| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Anu
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 879
|
 Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 1:01 pm Post subject: The Great Photo Quiz! |
 |
|
Anu wrote:
What can you tell about capturing of this image? (lens, ISO, anything else?)
Hints:
Camera used was Pentax K20D. The image was shot hand held at 1/90th of a second with image stabilizer active. This is a full resized image, not a crop. Converted in lightroom from RAW without any post processing magic. The equipment list in my signature may or may not be of any help.
Prize:
A nice smile 
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
poncho_morales
Joined: 25 Oct 2008
Posts: 162
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Expire: 2013-02-21
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 1:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
poncho_morales wrote:
I'll play! i think it's using your flek 35mm with some extension tubes, iso must be high, maybe 1600? maybe more hints would help
_________________
EOS 1Ds mark 2, Super Multi Coated Takumar 3.5/35mm and 1.4/50mm, Carl Zeiss Distagon 1.4/35mm, Olympus Zuiko 2/40mm, Olympus Zuiko 2/90mm, Minolta Rokkor 1.2/58mm, Canon 2.8/300mm ssc fluorite |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nesster
Joined: 24 Apr 2008
Posts: 5883
Location: NJ, USA
Expire: 2014-02-20
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 1:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nesster wrote:
High ISO, and either you are using a pinhole or a very very small aperture. (This I can tell by the sensor dust being so in focus)
_________________
-Jussi
Camera photos
Print Photographica
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anu
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 879
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 7:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Anu wrote:
| poncho_morales wrote: |
| I'll play! i think it's using your flek 35mm with some extension tubes, iso must be high, maybe 1600? maybe more hints would help |
ISO is high, lens is not a Flektogon |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anu
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 879
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 7:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Anu wrote:
| Nesster wrote: |
| High ISO, and either you are using a pinhole or a very very small aperture. (This I can tell by the sensor dust being so in focus) |
Yes, sensor dust was the key for that. Not a pinhole, but the aperture is rather small for some reason. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PaulC
Joined: 23 Dec 2008
Posts: 2318
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 8:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
PaulC wrote:
The distance from the bulb to the bulb-holder looks compressed to me, suggesting a long lens. Maybe a 135 or even a 200 or 300. The picture is very soft suggesting camera shake even at 1/90th second. I'd go for the Sonnar 300 with a tube.
_________________
View or buy my photos at:
http://shutterstock.com/g/paulcowan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anu
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 879
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 5:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Anu wrote:
| PaulC wrote: |
| The distance from the bulb to the bulb-holder looks compressed to me, suggesting a long lens. Maybe a 135 or even a 200 or 300. The picture is very soft suggesting camera shake even at 1/90th second. I'd go for the Sonnar 300 with a tube. |
Compressed yes, so a long focal lenght, yes. Good. But not a Sonnar 300 with a tube
Nor a 135 or 200 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mal1905
Joined: 30 Oct 2008
Posts: 1705
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Expire: 2011-11-18
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 10:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Mal1905 wrote:
So, could it be the Sonnar 2.8/180 I wonder?
Or even the 500mm Mirror-Monster? 
_________________
Canon EOS 5D / EOS 40D
Carl Zeiss Jena: Flektogon 2.8/20, 2.4/35, 2.8/35, Pancolar 2/50, MC 1.8/50, MC 1.8/80, Triotar 4/135, Tessar 2.8/50, S 4/135 1Q, S 3.5/135, Sonnar 3.5/135 MC, 2.8/180, Biotar 2/5,8cm, 2/58, 1.5/75
Carl Zeiss: Distagon 2/28 T*, 1.4/35 T*, Ultron 1.8/50, Tessar 2.8/50, Planar 1.4/50 T* MM, 1.7/50 T* MM, 1.4/85 T* AEG, Sonnar 2.8/135 T*
Asahi Optical Co.: Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 4.5/20, 3.5/24, 3.5/28, 2/35, 3.5/35, 1.4/50, 1.8/55, 1.8/85, 2.8/105, 2.8/120, 2.5/135 I & II, 3.5/135, 4/150, 4/200, 4/300, 5.6/400, 4/45-125, 4.5/85-210, Super-Takumar 4.5/20, 3.5/24, 3.5/28, 2/35, 3.5/35, 1.4/50, 1.8/55, 2/55, 2.8/105, 3.5/135, 4/150, 4/200, 4.5/70-150, Fish-Eye-Takumar 4/17, Macro-Takumar 4/50, Super-Macro Takumar 4/50, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-Takumar 4/50, 4/100, Bellows-Takumar 4/100, Asahi-Kogaku Takumar 3.5/50, 2.4/58, 3.5/100, Asahi-Kogaku Tele-Takumar 3.5/135, Auto-Takumar 2.3/35, 3.5/35, 1.8/55, 1.8/55 (Zebra), 2/55, 2.2/55, 1.8/85, 2.8/105, 3.5/135, Takumar 4/35, 2.2/55, 2/58, 2.8/105, 3.5/135, 3.5/200, 5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 5.6/200, 6.3/300, SMC Takumar 1.4/50, 1.8/55, 2/55, SMC-M 1.4/50, 1.7/50, 2/50
Tomioka: Tominon 2/5cm, Auto-Chinon 3.5/21, 1.4/55, Auto-Yashinon DS-M 1.2/55 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anu
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 879
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 11:22 am Post subject: The Amazing Answer! |
|
|
Anu wrote:
| Mal1905 wrote: |
So, could it be the Sonnar 2.8/180 I wonder?
Or even the 500mm Mirror-Monster? |
Maybe I should give the answer, as it will otherwise take a while
As I said, hand held, 1/90s, iso 12800 (!), 500mm mirror lens with all my teleconverters attached That is 6000mm, 6 meters of focal length
The softness was probably because the aperture was about f/90 or something like that However, I am pretty sure that the Image stabilizer did prevent camera shake (the bright light bulb swinged wildly in the viewfinder, yet no obvious motion blur is in the image).
When I tried to take the shot, I had to recheck if I had the lens cap on as the viewfinder was pitch black The only target I could shoot was that lamp...
Anyhow, it seems to be a nice way of testing if the sensor's dirty... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
