Posts for: Revet
Jan 29, 2016 06:40:36 #
Spirit Hawk wrote:
Just how good or bad is this lens ??Used they are getting affordable at $400-$450..
Reviews say soft past 450mm,,??birding and wildlife ?? how do you rate it ?? Yes i am thinking on buying one !!??
Whats your thoughts ??
Thanks Ron
Reviews say soft past 450mm,,??birding and wildlife ?? how do you rate it ?? Yes i am thinking on buying one !!??
Whats your thoughts ??
Thanks Ron
I have had this lens for half a year and I love it. For $1000 you just can't beat it. The image stabilization is amazing. Images at 600 mm are crisp most of the time but are occasionally soft (usually in low light from focusing troubles). If it is soft with a camera body:lens combination, it can be corrected with the dock.
Here is a review on a cropped sensor and full frame Canon:
http://froknowsphoto.com/sigma-150-600-realworld-review/
Jan 29, 2016 06:30:46 #
Macronaut wrote:
Is anyone having any issues with downloading Sigma Optimization Pro on Windows10? I keep getting a 1327 error invalid drive "D". My computer drive is "C".
I'm at a loss :|
I'm at a loss :|
No problems, installed and worked fine on Windows 10.
Jan 26, 2016 08:05:33 #
My brother took the problem up with Browning. The LED flash is the culprit along with the long exposure. Those coyote eyes were confusing me because I was relating it to a speedlite flash. Regardless, he has gotten some fantastic shots during the day and some at night without the critters running.
Jan 26, 2016 07:45:04 #
I also am very happy with the Nest. It is strong, lightweight, very smooth, and easy to balance. I read a review somewhere on the internet that it would not work in cold weather. I have no problems after doing the range of motion procedure recommended by MT Shooter when you first take it out of the box. Great product, Great price.
Jan 24, 2016 13:14:57 #
Capture48 wrote:
There is plenty of light, if you look at the exposure value, its -2. Meaning the flash is providing only a little light. Also at $100 price point I would not say this is the best camera. Although the aperture does go to 2.8. I'm assuming the camera uses some auto mode, which will never be the best way to shoot, but I understand it may be all that is available.
At 2.8 and 1/20 the shutter is open wide enough and long enough to take in some ambient light.
At 2.8 and 1/20 the shutter is open wide enough and long enough to take in some ambient light.
My point of confusion was the tapetum reflection of this coyote. A speedlite has a duration of around 1/20,000 of a second. The coyotes eyes are fully lite for what looks to be about 2 inches of movement. 2 inches of motion at 1/20,000 of a second is 3,3333.33 feet per second that this guy is moving!!! I believe there is far more motion blur in the photo than out of focus blurring because the tapetum width is about right for a dilated coyote eye (should be dilated at night running down a trail). In addition, there is no way ambient light is going to cause the tapetum to reflect like that.
I think I found the answer here. Looking more into flash duration, they can be as long as 1/200 of a second on some cameras. That length of flash could easily give an eye tapetum trail such as in this picture.
Jan 24, 2016 08:42:08 #
Capture48 wrote:
if there was enough ambient light the camera could still see the animal even a little without the flash, blurring would occur. Perhaps it was a full moon or there was another light source. either way at 2.8 and a slow shutter blurring is completely understandable.
If you look at the edges of the photo, you can see there is very little ambient light. In addition, there are other photos where this is more evident. The majority of the light is from the flash.
Jan 24, 2016 08:39:39 #
Capture48 wrote:
Here the EXIF...Now you know why it's blurry.
Thanks, I didn't know I could find that data. It helps but I still don't get the eyes. The eyes are telling me that the flash is on the entire time during this guy/gal's movement. When I shoot with a flash with a longer shutter speed, I get a pretty crisp shot with trails. This is not trails, The eyes are equally illuminated during the entire shot.
Jan 24, 2016 08:34:52 #
travisdeland wrote:
This might be slightly off topic, but figured this was worth passing on: I talked to a Sigma technical rep about the 150-600(both) and using the TC1401, and adjusting with the dock. The lens has a separate storage table for adjustments done with the teleconverter-it will NOT overwrite any adjustments stored for just the lens.
Good info!! Thanks. The Sigma 1.4TC is my next GAS attack
Jan 24, 2016 07:54:42 #
Our family all chipped in and got one our brothers a decent trail camera for his property in Northern Vermont. He has gotten some pretty cool pictures of all sorts of critters.
I noticed though that many of the night shots using flash are very blurry. I have downloaded one of these pictures. I don't understand why since this is with a flash, the motion isn't frozen. Even with a long shutter speed it should be frozen with trails (in one direction or the other depending on with you use rear or front curtain sync). This picture almost looks like the flash is very long like in Auto FP mode. I know very little about trail cams but I told my brother I would look into it for him. I can get the model name if needed.
I noticed though that many of the night shots using flash are very blurry. I have downloaded one of these pictures. I don't understand why since this is with a flash, the motion isn't frozen. Even with a long shutter speed it should be frozen with trails (in one direction or the other depending on with you use rear or front curtain sync). This picture almost looks like the flash is very long like in Auto FP mode. I know very little about trail cams but I told my brother I would look into it for him. I can get the model name if needed.
Jan 24, 2016 07:40:35 #
ptcanon3ti wrote:
I do BIF with the sigma sport along with stationar... (show quote)
Really wonderful photos!!! Thanks for sharing them. Since most of the time when I put the Sigma lens on my body I am using the higher focal lengths, it makes perfect sense to check the 600 mm first at the various distances and then work back towards 150 if time and need permits. I am curious though, how accurate do I have to be with the distances. I would imagine better than a rough estimate but I don't need to hire a surveyor I assume!!!
Jan 24, 2016 07:33:37 #
Warbird wrote:
I have the same settings, almost. I use C2 just to help me remember (second gear is faster than first :-) )
I like using C2 for faster!!! I have 6 lenses and they all have different settings such as active, panning, etc. Hard to remember which is what when you put the lens on so simplifying is always nice.
Jan 23, 2016 06:41:12 #
joer wrote:
There is a flaw in you comparison: Both at 15'; not the same images.
Had you moved the full frame camera closer to get the same size image the DOF would be shallower.
FF has less DOF that Crop at the same image size.
The DOF calculators assume you know the difference.
Had you moved the full frame camera closer to get the same size image the DOF would be shallower.
FF has less DOF that Crop at the same image size.
The DOF calculators assume you know the difference.
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
Jan 23, 2016 06:37:35 #
ptcanon3ti wrote:
Yes. I have tuned for various focal lengths AND distances. Distance seems to be the biggest issue.
Could you share how you went about this. I have the dock and fully understand how to use it, but calibrating 16 points on the 150-600 could take me a weekend or more. I just bought LensAlign and Focus tune for Christmas and it is quite a project just to fine tune a prime lens at one distance. Plus, the 150-600 will not work on the normal ruler of the lensalign much over 200 mm. Just wondering if you had any tips to simplify the project.
And for you Hogs using the 150-600 for BIF, what custom settings have you used??? I set C1 for BIF, using quicker focus and OS Dynamic mode. I also changed the focus range to 20 feet to infinity (purely guessing here). Does this sound right since I haven't had a chance to test it yet.
Jan 21, 2016 06:32:54 #
arthurfweidner wrote:
Hi,thank you,I think it is a Downy
Looks like a Downy to me
Jan 19, 2016 07:18:34 #
DWU2 wrote:
I shoot in RAW and process with Lightroom. I only keep the RAW files, and output to JPG when needed.
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: