very handy. Technical stuff: 1/125 sec, f/4.5 @ 70 mm, ISO 100. (Sigma 17-70mm.) Cloudy
white balance setting.
Blue sky reflected. Caught this scene on the way home from work. I hope the mood of it comes across. Technical stuff: 1/800 sec, f/5.6 @ 70 mm, ISO 100. (Sigma 17-70mm.) Cloudy white balance setting.
Old houses. Went for a walk around town to see what there was to photograph. Found this charming street. Technical stuff: 1/200 sec, f/8 @ 21 mm, ISO 100. (Sigma 17-70mm.) Shade
white balance setting.
Bleeding heart. In our garden. Technical stuff: 1/250 sec, f/4.5 @ 70 mm, ISO 100. (Sigma 17-70mm.) Daylight
white balance setting.
Wilted rose. In our lounge. Technical stuff: 1/800 sec, f/5.6 @ 75 mm, ISO 800. (EF 75-300mm with close-up lens 500D.) Shade
white balance setting.
Violet bud, unknown species. In our garden. Technical stuff: 1/250 sec, f/7.1 @ 120 mm. (EF 75-300mm with close-up lens 500D.) Cloudy
white balance setting.
Unknown Species II, The Return of Pink. Technical stuff: 1/400 sec, f/7.1 @ 80 mm. (EF 75-300mm with close-up lens 500D.) Cloudy white balance setting.
Labels: canon, photography
Well, I got my 30D on Monday. (Finally!) I ordered it basically a month ago. Oh boy is this a nice camera... I've had the lens since the 16 May, but obviously haven't been able to use it properly until now.
Thought I'd give you a little review of it here. If you're wondering, I'm not having second thoughts about my purchase. I just thought it would be wrong to title this First Thoughts
, since I've had it for about a week now :-) All the same, it won't be a complete review – there are plenty of those out there for you already. I'll just comment on a few different aspects of the camera.
The size of the grip.
This is the main reason I got the 30D instead of the 350D. I'm not so bothered about the 5 frames per second, although it is nice at times. Having tried the 350D with a ~400 gram lens and a flash attached, I am convinced I made the right choice. For me, the 350D was far to small to feel comfortable. I got the feeling I was only holding it with my fingertips.
I actually ordered the vertical grip (BG-E2) as well, but canceled it when I read that it wasn't very high quality, and sometimes could cause power-cuts. I would definitely like the vertical grip for that last bit of hand to fit onto the camera in landscape orientation, and obviously not having to hold your arm up for verticals would be nice. However, having a battery grip on when using a tripod is not optimal in my experience, which is half the reason I decided to skip the BG-E2.
The 2.5-inch display
This, obviously, is very nice to have. Some have complained about the brightness not being good enough for outdoor use. I agree that the default (middle) brightness setting is a bit low for daylight use, but you just need to up it two notches for it to be fine. However, remember to turn it down again, or your pictures will look overexposed when you review your photos in less light.
The viewfinder
Some mean that the viewfinder of the 20D and 30D is on the small side. I feel it's just right, probably mainly because of me wearing glasses. With it not being huge, I can easily see all of it at the same time. If it were any bigger I would have to keep moving my eye in relation to the camera to see the edges of the frame.
The USB connection
(See the edit at the end of this post.) My largest disappointment with the 30D must be the non-functional USB-to-computer connection. The CD doesn't seem to include any so called WIA drivers for the camera, which may be why the connection keeps dying in the middle of transfers. I've given up completely on moving pictures directly from the camera, because it seems impossible to move more than a few before the camera disconnects from the computer. I've ordered a CF card reader. While some may say that I should use a card reader all the same, I feel it should at least be possible, if a little slow, to transfer pictures straight from the camera. Canon, are you listening?
The Auto White Balance
Some reviews have complained about Canon's AWB not handling tungsten light very well. My thought is that this is because they don't want to risk taking the warmth out of photos shot at dawn and dusk. I'd love to hear what you think on the subject – leave a comment if you think I'm right or wrong.
The Multi-Controller
There is a small joy-stick thing on the back of the 30D (and the 20D) which is used for moving around when reviewing photos. One of the custom functions (nr 13, set to 1) lets you use this multi-controller
for quickly selecting which AF point to use. I think this should be the default behaviour, since it is much quicker and easier than having to press the AF-point selection button first.
The Sigma 17-70mm 1:2.8-4.5 DC
Without having made any direct, scientific comparisons, this lens seems very sharp. Photozone.de have done though, and the charts show that this lens is better than the EF 17-85 IS USM in many ways, apart from the fact that it doesn't have IS of course. I'll do a comparison with my EF 28-90mm f/4-5.6 later just for the fun. I realize they will be like day and night, optically. They definitely are quality-wise anyway.
The Over-All Feeling
This is a camera I will have lots of fun using, hopefully for many days to come!
Edit: After consulting my fellow photographers in the MBP Forums, I tried reinstalling all the Canon software. If I had read the manual I would have seen a warning to not connect the camera before installing anything. I must have done just that, because it works fine now that I have reinstalled.
Labels: canon, lenses, photography, Sigma
03 May 2006
Well, just as I suspected, I couldn't resist the temptation. Yesterday I went down to Allradio, were I'll be working this summer BTW, and ordered a Canon EOS 30D body and a Sigma AF 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC lens. Can't wait to get clicking.
Labels: canon, photography
25 April 2006
I found a very detailed and interesting review of the Canon EOS 30D, which highlights things I haven't heard about in previous reviews.
Here are some of the interesting facts I didn't know until reading this review:
While still able to shoot at a fast 5 fps rate, the Canon EOS 30D is also switchable to a low-speed 3 fps continuous shooting rate. The 30D can also shoot at rated speed with non-USM (Ultrasonic Motor) lenses while the 20D fell back to 3.5 fps when using these.
The emphasis there was mine. Then they compare the shutter sound of the 30D and the 20D:
Those shooting in quiet venues such as weddings will like the Canon EOS 30D's quieter shutter sound. The 20D shutter has a "CLACK" sound to it whereas the 30D has a more subtle sound.
However, having used the 30D previously, and having listened to the provided sound files (20D, 30D), I don't find the difference to be so huge. They both are fairly loud, but the 30D perhaps has a slightly softer, muffled flock
, as opposed to the 20D's sharp clack
. Anyway, until now I thought they had identical shutters. It's also nice to know that the 30D shutter is rated at 100,000 shots, while the 20D was only
rated at 50,000. That should let you fire away whithout worrying about the shutter waring out :-)
The following was also news to me... (Quoted, I think, from a Canon press release.)
Shapes around the flash head and lens mount have been changed subtly to suggest Canon's upper-range models. The mode dial now has a metallic finish. The grip below the shutter button has been extended for better purchase with the middle fingers and improved overall handling. A new groove where the middle finger falls improves comfort and security.
And, the reviewer concludes:
The first thing I noticed when picking up the 30D was the grippier surface on the rubber grip. The reshaped grip is nice, but just slightly different than the 20D.
Sounds good. Only a small improvement, but hey, don't fix what ain't broken.
I also found some interesting info in the official 30D white-paper. Specifically, they explained the Picture Styles very well:
Style 1 – Standard is for users who do not intend to do any post-processing of their images. Right out of the camera, the pictures look crisp and vibrant, with the sharpness set to 3
and the color tone and saturation set to obtain vivid colors. Excellent prints will eventuate without any further adjustment. It is equivalent to parameter 1 on the EOS 20D.
Style 2 – Portrait has color tone and saturation settings that yield natural skin tones. The sharpness is set one step weaker than the Standard setting so that skin and hair look softer.
Style 3 – Landscape has color tone and saturation settings that give vivid blues and greens for skies and greenery. The sharpness is set one step stronger than the Standard setting so that the outlines of mountains, trees, and buildings look more crisp.
Style 4 – Neutral yields natural color reproduction, and no sharpness is applied. This setting is ideal for post-processing and is the same as the EOS-1D Series defaults.
Style 5 – Faithful is intended to match the original as closely as possible. It is the same
as Faithful in Digital Photo Professional. When the subject is photographed in 5,200K
light, the color is adjusted colorimetrically to match the subject's color. No sharpness is applied. This setting, too, is designed for workflow that includes post-processing.
Style 6 – Monochrome with filter effects and color tones, is the same as the EOS 20D's monochrome setting.
I also downloaded the full 30D manual and read about the custom functions. Some which I found particularly interesting were...
- SET-button options (no. 1). You can link it to recording quality or Picture Style selection. I would definately set it to the latter, since it would be very useful to have quickly available when shooting.
- AF-assist beam options (no. 5). Allows you to disable the AF-assist beam when you haven't got an external flash unit. I'll probably do this since I find the stroboscope style AF-assist of the built-in flash really annoying.
- Mirror lock-up (no. 12), to reduce shake when shooting long exposures at long focal lengths on a tripod.
- Quick focus point selection with mini joystick (no. 13). The default setting requires you to press the AF point selection button first. With this custom function enabled you can use the mini joystick directly.
- Second curtain flash sync (no. 15)
Getting more and more tempted for each day... Just need to wait until I get my next pay. A whole month! I guess the price might go down in that time... (Nothing wrong in hoping, right?)
Here's what I'm hoping to get:
- EOS 30D body, no kit lens. (Read about the kit lenses here.)
- Sigma AF 17-70mm 2.8-4.5 DC macro. (Sharper, cheaper and faster than the kit lenses.)
- 2 GB CF card (Or 4 GB? For travelling you want plenty...)
I plan on selling my EOS 300 with the 28-90mm lens, but I'll hang on to my 75-300mm for now. Hopefully I'll get the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM sometime in the future. (Which is sharper than my current lens, and has 3-stop image stabilizing.) I already have the 420EX flash, which will work great with the 30D.
I'll let you know when I buckle under and order it.
Labels: canon, photography
18 April 2006
Can't stop thinking about it. The Canon EOS 30D. I got to play around with it last week-end, and ever since, I can't think of anything else.
I've been wondering whether I should get a second hand 20D instead, but I'd really like to have the spot metering of the 30D, as well as the larger screen. The 20D's 1.8 inch screen feels tiny when you've tried the 30D. Also, the direct access to the ISO setting is very useful, so I don't think I'll be getting a 350D since you have to use a menu to change the ISO there.
I've also read up on the lens tests over at Photozone. I'm a bit skeptical about Canon's EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 USM IS, since it seems to fair rather poorly. It has serious chromatic aberation, vignetting and barrel distortion. The
Sigma AF 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC macro is a much better buy, costing around 3500 SEK (€ 370) compared to the Canon's roughly 6000 SEK (€ 670). It is sharper (higher resolution) and suffers less from distortion and chromatic aberration. The vignetting is only slightly less pronounced in the Sigma. It doesn't have the Image Stabilizing that the Canon lens has, but instead it has a larger maximum aperture, by nearly a full stop. (2.8 vs. 4.0.)
Well, we'll see if this ever becomes more than just a dream... Extremely tempted right now anyway.
Labels: canon, lenses, photography, Sigma
10 September 2005
I was just doing some Google Image searching, when I came across the website of Outrun Sailing. It seems they have used one of my photographs to create the top graphic of this page. The photograph in question is the sunset behind Langdale Pikes, which I have in the dawn & dusk section of my web gallery.
It's quite clearly my photograph they have used. I sent the owner of the small-time criminal company an email on the 7th of September:
(Not so) dear sir and madam,
I happened to notice that you have stolen (copied) my photograph of a sunset over Langdale Pikes on your website. (Google Image search is awfully useful, isn't it?) Since I have specifically written on my website ( http://david.naylor.se/ ) that commercial use of my photographs is forbidden unless an agreement (& payment) is made, I demand you remove it at once. If you would rather pay me for being allowed to use it, we could probably agree on a reasonable sum.
David Naylor
I have yet to receive a reply. So, if anyone wants to help me carry out a DDOS attack on these guys I would be very greatful :-) Heh. No, only kidding. But you could send them an email if you had a few minutes – that'd be great.
Update: Since I got no reply to my first email I sent another one, making it clear that I was serious about the matter:
Hello.
I was just wanting to let you know that the UK Police Force have an excellent online crime-reporting tool. Do you want to settle the photograph issue, or should I just report you to the police? It's your choice.
David Naylor
Apparently this was just what was needed to get some action from Bob at Outrun Sailing. As you can read in the comments below, the creators of the website claim to have gotten the photo from a website with Royalty Free
photos for anyone to use. I'm sure they're telling the truth, but obviously they need to choose their sources more carefully in the future. Also, these two emails apparently made up a stream of offending emails
. Heh. Anyway, the photo has now been removed and all is well that ends well.
Labels: photography
25 August 2005
Of course, the term wanting
is a broad term. Maybe I should say The Canon 5D is Almost Something I Could Buy. But it's just a tad too expensive still, at around $3,300, for my student budget. :-)
The ideal digital SLR (for me) would have around 8 megapixels, be capable of about 3 or 4 frames per second and would have a full size image sensor. It could cost about $1,000 or so. Of course, I wouldn't mind if it were even cheaper... The reason I would prefer a full-size image sensor is so that I can use my current Canon EF lenses without quality loss. (If I were to use a digital SLR with an image sensor smaller than the default 24x36 mm the chromatic aberration of my (fairly cheap) lenses would be magnified by the same factor as the rest of the picture. (Often 1.6 times with Canon's digital SLRs.)
Labels: canon, photography
Full-text blog feed
