0
Sony FE Images Thread
p.1689 #1Sony FE Images Thread
Two images from the cascading waterfall at Whiney Portal. Both with SR app and 64-image but I didn't get that smooth, milky appearance of the water I was expecting. Maybe there was simply too much water and the individual shutter speeds were too fast since it was bright. I was at this location some 12 years ago and 1 sec regular exposure was enough to create that smooth appearance. Maybe I felt too cocky and relied too much on the app. I left the physical ND filter in the car through out this trip and at this particular location, I didn't feel like hiking back down to get it 
.
. |
||
 © AGeoJO 2016 |
||
 |
|
||
 © AGeoJO 2016 |
||
|
Jun 27, 2016 at 02:09 PM
p.1689 #2Sony FE Images Thread
Looks like a nice location Joshua but the water does indeed look a bit funky. I am going to try out (hopefully) the SR app this weekend but am not sure what settings to start with. I suppose it is best to guess what length of exposure is best and then calculate roughly how many shots you need?
Jun 27, 2016 at 02:21 PM
p.1689 #3Sony FE Images Thread
**Fairies exist**
Model: Dilyana
London, UK
June 2016
Sony A7RII + Sigma MC-11 + Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 EX DG HSM (taken at 300mm wide open)
Fairies exist by kalpachev1, on Flickr
Model: Dilyana
London, UK
June 2016
Sony A7RII + Sigma MC-11 + Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 EX DG HSM (taken at 300mm wide open)
Fairies exist by kalpachev1, on FlickrJun 27, 2016 at 02:26 PM
p.1689 #4Sony FE Images Thread
AGeoJO wrote:
Two images from the cascading waterfall at Whiney Portal. Both with SR app and 64-image but I didn't get that smooth, milky appearance of the water I was expecting. Maybe there was simply too much water and the individual shutter speeds were too fast since it was bright. I was at this location some 12 years ago and 1 sec regular exposure was enough to create that smooth appearance. Maybe I felt too cocky and relied too much on the app. I left the physical ND filter in the car through out this trip and at this particular location, I...Show more →
Hey Joshua I wonder if 64 images is too many for the waterfall! I've experienced something similar and sometimes less is more! Still, what a great composition of a great scene.
Two images from the cascading waterfall at Whiney Portal. Both with SR app and 64-image but I didn't get that smooth, milky appearance of the water I was expecting. Maybe there was simply too much water and the individual shutter speeds were too fast since it was bright. I was at this location some 12 years ago and 1 sec regular exposure was enough to create that smooth appearance. Maybe I felt too cocky and relied too much on the app. I left the physical ND filter in the car through out this trip and at this particular location, I...Show more →
Hey Joshua I wonder if 64 images is too many for the waterfall! I've experienced something similar and sometimes less is more! Still, what a great composition of a great scene.
Jun 27, 2016 at 02:49 PM
p.1689 #5Sony FE Images Thread
Gary Clennan wrote:
Looks like a nice location Joshua but the water does indeed look a bit funky. I am going to try out (hopefully) the SR app this weekend but am not sure what settings to start with. I suppose it is best to guess what length of exposure is best and then calculate roughly how many shots you need?
Thank you, Gary. You can choose the mode of blending, depending on the effect; waterfall, waves, reflection, etc. And you can choose 4 different settings; minor, moderate, strong and manual. From what i could gather from other folks' settings, the most common used is between 64 and 128 shutter actuations. I noticed that the each setting in the camera can vary depending on the actual conditions. It looks like the camera can recognize the situation and decide how many shutter actuations are good for what setting under those specific conditions.
In my situation, I am convinced that the wonkiness has to do with the shutter speed for each capture. It was simply too bright that day. I should have used a slower shutter speed by stopping down the aperture more. On the monitor when viewed in the field, the water of my images looked fine and actually quite good and not just smooth.
rji2goleez wrote:
.Hey Joshua I wonder if 64 images is too many for the waterfall! I've experienced something similar and sometimes less is more! Still, what a great composition of a great scene.
Bob, thank you! That's a possibility, too, I guess. It is worth experimenting some more. That waterfall is awesome in the fall. Maybe I should go back there and redo the shoot.
Edited on Jun 27, 2016 at 03:10 PM · View previous versions
Looks like a nice location Joshua but the water does indeed look a bit funky. I am going to try out (hopefully) the SR app this weekend but am not sure what settings to start with. I suppose it is best to guess what length of exposure is best and then calculate roughly how many shots you need?
Thank you, Gary. You can choose the mode of blending, depending on the effect; waterfall, waves, reflection, etc. And you can choose 4 different settings; minor, moderate, strong and manual. From what i could gather from other folks' settings, the most common used is between 64 and 128 shutter actuations. I noticed that the each setting in the camera can vary depending on the actual conditions. It looks like the camera can recognize the situation and decide how many shutter actuations are good for what setting under those specific conditions.
In my situation, I am convinced that the wonkiness has to do with the shutter speed for each capture. It was simply too bright that day. I should have used a slower shutter speed by stopping down the aperture more. On the monitor when viewed in the field, the water of my images looked fine and actually quite good and not just smooth.
rji2goleez wrote:
AGeoJO wrote
Two images from the cascading waterfall at Whiney Portal. Both with SR app and 64-image but I didn't get that smooth, milky appearance of the water I was expecting. Maybe there was simply too much water and the individual shutter speeds were too fast since it was bright. I was at this location some 12 years ago and 1 sec regular exposure was enough to create that smooth appearance. Maybe I felt too cocky and relied too much on the app. I left the physical ND filter in the car through out this trip and at this particular location, I didn't feel like hiking back down to get it.Bob, thank you! That's a possibility, too, I guess. It is worth experimenting some more. That waterfall is awesome in the fall. Maybe I should go back there and redo the shoot.
Edited on Jun 27, 2016 at 03:10 PM · View previous versions
Jun 27, 2016 at 02:54 PM
p.1689 #6Sony FE Images Thread
Test shot Loxia 50 
DSC03626 by Ronny Olsson, on Flickr
Sony A7R II + Zeiss Loxia 50mm f/2 Planar T* by Ronny Olsson, on Flickr
New Lens
New Lens Loxa 21 and Loxia 50 by Ronny Olsson, on Flickr
DSC03626 by Ronny Olsson, on Flickr
Sony A7R II + Zeiss Loxia 50mm f/2 Planar T* by Ronny Olsson, on Flickr
New Lens
New Lens Loxa 21 and Loxia 50 by Ronny Olsson, on Flickr
Jun 27, 2016 at 03:10 PM
p.1689 #7Sony FE Images Thread
AGeoJO wrote:
Two images from the cascading waterfall at Whiney Portal. Both with SR app and 64-image but I didn't get that smooth, milky appearance of the water I was expecting. Maybe there was simply too much water and the individual shutter speeds were too fast since it was bright. I was at this location some 12 years ago and 1 sec regular exposure was enough to create that smooth appearance. Maybe I felt too cocky and relied too much on the app. I left the physical ND filter in the car through out this trip and at this particular location, I...Show more →
I have found that the SR app works well only within certain limits.
It does a nice job on clouds, and can do a decent job on moving water if it's on the longer side of exposures.
However, like what you've just discovered (in my case, it was with ocean waves) it gives a somewhat choppy appearance to the water if the shutter speed is too high given the lighting conditions.
I've gone back to carrying my ND set with me and deciding whether to use the app or the ND according to the setting.
Two images from the cascading waterfall at Whiney Portal. Both with SR app and 64-image but I didn't get that smooth, milky appearance of the water I was expecting. Maybe there was simply too much water and the individual shutter speeds were too fast since it was bright. I was at this location some 12 years ago and 1 sec regular exposure was enough to create that smooth appearance. Maybe I felt too cocky and relied too much on the app. I left the physical ND filter in the car through out this trip and at this particular location, I...Show more →
I have found that the SR app works well only within certain limits.
It does a nice job on clouds, and can do a decent job on moving water if it's on the longer side of exposures.
However, like what you've just discovered (in my case, it was with ocean waves) it gives a somewhat choppy appearance to the water if the shutter speed is too high given the lighting conditions.
I've gone back to carrying my ND set with me and deciding whether to use the app or the ND according to the setting.
Jun 27, 2016 at 03:34 PM
p.1689 #8Sony FE Images Thread
Joshua, that is why I still use traditional ND-filters. They are perfectly fine up to 30 seconds if you chase high IQ.
Jun 27, 2016 at 03:39 PM
p.1689 #9Sony FE Images Thread
puckman wrote:
.I have found that the SR app works well only within certain limits.
It does a nice job on clouds, and can do a decent job on moving water if it's on the longer side of exposures.
However, like what you've just discovered (in my case, it was with ocean waves) it gives a somewhat choppy appearance to the water if the shutter speed is too high given the lighting conditions.
I've gone back to carrying my ND set with me and deciding whether to use the app or the ND according to the setting.
MJKoski wrote:
Joshua, that is why I still use traditional ND-filters. They are perfectly fine up to 30 seconds if you chase high IQ.
Gentlemen, you are right on the money. That app worked wonders in Vegas at the Bellagio Fountain, at the South Tufa, Mono Lake and to get streaks in the clouds at the Ancient Bristlecone Pine forest. Yup, I got too "cocky" there and went overboard with it. The ironic thing is I had my ND filter in a different bag but left it in the car and didn't use it at all throughout the trip until the very last stop here at the waterfall, where it would have been different. Oh, well.
I believe that a combination of physical ND filter and this app may have worked better here.
AGeoJO wrote
Two images from the cascading waterfall at Whiney Portal. Both with SR app and 64-image but I didn't get that smooth, milky appearance of the water I was expecting. Maybe there was simply too much water and the individual shutter speeds were too fast since it was bright. I was at this location some 12 years ago and 1 sec regular exposure was enough to create that smooth appearance. Maybe I felt too cocky and relied too much on the app. I left the physical ND filter in the car through out this trip and at this particular location, I didn't feel like hiking back down to get it.It does a nice job on clouds, and can do a decent job on moving water if it's on the longer side of exposures.
However, like what you've just discovered (in my case, it was with ocean waves) it gives a somewhat choppy appearance to the water if the shutter speed is too high given the lighting conditions.
I've gone back to carrying my ND set with me and deciding whether to use the app or the ND according to the setting.
MJKoski wrote:
Joshua, that is why I still use traditional ND-filters. They are perfectly fine up to 30 seconds if you chase high IQ.
Gentlemen, you are right on the money. That app worked wonders in Vegas at the Bellagio Fountain, at the South Tufa, Mono Lake and to get streaks in the clouds at the Ancient Bristlecone Pine forest. Yup, I got too "cocky" there and went overboard with it. The ironic thing is I had my ND filter in a different bag but left it in the car and didn't use it at all throughout the trip until the very last stop here at the waterfall, where it would have been different. Oh, well.
I believe that a combination of physical ND filter and this app may have worked better here.
Jun 27, 2016 at 03:48 PM
p.1689 #10Sony FE Images Thread
Indeed, combination might work. I used to do very milky and smooth waterfalls in the past but these days I try to keep it down to 1-2 seconds. This way I can have the needed smoothness and still have some "energy" of the water present.
Jun 27, 2016 at 10:40 PM
|
p.1689 #11Sony FE Images Thread
© MikeReif 2016
Jun 28, 2016 at 12:40 AM
p.1689 #12Sony FE Images Thread
Different day, different light and even cameras and sensor stacks; clearly unfair comparison to both lenses, but that's all I got. So, SEM21 gets the bite on 36MP but at additional PP work; Loxia on 42MP gets it easy
Loxia vs SEM 21 - @f/2.8 vs. @f/3.4
Jun 28, 2016 at 12:45 AM
p.1689 #13Sony FE Images Thread
Superb images René, Werner, Joshua...
Otus 55 on A7R II
Otus 55 on A7R II
Jun 28, 2016 at 12:54 AM
p.1689 #15Sony FE Images Thread
The Floating Piers by Christo, Lake Iseo, Italy
The Floating Piers I by Werner Utsch, on Flickr
Floatingpiers II by Werner Utsch, on Flickr
Jun 28, 2016 at 02:21 AM
p.1689 #16Sony FE Images Thread
Got myself a Contax "Hollywood" 28/2 to try. A lens with quite unique characteristics. First is a skyshot of the roofs on the other side of the street. Note the birds. Below are growing chicks from a family living on the mid-left roof, shot with Contax 100-300 + Mutar II with the Sony A7II.
Contax 28/2
DSC02993 1600 by Wilhelm Frank - Stockholm, on Flickr
Contax 100-300 + Mutar II. They look a bit rugged because it is raining.
DSC02903 1600 by Wilhelm Frank - Stockholm, on Flickr
Contax 28/2
DSC02993 1600 by Wilhelm Frank - Stockholm, on FlickrContax 100-300 + Mutar II. They look a bit rugged because it is raining.
DSC02903 1600 by Wilhelm Frank - Stockholm, on FlickrJun 28, 2016 at 03:49 AM
p.1689 #17Sony FE Images Thread
Drying Fish at Dark.
Fishermen often hang some of their catch to age - thereby intensifying flavour prior to cooking.
A7II, MBIV T*, 50mm f1.8 STM.
Jun 28, 2016 at 04:48 AM
p.1689 #18Sony FE Images Thread
Geisler Group, Adolf Munkel Weg, Dolomites
A7rII + Batis 18mm
Edited on Jun 28, 2016 at 12:32 PM · View previous versions
A7rII + Batis 18mm
Edited on Jun 28, 2016 at 12:32 PM · View previous versions
Jun 28, 2016 at 05:13 AM
p.1689 #19Sony FE Images Thread
Photo taken the evening of April 24, 2016, at 7:01 PM (49 minutes before sunset), looking at farmers fields along Loch Valley Road, New Tripoli, PA. Image taken with my tripod mounted A7rM V3 and my Zeiss 35mm f1.4 Distagon ZM lens, ISO 100, lens set to f11 for 1/60 second. Exposure corrected by +0.24 Stops and processed with CornerFix and LR6.
Rich
Rich
Jun 28, 2016 at 06:08 AM
