Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Solar eclipse
Page <prev 2 of 2
Apr 7, 2024 23:29:18   #
coolhanduke Loc: Redondo Beach, CA
 
There are recommendations
I bought onevthat is so dsrk I can’t see the sun.

Reply
Apr 8, 2024 10:33:18   #
SENSORLOUPE
 
lindmike wrote:
Im not that interested in visualizing or photographing the eclipse. Ill see it on TV. Im more interested in seeing how the animals react.

My thoughts also!!

Reply
Apr 8, 2024 12:04:01   #
Tomfl101 Loc: Mount Airy, MD
 
wdross wrote:
If he "experiments" with his 3 stop ND filter and his 1.5 stop polarizer, his shutter and/or sensor will be damaged. If you are using only an 8 stop filter for your camera, you are at risk (Are you really sure that your filter is only 8 stops?). Check B&H Photo, Adorama, Thousand Oaks Optical, and the NASA website and see the minimum is 16.5 stops (in photographic ND terms, 100,000X). If you are using a DSLR, your eyes are at risk. With a mirrorless, at least only your camera will be at risk. When I was choosing what level light reduction using welders glass, I tried ND 16, ND 17, ND 18, and ND 19 darknesses (16 to 19 stops). Although 16 and 17 were too bright for my viewing taste, they were more than acceptable for a camera. The 19 was too dark for my taste. Based off my own experience, if you are only using an 8 stop filter, you are only taking an unnecessary risk of camera damage and/or permanent eye damage. And for the OP, at only 4.5 stops, it would be a very ignorant decision.
If he "experiments" with his 3 stop ND f... (show quote)


I was using a 400 2.8 lens with a rear mount filter slide. The huge 4 inch+ front filter mount was damaged on the barrowed lens I was using. As I recall the darkest rear mount filter I could find was an 8 stop. Since I used a 2x converter it allowed an exposure of 1/8000 at f22. My Mark3 camera suffered no damage. The converter made the difference. See samples


(Download)

Reply
 
 
Apr 8, 2024 12:39:30   #
scallihan Loc: Tigard, OR
 
Tomfl101 wrote:
I was using a 400 2.8 lens with a rear mount filter slide. The huge 4 inch+ front filter mount was damaged on the barrowed lens I was using. As I recall the darkest rear mount filter I could find was an 8 stop. Since I used a 2x converter it allowed an exposure of 1/8000 at f22. My Mark3 camera suffered no damage. The converter made the difference. See samples


Nice crisp image!

Reply
Apr 8, 2024 15:47:18   #
SENSORLOUPE
 
Tomfl101 wrote:
I was using a 400 2.8 lens with a rear mount filter slide. The huge 4 inch+ front filter mount was damaged on the barrowed lens I was using. As I recall the darkest rear mount filter I could find was an 8 stop. Since I used a 2x converter it allowed an exposure of 1/8000 at f22. My Mark3 camera suffered no damage. The converter made the difference. See samples


excellent!!

Reply
Apr 8, 2024 18:59:58   #
druthven
 
Bridges wrote:
How dark a filter is required? I have a 10x variable neutral density and could add a polarizing filter.


It depends. Cloud cover can create a number of variables. Today here i Houston I bounced between no filter, a variable density filter and a 20 stop filter when there was no overcast. But for clear skies a 16-20 stop filter is required.

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 2
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.