Nikon D850 + Nikkor 800mm f/5.6 ai-s EDIF + tripod, ISO 3200, f/11 at 1/1000s; 22% cropped( 9.9/45MP).
Adult feeding on one of the nestlings with a ripe (yes it is bright green) fruit of Miconia albicans (Melastomataceae) in a grassland savannah. Soon after sunrise in a cloudy morning.
Nikon D850 + Nikkor 800mm f/5.6 ai-s EDIF + tripod, ISO 3200, f/11 at 1/1000s; 22% cropped( 9.9/45MP).
Adult feeding on one of the nestlings with a ripe (yes it is bright green) fruit of Miconia albicans (Melastomataceae) in a grassland savannah. Soon after sunrise in a cloudy morning.
Beautiful image.
Quick question; why F11? I would think F8 would be enough for DOF, less noise, less diffraction.
I posted this question on its' own, Reagan suggested I ask it here.
Regarding Nikon manual focus lenses that use the 39mm drop-in filters (300 2.8, 400 3.5, 500 4.0), it looks like not any 39mm filter will work-it has to be threaded on the outside of the filter ring? Can the lens be used without a filter without sacrificing image quality? Any sources for a 39mm L37C filter? I have checked around but keep coming up empty.
Chris Dees wrote:
Beautiful image.
Quick question; why F11? I would think F8 would be enough for DOF, less noise, less diffraction.
Oh Chris, in fact I would prefer f/16 if light and diffraction had allowed me. I was just 9 m away of the nest, so the DOF was thin. Some shots late at the day I used ISO 25600
This was a nest found opportunisticaly and I made some sessions of observations with quantified data (rate of food delivery among others).
I don´t care about noise, it add something to the mood of the moment: It happened at sunrise with a dark & cloudy sky.
jcw1982 wrote:
I posted this question on its' own, Reagan suggested I ask it here.
Regarding Nikon manual focus lenses that use the 39mm drop-in filters (300 2.8, 400 3.5, 500 4.0), it looks like not any 39mm filter will work-it has to be threaded on the outside of the filter ring? Can the lens be used without a filter without sacrificing image quality? Any sources for a 39mm L37C filter? I have checked around but keep coming up empty.
From what I have read you should not see any difference with or without the filter on longer focal length lenses.
The telephotos, as I understand it, do focus a bit beyond infinity unlike some of the wide angle lenses like the 16mm f/2.8 where the lens will not focus to infinity without the filter.
As a rule of thumb the converging light cone gets displaced toward the focal plane ~1/3 the thickness of the filter.
This makes more of a difference in shorter focal length lenses where the converging cone is usually steeper and there is a hard infinity focus stop.
That said, I do not have any older telephotos that take a 39mm filter!
It isn't required but if you get the circular polarizing version can be very helpful - plus it is way more economical than a front mount circular polarizer. It will slightly shift the focus if removed, but focus can be achieved with or without the filter.
jcw1982 wrote:
I posted this question on its' own, Reagan suggested I ask it here.
Regarding Nikon manual focus lenses that use the 39mm drop-in filters (300 2.8, 400 3.5, 500 4.0), it looks like not any 39mm filter will work-it has to be threaded on the outside of the filter ring? Can the lens be used without a filter without sacrificing image quality? Any sources for a 39mm L37C filter? I have checked around but keep coming up empty.
Some from our hike on Peng Chau Island on the weekend. This island is much more inhabited than the one we went to last time with around 5,000 people living here. Mainly fishing and tourism. Hiking is pretty easy but nice scenery and some cool shops, cafes and places to eat. Around 40 mins by ferry
Nikon F3HP & Kodak Ektar 100. I still have issues processing images from Ektar. They have weird funky colours out of the scanner. These colours probably look a bit better than my past efforts but still a bit weird.
deang001 wrote:
Some from our hike on Peng Chau Island on the weekend. This island is much more inhabited than the one we went to last time with around 5,000 people living here. Mainly fishing and tourism. Hiking is pretty easy but nice scenery and some cool shops, cafes and places to eat. Around 40 mins by ferry
Nikon F3HP & Kodak Ektar 100. I still have issues processing images from Ektar. They have weird funky colours out of the scanner. These colours probably look a bit better than my past efforts but still a bit weird.
See PM for one in stock, at least while I am typing this
jcw1982 wrote:
I posted this question on its' own, Reagan suggested I ask it here.
Regarding Nikon manual focus lenses that use the 39mm drop-in filters (300 2.8, 400 3.5, 500 4.0), it looks like not any 39mm filter will work-it has to be threaded on the outside of the filter ring? Can the lens be used without a filter without sacrificing image quality? Any sources for a 39mm L37C filter? I have checked around but keep coming up empty.
leighton w wrote:
Nice set. You can definitely tell it's film. Do you ever do anything to them in post?
Thanks. Yeah, always need to do something in post.
I don’t think film is really that different to digital. As soon as the neg passes through scanning software whether you do something or leave it on the default settings of the scanner, there’s always something being done to the image. I think people’s idea of a typical "untouched" filmy look is either an auto setting lab scan or else a crappy washed out auto flatbed scan (Lomo style).
I use NegativeLabPro which gives you a lot of freedom to go with what type of “look” you are after ... including lab emulations from a Frontier or Noritsu. The negs are scanned as RAW DNG’s in a specific manner before they can be processed in NLP. I guess the idea is to not stray too far out from the actual film stock you’re using like making Portra 160 look like Velvia 50 or something like that
I find many of my Ektar 100 shots need colour balancing to get rid of that reddy brown look. Pretty common it seems. With Portra 400 I rarely do anything at all with them after they’ve gone through NLP. They look pretty good.
Some examples below of how the Ektar shots looked straight out ... the last one was particularly terrible. I think I shot it OK, but maybe not. I metered for the vegetation @ 1/250. I used a 2 stop GND for the sky, but that shouldn't have made a difference to the colour cast it has.
But I love the challenge of film. You work hard for your shots and it feels great when you get it right. Long way to go!
deang001 wrote:
Thanks. Yeah, always need to do something in post.
I don’t think film is really that different to digital. As soon as the neg passes through scanning software whether you do something or leave it on the default settings of the scanner, there’s always something being done to the image. I think people’s idea of a typical "untouched" filmy look is either an auto setting lab scan or else a crappy washed out auto flatbed scan (Lomo style).
I use NegativeLabPro which gives you a lot of freedom to go with what type of “look” you are after ... including lab emulations from a Frontier or Noritsu. The negs are scanned as RAW DNG’s in a specific manner before they can be processed in NLP. I guess the idea is to not stray too far out from the actual film stock you’re using like making Portra 160 look like Velvia 50 or something like that
I find many of my Ektar 100 shots need colour balancing to get rid of that reddy brown look. Pretty common it seems. With Portra 400 I rarely do anything at all with them after they’ve gone through NLP. They look pretty good.
Some examples below of how the Ektar shots looked straight out ... the last one was particularly terrible. I think I shot it OK, but maybe not. I metered for the vegetation @ 1/250. I used a 2 stop GND for the sky, but that shouldn't have made a difference to the colour cast it has.
But I love the challenge of film. You work hard for your shots and it feels great when you get it right. Long way to go!
deang001 wrote:
Some from our hike on Peng Chau Island on the weekend. This island is much more inhabited than the one we went to last time with around 5,000 people living here. Mainly fishing and tourism. Hiking is pretty easy but nice scenery and some cool shops, cafes and places to eat. Around 40 mins by ferry
Nikon F3HP & Kodak Ektar 100. I still have issues processing images from Ektar. They have weird funky colours out of the scanner. These colours probably look a bit better than my past efforts but still a bit weird.
I haven’t posted anything in a long while because I haven’t been shooting. Based on the words of an acquaintance that the 200/4 AI-s + PN-11 is a good combo for macro work, I decided to give it a try on the Df. It actually does much better than I expected.
This is one of my most neglected lenses. Well, of late they’ve all been neglected. Maybe it deserves a bit more respect.
