redlegfrog wrote:
From 02Ra and you. see earlier replies
I believe i said:
"Not larger sensors, just higher density sensors, and faster shutters, not larger apertures.."
"Now with the D810/36mpx, i'm not even sure 1/500 is fast enough."
And i think o2ra said:
"But with higher mp you'll have to shoot at higher shutter speeds to stop the blurring effects you get from that high mega pixel sensor. It even happens with the d810."
No mention of sensor dimensions or aperture.
redlegfrog wrote:
...I would like to hear more about Larger sensors needing faster f-stops to produce sharp images....
where did you hear something like that?
tkphelps wrote:
It doesn't appear to matter what the assembly sequence is. The 12 mm tube will autofocus and appears to correctly modify the exposure though auto ISO is on. The 20 and 36 mm tubes will not auto-focus, ... Those tubes also do not couple the lens data, although they do stop down when the exposure is made.I don't believe the tubes have any processor included ....
I would not expect to find any processor in the tubes and they should work in any combination or order.
You are right that auto focus is not a necessity for macro work, but it should still function.
The only time i've seen it fail is when there isn't enough light,
which is most of the time when you have 2 or more tubes mounted.
Mount all 3 tubes, point your camera at a real bright subject and try again.
You said: "Those tubes also do not couple the lens data":
What data do you feel you are not getting?
CSand wrote:
... I set for soft water flow thinking all else should have been in focus. Because of softness in other areas am I thinking correctly that this was caused by my movement? ...trying to shoot correctly in manual.
Rather than try to decipher what you just said:
Put your camera in a normal picture taking mode. Set it to full manual.
Mount a ND filter on the lens. Place the camera on a tripod.
Manually focus using magnified live view.
Determine exposure using the in camera meter. Compose the shot.
Now the fun begins:
Close down the lens to get your depth of field and slow down the shutter to blur the water.
You are running out of light though so jack up the ISO to zero the meter.
Squeeze your remote shutter button and move on.
Its all about the picture though and the way i see it is:
You have a static detailed stream bank.
You have a wonderful fluid reflection in the stream bed.
You added fuzzy water in the rapids.
Two concepts balance, 3 things just fight.
If you aren't willing to severely reduce the blurring of the water i would side
with Linda and suggest cropping for that beautiful reflection.
one thing for sure, its "one far out cat". Wonderful head shot.
It seems like simply selecting and making the water fuzzy solves your problem.
Why is that not a reasonable answer in your opinion?
Because auto focus is a money maker for bodies and lenses.
Offering good manual focus as an alternative would have eaten into the potential profits.
redlegfrog wrote:
...I would like to hear more about Larger sensors needing faster f-stops to produce sharp images....
Not larger sensors, just higher density sensors, and faster shutters, not larger apertures..
they seem right proud of themselves in their easter finery.
Including the customer in the frame makes that shot just right.
O2Ra wrote:
... with higher mp you'll have to shoot at higher shutter speeds to stop the blurring effects you get from that high mega pixel sensor. It even happens with the d810. ...
You raised a good point which is too often ignored by users who upgrade to higher mpx bodies.
With the old D40/6mpx, i could grab a snapshot at 1/60.
Moving to the D3100/14mpx, i could get a descent shot at 1/125.
When i got the D7100/24mpx, i had to raise it to 1/250.
I expected the D800/36mpx to be the same as the D7100 but it needed 1/500.
Now with the D810/36mpx, i'm not even sure 1/500 is fast enough.
I am less steady and more critical than i used to be, but there is a real difference.
Because of the light loss and need for higher speed shutter, I vote for cropping rather than
using an extender; and if you are going to crop, then
using a high mpx smaller sensor starts to be a reasonable alternative.
jeep_daddy wrote:
You got it mwsilvers. I don't know why he can't see it. Yes, with a 3 stop ND filter I will not have accurate focus etc., but it will still attempt to focus and I've even had it be accurate on a bright day. But when it comes to a filter, it doesn't alter the maximum aperture of the lens. Teleconverters do affect or alter maximum aperture and when the cameras computer detects this, it simply disables the AF of the camera.
I put a 100-400 Canon zoom on my body and it has a max aperture of f/5.6@400mm. When I install the 1.4x teleconverter it's max aperture becomes f/8 and still autofocus'. But if I put my 2x teleconverter on then the max aperture becomes f/11 and autofocus is completely disabled. No amount of filter on the front of the lens, as long as the camera detects f/8 or greater aperture, will completely disable the AF. It might be slow or might not be accurate, but it will still attempt AF.
You got it mwsilvers. I don't know why he can't s... (
show quote)
Your two statements do not agree with each other:
"Even if I install a 3 stop ND filter my camera will still autofocus."
...."Yes, with a 3 stop ND filter I will not have accurate focus etc.,..."
There are times when neither one of them is even true.
Place a piece of cardboard to cover 2/3 of the objective lens on your f/5.6@400mm.
How well does the auto focus work now?
The response, speed, and accuracy of your AF is dependent on the level of light
reaching the AF sensors, not the aperture setting.
I respect your abilities as a photographer and have no issue with what you are trying to say,
only with the way you express it.
mwsilvers wrote:
... I think you're both agreeing on the same thing but just phrasing it differently.
jeepdadddy says"
"Even if I install a 3 stop ND filter my camera will still autofocus."
I say:
"it might not"
How can you feel those two statements are even remotely similar?