Posts for: Steve Perry
Apr 22, 2019 09:27:24 #
It's too blue and the cool cast has sucked all the life out of it :)
I did a quick adjustment using the photoshop technique shown in my video here:
https://backcountrygallery.com/got-white-try-this-color-balance-trick/
I used the plain edge of the white plate as my color target, the result is below (only took a second, so it's really easy to fix). Also, not sure if this is just as you remember since I wasn't there, but I bet it's close :)
I did a quick adjustment using the photoshop technique shown in my video here:
https://backcountrygallery.com/got-white-try-this-color-balance-trick/
I used the plain edge of the white plate as my color target, the result is below (only took a second, so it's really easy to fix). Also, not sure if this is just as you remember since I wasn't there, but I bet it's close :)
Apr 18, 2019 16:50:41 #
Yup, as amfoto1 says, there are companies who have done it - I had the one from Singh-Ray in fact. The trick is they are more expensive and if you don't really need one or the other, than it's more cost effective to skip the combo.
The bigger issue is however, that the stacked filters are thicker and often vignette on wider lenses or the wider end of zoom lenses (I couldn't use the one I had on my 24-70 at 24mm~28mm).
The bigger issue is however, that the stacked filters are thicker and often vignette on wider lenses or the wider end of zoom lenses (I couldn't use the one I had on my 24-70 at 24mm~28mm).
Apr 5, 2019 09:30:05 #
Actually, we filled our last spot last night, less than 36 hours after the announcement (and we had 6 weeks / 60 spots). If anyone wants in, getting on the waitlist is the best bet - there are always a couple bookings that fall through, but the sooner you get on, the better.
As for flash, I personally am not a huge fan - I think even carefully done fill-flash can look unnatural in heavily backlit scenarios and it actually has a negative effect on some wildlife (white faced monkeys get visibly angry). So, when we do use it, it's done sparingly. Some participants like to use with with macros - and the diffuser suggested above isn't a bad idea, although we do have some there for anyone to use. We also use reflectors with macros, and I often think that works out a little better.
As for flash, I personally am not a huge fan - I think even carefully done fill-flash can look unnatural in heavily backlit scenarios and it actually has a negative effect on some wildlife (white faced monkeys get visibly angry). So, when we do use it, it's done sparingly. Some participants like to use with with macros - and the diffuser suggested above isn't a bad idea, although we do have some there for anyone to use. We also use reflectors with macros, and I often think that works out a little better.
Apr 4, 2019 15:29:19 #
Hi Raz -
I saw this and wanted to respond. First, thanks for your interest - and yes, they are filling fast. We had 53 of the 60 spots filled within 24 hours of the announcement.
As for glass, my two most commonly used focal lengths are 600mm and 105 (macro). It's nice to have a zoom to cover some of the in-between space (the 200-500 Nikon is a good one for instance). From 24mm~200mm we don't do much since it's a dedicated wildlife trip, although you never know - there are times shorter lenses can work (however, some participants like to hit the dock on their own for sunrise shots, so you'd want a wider shot for that). However, for most trips you can leave them at home and not end up missing anything. If we're too close I just tell people to grab head shots!
There isn't much hiking on this trip, so no worries about carrying gear around all day. We travel by truck and boat and when we're on foot it's usually just with a single camera and lens combo.
I hope that helps and thanks again for your interest.
I saw this and wanted to respond. First, thanks for your interest - and yes, they are filling fast. We had 53 of the 60 spots filled within 24 hours of the announcement.
As for glass, my two most commonly used focal lengths are 600mm and 105 (macro). It's nice to have a zoom to cover some of the in-between space (the 200-500 Nikon is a good one for instance). From 24mm~200mm we don't do much since it's a dedicated wildlife trip, although you never know - there are times shorter lenses can work (however, some participants like to hit the dock on their own for sunrise shots, so you'd want a wider shot for that). However, for most trips you can leave them at home and not end up missing anything. If we're too close I just tell people to grab head shots!
There isn't much hiking on this trip, so no worries about carrying gear around all day. We travel by truck and boat and when we're on foot it's usually just with a single camera and lens combo.
I hope that helps and thanks again for your interest.
Mar 23, 2019 14:44:59 #
Swamp-Cork wrote:
Excellent article, Steve and many thanks. I reall... (show quote)
I'm sure it on the computer somewhere but will probably need to allow much of the day to find it. I remember writing down where it was stored on the computer, and should have filed that information in my old conventional file cabinets which I do understand! Thanks for the kind words :) Photoshop essentials actually isn't one of mine, but we do have people print the books all the time and put them in a looseleaf as you describe - works great!
Mar 22, 2019 19:49:31 #
Thanks again for the kind words everyone :)
@Rich - LOL :)
@John - Thanks so much - I don't really consider myself a great writer or anything, but it's always nice to hear that the article reads well.
@Rich - LOL :)
@John - Thanks so much - I don't really consider myself a great writer or anything, but it's always nice to hear that the article reads well.
Mar 21, 2019 15:28:14 #
Sunnely wrote:
Great article. Sound advice. Thank you so much. ... (show quote)
LOL - there's probably a picture of me out there like that!
Mar 21, 2019 14:28:41 #
John Battle wrote:
Thanks for this great article and lovely pictures!
I was interested in the right angle viewer that you mentioned, and looked it up -- about $200 for a Nikon one at B&H.
I have a d750, which has an tilting screen for low shots. But I was wondering if the viewfinder works better, giving a better view and better results than the screen does.
Do you have an opinion about that?
I was interested in the right angle viewer that you mentioned, and looked it up -- about $200 for a Nikon one at B&H.
I have a d750, which has an tilting screen for low shots. But I was wondering if the viewfinder works better, giving a better view and better results than the screen does.
Do you have an opinion about that?
The viewfinder is better - if you can see it :) The tilt screen can work (and I use it), but the PDAF system via the viewfinder is faster and will lock on easier. Still, if you have to be really low and the subject isn't moving around too much, the tilt screen works well.
Mar 21, 2019 14:12:29 #
srt101fan wrote:
Thanks for another good one Steve!
Your article gives support to the position that articulated (tilt) screens do come in handy sometimes! Unfortunately UHH responses to questions re cameras like the Nikon D5600 often include negative comments re the tilt screen: "useless", "a part waiting to break off", etc. Pity that they pass on misleading information and don't recognize the positives...
Sorry if I went off topic a bit. Great article!
Your article gives support to the position that articulated (tilt) screens do come in handy sometimes! Unfortunately UHH responses to questions re cameras like the Nikon D5600 often include negative comments re the tilt screen: "useless", "a part waiting to break off", etc. Pity that they pass on misleading information and don't recognize the positives...
Sorry if I went off topic a bit. Great article!
I hear ya - I see tilt screen criticized all the time. I personally use them quite a bit - and hope the D6 when it comes out has one.
Mar 21, 2019 14:11:36 #
Thanks for the kind words :) Glad you liked the article.
Mar 21, 2019 11:13:22 #
Check out my newest article - it's all about why I shoot eye-level and lower and the incredible impact it can have on your photography.
https://backcountrygallery.com/game-changer-shootin-eye-level/
Enjoy!
Steve
https://backcountrygallery.com/game-changer-shootin-eye-level/
Enjoy!
Steve
Mar 19, 2019 08:10:23 #
Wait, what? You mean the Nikon and Zeiss wipes are FOR LENSES????
Man, have I been using them wrong...
(Just kidding)
Man, have I been using them wrong...
(Just kidding)
Mar 12, 2019 08:39:11 #
CO wrote:
I was wondering which ones of the new Nikons have that dedicated AF processor. The D500 has the dedicated processor. I thought the D5, D500, and D850 all have it.
My Bad - Sorry, I was exhausted after driving all day yesterday and shouldn't be answering posts :)
In double-checking, yes, they do have dedicated AF processors. Sorry...
That said, keep in mind that my own tests show incredibly similar AF performance between the two cameras. Also, I think in some cases the high pixel density of the D850 is showing slight misses that would be invisible on the lower pixel density D5.
Mar 12, 2019 08:35:11 #
SteveR wrote:
Thanks for clearing that up for us, Steve. I'm sure a lot of 850 owners are feeling much better. It does make me wonder about Matt's test, though, which seemed pretty good.
I ran similar tests to Matt's (bike not jogger) and had roughly the same hit rate between the D5 and D850. Sometimes the D5 was better, other times the D850 was better. The problem is, AF is is incredibly difficult to test. It uses "fuzzy logic" and it doesn't take much of a difference to swing it one way or the other. So, no matter how controlled the tests are (and Matt's really aren't), it's incredibly difficult to have a good AF system test.
All I know is that in the field for what I shoot and in the tests I performed, the performance was incredibly close - close enough not to care :)
Mar 11, 2019 18:15:32 #
Same AF system, the D5 has a dedicated processor for AF that helps. However, with respect to Matt (the tester), I have both cameras and in my experience the AF is incredibly close - certainly closer than what we used to see between single digit pro bodies and the 8xx series. Put another way, for most photographers - myself included - if the D850 isn't getting the shot, it's usually not the camera's fault.