Thank you, Mukesh! Well, I had to resort to an alternative lighting source on that . Check out the aperture on that image, too to get more depth-of-field.
AGeoJO wrote:
Thank you, Douglas! Troy was there at Conowingo, huh? Yes, he is into photographing eagles a lot.
I couldn’t hide it from you guys, huh ? Not my intention either, hence the exif data.
Hi Joshua,
OK, so you used flash with the camera. Did you project the flash output as with something like a Better Beamer? How well did you like to project the flash for the bird photos? Also, you didn't find any issues with dark shadows anywhere in any of the images taken this way? I haven't use flash for birds or animals in forever, though I used to have some good luck when I was shooting Leica R cameras and lenses with my Metz 45 system and their projection system.
OK, so you used flash with the camera. Did you project the flash output as with something like a Better Beamer? How well did you like to project the flash for the bird photos? Also, you didn't find any issues with dark shadows anywhere in any of the images taken this way? I haven't use flash for birds or animals in forever, though I used to have some good luck when I was shooting Leica R cameras and lenses with my Metz 45 system and their projection system.
Rich
Rich, in general there are 2 methods here. The first is to use flash as fill-in; you rely on available light to be the main lighting for your target. In a similar fashion, this the way a reflector is used. I used both fill-in flash and reflector for quite a bit of images from Costa Rica back then.
The second way is to use flash as the main lighting source. Here, the aperture controls the amount of flash on your target. Your flash output will be determined by the aperture needed. The amount of ambient light is controlled by the shutter speed. Here, if you don’t use flash, the general exposure is about 2-stop under. You may want to use the maximum shutter speed the light enables you to to minimize ghosting. Again, the keyword, is to “minimize”. You can get away without ghosting if your flash system works using hi-speed sync. For my taste though, the effect looks too “flashy”. I prefer the images to be like what you see above. Just enough to freeze the wing blur and to get an extended depth-of-field but mixed with some ambient light to create the 3D-effect. The idea here is to make your flashed images not to look too much “flash is used”. Hope this helps.
AGeoJO wrote:
Rich, in general there are 2 methods here. The first is to use flash as fill-in; you rely on available light to be the main lighting for your target. In a similar fashion, this the way a reflector is used. I used both fill-in flash and reflector for quite a bit of images from Costa Rica back then.
The second way is to use flash as the main lighting source. Here, the aperture controls the amount of flash on your target. Your flash output will be determined by the aperture needed. The amount of ambient light is controlled by the shutter speed. Here, if you don’t use flash, the general exposure is about 2-stop under. You may want to use the maximum shutter speed the light enables you to to minimize ghosting. Again, the keyword, is to “minimize”. You can get away without ghosting if your flash system works using hi-speed sync. For my taste though, the effect looks too “flashy”. I prefer the images to be like what you see above. Just enough to freeze the wing blur and to get an extended depth-of-field but mixed with some ambient light to create the 3D-effect. The idea here is to make your flashed images not to look too much “flash is used”. Hope this helps.
I have used projected flash both as a main as well as a fill flash. So, if I am understanding you, you used the flash as a fill as well as using a reflector. Did you use 2 flash units then, one as a fill and then one as shot into a relector or did you have light reflected into the image? Maybe I am misunderstaning you somewhat. Also, for the fill flash did you just use a flash without a magnifier to narrow the beam or did you use something to narrow the beam and to adjust for fill by setting the flash output 2 stops under exposed from ambient?
I have used projected flash both as a main as well as a fill flash. So, if I am understanding you, you used the flash as a fill as well as using a reflector. Did you use 2 flash units then, one as a fill and then one as shot into a relector or did you have light reflected into the image? Maybe I am misunderstaning you somewhat. Also, for the fill flash did you just use a flash without a magnifier to narrow the beam or did you use something to narrow the beam and to adjust for fill by setting the flash output 2 stops under exposed from ambient?
Rich, without flash the image above would have been under-exposed by about 2-stops. Two flash units were used to illuminate the target; both of equal power on both sides at approximately 45-degree angle. The combined flash power output was set for me to stop down the aperture to f/10 or thereabouts. I used the max shutter speed that would sync properly with the flash since I didn’t use my Sony dedicated flash units that would enable me to use a significantly higher shutter speed. But 1/160th of a second was good enough to minimize ghosting because the available light was fairly dim. There were some around the wing that could easily be removed; not necessarily on that image above but in general, on images were flash was used. No flash modifier was used on the flash units since they were fairly close to the target; 6-7 feet or so from the target.
I only made a reference to the images I did in Costa Rica when I used either fill-in flash or a reflector to open up the shadows. Here, in Ecuador since the lighting was low, generally speaking lower than in CR. When flash was used, I used flash as the main light source but we did it only at 2 occasions during the entire trip. For the rest, only available light was used.
I have been using the 600/4 with a 2X TC for some slow moving subjects. I am impressed by how well the combination works. The AF is quick and the optical performance exceeds my expectations. I have used it with the A9 and the A7R4. I do not believe I can get the full 61MP even using a tripod with a fluid head. There is enough motion blur that the A7R4 does not really outperform the A9. The following is an example of an image of a grebe. Grebes have extremely fine white feathers and it is very difficult to get feather detail. I like the images I am getting and will probably use the 2X more than I expected.
Dave
P.S. This image will also be posted on the N&W forum.
1:1 detail of the above image. I don't know if the detail will show properly on this uploaded image.
Hummingbird in flight - plain and simple setup, just the camera/lens plus 1.4X TC on tripod . This hummingbird is very tiny and light. It is about the size of a human’s thumb, weighing only about 3 grams or approximately 0.1 ounce.
...
BTW, I met your friend Troy Duong at Conowingo yesterday, really nice guy.
? Not my intention either, hence the exif data.
