| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/11/2013 08:31:29 AM · #26 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Sunny 16...leans towards the dark side. |
I knew there was a reason I liked it! ;-)
|
|
|
|
09/11/2013 12:31:14 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by MelonMusketeer:
I keep preview set for the "blinkies" to show me instantly in the LCD what is blown out in the shots, and I can see that even in full bright daylight without my glasses. |
This, too, is my method :-)
And no, Cindi, I'd never heard of sunny 16. Of course, I've never heard of MOST photographic terms as I'm most self DPC-taught...
I do have a question, however, about the f/16+ setting. Doesn't this and higher settings impact sharpness? |
|
|
|
09/11/2013 12:37:16 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by tanguera:
Originally posted by MelonMusketeer:
I keep preview set for the "blinkies" to show me instantly in the LCD what is blown out in the shots, and I can see that even in full bright daylight without my glasses. |
This, too, is my method :-)
And no, Cindi, I'd never heard of sunny 16. Of course, I've never heard of MOST photographic terms as I'm most self DPC-taught...
I do have a question, however, about the f/16+ setting. Doesn't this and higher settings impact sharpness? |
Yep. Less so with film, but in the digital world, it's a bigger deal.
What you're talking about is the diffraction limited aperture.
My 5D can perform reasonably at F/16 - your D700 should be about the same.
Although, really, in practice I see degradation starting at about f/13 or so.
With the 50D it was more like f/8 where I started to see issues.
Message edited by author 2013-09-11 12:37:44. |
|
|
|
09/11/2013 01:21:14 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by Cory:
Originally posted by tanguera:
Originally posted by MelonMusketeer:
I keep preview set for the "blinkies" to show me instantly in the LCD what is blown out in the shots, and I can see that even in full bright daylight without my glasses. |
This, too, is my method :-)
And no, Cindi, I'd never heard of sunny 16. Of course, I've never heard of MOST photographic terms as I'm most self DPC-taught...
I do have a question, however, about the f/16+ setting. Doesn't this and higher settings impact sharpness? |
Yep. Less so with film, but in the digital world, it's a bigger deal.
What you're talking about is the diffraction limited aperture.
My 5D can perform reasonably at F/16 - your D700 should be about the same.
Although, really, in practice I see degradation starting at about f/13 or so.
With the 50D it was more like f/8 where I started to see issues. |
Depends on the lens: diffraction is a function of the physical size of the aperture. F/20 on a 200mm lens is a 10mm opening; you can shoot that all day with no diffraction issues. F/20 on a 10mm lens is an 0.5mm opening and that's WAY too small for optimimum rendering of detail.
My default aperture (what the camera's set to when I turn it on) is f/11, and I'm pretty OK with that with all lenses, though I'll usually go to f/8 with the ultrawide. |
|
|
|
09/11/2013 01:43:59 PM · #30 |
| I guess I can't blame it on diffraction -- my camera won't go smaller than f/8.0 ... |
|
|
|
09/11/2013 02:49:16 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
I guess I can't blame it on diffraction -- my camera won't go smaller than f/8.0 ... |
f/8 on your lens at 6mm (its wide end) is getting pretty tiny: 0.75mm physical aperture :-) That's gonna cost ya some acuity for sure. I'd guess your sweet spot would be around f/4.5 at the wide end? |
|
|
|
09/11/2013 05:13:14 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
I guess I can't blame it on diffraction -- my camera won't go smaller than f/8.0 ... |
f/8 on your lens at 6mm (its wide end) is getting pretty tiny: 0.75mm physical aperture :-) That's gonna cost ya some acuity for sure. I'd guess your sweet spot would be around f/4.5 at the wide end? |
I've never been able to tell -- maybe I'll take some test shots in aperture-priority mode to check it out. I can't really tell what the focal length is when I'm shooting (there's only a bar graph display). That 6mm reading which is displayed in the EXIF data is considered the equivalent of 36mm on a 35mm full-frame camera -- AFAIK all the EXIF values need to be multiplied by six to get the 35mm EQ -- so I don't know if that affects the calculation or not.
Any suggestions for a "calibration target" to test for this? |
|
|
|
09/11/2013 06:35:46 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
I guess I can't blame it on diffraction -- my camera won't go smaller than f/8.0 ... |
f/8 on your lens at 6mm (its wide end) is getting pretty tiny: 0.75mm physical aperture :-) That's gonna cost ya some acuity for sure. I'd guess your sweet spot would be around f/4.5 at the wide end? |
I've never been able to tell -- maybe I'll take some test shots in aperture-priority mode to check it out. I can't really tell what the focal length is when I'm shooting (there's only a bar graph display). That 6mm reading which is displayed in the EXIF data is considered the equivalent of 36mm on a 35mm full-frame camera -- AFAIK all the EXIF values need to be multiplied by six to get the 35mm EQ -- so I don't know if that affects the calculation or not.
Any suggestions for a "calibration target" to test for this? |
The "equivalent focal length" doesn't mean a thing. All that matters is the physical size of the aperture that's rendering the image. If you can do close-up at your 6mm zoom, then use the tripod and spread some newspaper on the wall. Shoot at every aperture and see the difference. There will be one for sure. Incidentally, the physical size of the aperture is what's relevant for DOF also, which is why f/11 is huge DOF on a 16mm ultrawide FF lens and anything BUT with 200mm on the same body.
Remember: f/10 on a 10mm lens would be 1 mm aperture; on the 200mm lens f/10 would be 20mm... Think of f/stop as a fraction, representing a portion of the focal length: f/22 would be an aperture that has a diameter 1/22 of the focal length of the lens you're using.
Message edited by author 2013-09-11 18:40:58. |
|
|
|
09/11/2013 08:11:08 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
If you can do close-up at your 6mm zoom, then use the tripod and spread some newspaper on the wall. Shoot at every aperture and see the difference. |
Do you mean as close as I can focus at 6mm in normal mode, or one of the two macro modes I have, which will focus on anything between 0-20" away?
And that means that wide-open (f/3.5) at maximum zoom (72mm/432mm EQ) the opening is about 20.5mm, right? |
|
|
|
09/11/2013 08:16:56 PM · #35 |
| Robert, you indicated on the previous page that sunny 16 should be F11 on modern sensors. Taking the OP̢۪s Wikipedia̢۪s table in consideration should I subtract 1 stop from the rule. Say I̢۪m in overcast conditions instead of F8 I should rather go with F5.6 ? |
|
|
|
09/11/2013 08:50:15 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by see:
Robert, you indicated on the previous page that sunny 16 should be F11 on modern sensors. Taking the OP̢۪s Wikipedia̢۪s table in consideration should I subtract 1 stop from the rule. Say I̢۪m in overcast conditions instead of F8 I should rather go with F5.6 ? |
Or increase the shutter speed by a stop, if you want to keep f/8, sure. But here's the thing of it: this will vary from camera to camera and even according to your preferred processing of images. Not all sensors calibrate the same, even between similar camera models, nor do all cameras treat the arbitrary ISO the same (what is "same" anyway? how about one maker having a sensor more sensitive to blue light than Canon's for example?)
So what you need to do is TEST this. Spend a couple days TESTING camera and lenses and tabulating your data.
In my large-format days, we bought our films in bulk and stored them in the freezer. We tested samples of the batch to establish "true" ISO and to chart the actual reciprocity failure of that batch: 4 seconds would not be twice as much exposure as 2 seconds, nor 8 seconds twice 4, and we could establish a curve.
If my base exposure on an architectural interior at night was 30 minutes, then reciprocity charts on that batch of Ektachrome told me, for example, that to go half a stop brighter I'd need, say, 70 minutes. It got complicated...
Anyway, you need to test your shutter to see how accurate it is, and all your lenses to see if they have nominal f/stops as indicated, AND your light meter, and so forth, if you're really serious.
Of course, we have photoshop, so a well-ballparked exposure will suffice 90% of the time. So go out and test and see what your own, personal sunny-whatever rule is, and make sure it's consistent through all lenses. I usually find that the WA lenses are effectively half a stop brighter than the teles, for example, mostly because of the nature of how you'd prefer to render a wide scene compared to a tight one.
|
|
|
|
09/11/2013 09:37:57 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Anyway, you need to test your shutter to see how accurate it is, and all your lenses to see if they have nominal f/stops as indicated ... |
According to my EXIF data the settings are indeed "nominal" -- a shutter speed setting of 1/800 yields a shutter speed value of 1/807, while an aperture setting of 3.5 will show up with a value of 3.51. and focal lengths are almost always in fractions of mm ...
Originally posted by Canon S3 IS EXIF:
File: - L:\...\IMG_7680.JPG
Model - Canon PowerShot S3 IS
ExposureTime - 1/800 seconds
FNumber - 3.50
ShutterSpeedValue - 1/807 seconds
ApertureValue - F 3.51
FocalLength - 25.20 mm (x 6 = 151.2mm @ 35mm EQ)
ISO Value - 16464 (other) = 80
Metering mode - Center weighted
Focus type - Manual
AF point selected -
Exposure mode - Manual
Focal length - 600 - 7200 mm (100 mm) |
|
|
|
|
09/11/2013 09:48:40 PM · #38 |
Thanks. I do remember reading that. And to answer the question from one other, I was referring to digital. In fact, a lot of the "rules" seem to need a bit of altering to account for the digital sensors now.
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Sunny 16 was basically a slide exposure anyway. It leans towards the dark side. Sunny 11 would work better for a modern sensor. |
|
|
|
|
09/11/2013 10:12:01 PM · #39 |
| Thank You Robert, tomorrow is for challenges (well after work). This weekend will be testing, trying to nail the perfect exposure, on a unique view of a world famous location. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/25/2025 01:59:20 PM EDT.
