When I first started shooting in anger with my 350D (9 months and over 15,000 shutter activations ago, not counting the film shots...) I had immense trouble and frustration losing shots to focus issues. Happily, a few things I learnt along the way really helped me:
1) Not using multi-point AF. Set it to the centre point and leave it there. Point at what you want in sharp focus, half-press the shutter, hold it down and recompose, then take the shot. Also, if you're having trouble getting the AF to lock, remember that it needs some contrast to work with. So give it an edge to look at (one that's at the focus point you want, of course) and then recompose.
2) Not using A-DEP. I don't know why I started using this in the first place really, but now I pretty much leave the camera on aperture priority (Av) and adjust for the depth of field I want (within the limitations of available light and motion of my subject... bearing in mind that you can't have everything!) Occasionally I go full manual (and paradoxically, sometimes I use P for manual lenses - eg. FD stuff with aperture rings, because the metering still helps).
3) Using one-shot AF mode. AI Focus and AI Servo modes for me are nice ideas, but I haven't figured out how to use them properly. Mostly they just cause me to focus on the wrong thing and I've come to prefer the certainty of a positive AF lock. That said, I have gotten a couple of nice bird-in-flight shots with AI Focus that I wouldn't have gotten otherwise. Save it for special [purpose] occasions.
4) Actual depth of field. Yes, f/1.8 is lovely for low light work and portraits, but if you're not careful your depth of field might only be a couple of centimetres, if not millimetres. You might not notice the difference in the viewfinder but you'll surely see it when you view the result full size. Consider f/8 or narrower if you have the light to do it without going so low on the shutter speed that you shake the shot anyway. (Oh and for the record, I _love_ f/1.8!)
5) Adjusting the viewfinder diopter. That little wheel to the right of the viewfinder may be set wrong for you (it's personal) and might be causing you not to notice focus issues. Or in my case, be so far out that I can barely make myself look in the viewfinder.
6) Holding the camera steady. Seems obvious, but sometimes you think you're steady when you're really not. If you're down below, say, 1/250, check your stance. Hold the lens barrel as well as the camera (don't disturb the focus, mind!) Use whatever's nearby (wall, post, etc) to brace yourself. Use a tripod. Use a monopod. Use a remote release. Etc. Etc. I can hand-hold 1/10 if I get lucky (but I do have good and bad days), but don't risk it if you don't have to. Hold the shutter release down and take a few shots if you're working on the edge - you might get at least one that works.
7) Using a vertical grip. For me, this added a nice amount of weight to the camera which make it easier for me to keep steady. The extra shutter button also meant I was much less likely to push the camera sideways when I hit the button on a portrait (ie. sideways) shot.
8) Staying on or under ISO 800. On the 350D, cranking the sensor up to ISO 1600 makes for some serious noise in the image. ISO 800 is ever so much nicer. Use ISO 1600 only if you must and be prepared for some serious editing (and/or disappointment). (Note that later models are much better in this regard - the 500D will give you decent results at 1600, for example, and this will only get better as the technology improves - one area where digital is definitely going to beat film, I'd say.)
Meanwhile, know that manual focus with a matte focus screen (ie. no split circle or microprisms) is really hard, especially with some of the cheaper EF lenses with really jumpy focus rings. And the LCD is so tiny it make make bad shots look OK (even if you zoom in the view). Trust the AF (but do try the "centre point AF, lock and recompose" trick). You may also wish to investigate a third-party split-circle focus screen if you really want to do a lot of manual focus work.
Look over your failed shots and try to figure out if it was focus or camera shake that killed it. What looks like focus might also just be depth of field - look for the sharp spot in the image. And shake might just be the operator trying to pushing the envelope too far - digital cameras are amazing but they're not magical.
Happy shooting!
Friday, February 19, 2010
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Teleconvert me!
A new toy arrived in the mail today. Actually it's relatively old, like a lot of my gear but it's new to me. It's a "2X CFE Teleplus MC4" teleconverter for Canon FD lenses for which I paid the princely sum of ninety-nine cents. I do feel ever so slightly guilty not paying more but I guess that's the way it goes when people list things on eBay for $0.99 and there's only one bid. I'll try to "pay it forward" or something...
The first combination I tried was the teleconverter and 100-300mm f/5.6 zoom on my AE-1 Program. After a little [user] trouble getting things mounted I was happy to note that metering worked as expected. Basically the teleconverter ate two stops (e.g. f/22 without became f/11 with), which is what my reading suggested for a 2X version. But for those two stops I do get 2X magnification... or a 600mm lens. In fact, this combination might equal or better my 600mm f/8 (fixed) mirror lens (although the mirror lens _is_ pretty sharp and the teleconverter optics might fail on that front).
And then it just got silly. I put the 600mm mirror lens on the teleconverter. So that's a 1200mm f/16 lens, which allows me to pick out small details on the roof of a shed two houses away. Of course, given that my personal film lab isn't quite up and running, I just had to try this on my 350D to see what it looked like. Out with the FD-EF adapter... and I have a [sort of] 1920mm focal length. Ridiculous! As is trying to hold the thing steady, so I'm off to play with this on a tripod now... ;) Photos soon.
The first combination I tried was the teleconverter and 100-300mm f/5.6 zoom on my AE-1 Program. After a little [user] trouble getting things mounted I was happy to note that metering worked as expected. Basically the teleconverter ate two stops (e.g. f/22 without became f/11 with), which is what my reading suggested for a 2X version. But for those two stops I do get 2X magnification... or a 600mm lens. In fact, this combination might equal or better my 600mm f/8 (fixed) mirror lens (although the mirror lens _is_ pretty sharp and the teleconverter optics might fail on that front).
And then it just got silly. I put the 600mm mirror lens on the teleconverter. So that's a 1200mm f/16 lens, which allows me to pick out small details on the roof of a shed two houses away. Of course, given that my personal film lab isn't quite up and running, I just had to try this on my 350D to see what it looked like. Out with the FD-EF adapter... and I have a [sort of] 1920mm focal length. Ridiculous! As is trying to hold the thing steady, so I'm off to play with this on a tripod now... ;) Photos soon.
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Fun wth Infrared
Infrared photography has been on my list of things to do for a little while and this week the correct celestial alignment presented itself. Basically I picked up some Ilford SFX 200 from a bargain bin of expired film thinking I'd try something new. I thought it was just another black and white film but it turns out this one is a little different in that it's sensitive to infrared light.
So I asked the friendly photography store people what I needed to use it and they found me a relatively cheap ($A40) 52mm Hoya R72 filter. I was intending to use this film in my AE-1 Program and this size fits most of my FD lenses. It's also significantly cheaper than the 58mm R72 and fits the [f=]50mm EF lens for my EOS cameras.
And in fact, that's the only lens I've tried out with this filter so far since it's much easier to whack it on my 350D and play around with exposures on a digital camera than to shoot a roll of film and hope that I got something right. Happily the 350D's sensor is also sensitive to IR light and it doesn't get filtered out on the way through.
The filter seems opaque just to look at and once on the camera it makes the viewfinder completely black, unless you point it at the sun (with some leaves in the way for a nice effect), like so (f/4, 1/125):
With no sun in the frame things are trickier as you really can't see what you're shooting, but I seem to be able to guess OK. When I shoot the film I'll most likely use a tripod, frame the shot with the filter off and only put the filter on for the actual exposure. Meanwhile, the near-instant feedback on the digital camera, not to mention the inexpensive medium of compact flash, makes experimenting easy. Here's another experiment without the sun in the frame, shot at f/1.8, 1/40 (manual mode is what you want, since the camera's metering is affected by the filter).
Obviously these shots are very red (except for the purple trees!), whereas the film will be black and white, but I kinda like it. Focus is another issue to deal with when shooting infrared, presumably because light at infrared wavelengths bends differently to visible light, making the focal point different. In practice the 350D's autofocus still worked sufficiently well for my experiments, but I'll be making use of the helpful red dots on my FD lenses when I try the film...
So I asked the friendly photography store people what I needed to use it and they found me a relatively cheap ($A40) 52mm Hoya R72 filter. I was intending to use this film in my AE-1 Program and this size fits most of my FD lenses. It's also significantly cheaper than the 58mm R72 and fits the [f=]50mm EF lens for my EOS cameras.
And in fact, that's the only lens I've tried out with this filter so far since it's much easier to whack it on my 350D and play around with exposures on a digital camera than to shoot a roll of film and hope that I got something right. Happily the 350D's sensor is also sensitive to IR light and it doesn't get filtered out on the way through.
The filter seems opaque just to look at and once on the camera it makes the viewfinder completely black, unless you point it at the sun (with some leaves in the way for a nice effect), like so (f/4, 1/125):
With no sun in the frame things are trickier as you really can't see what you're shooting, but I seem to be able to guess OK. When I shoot the film I'll most likely use a tripod, frame the shot with the filter off and only put the filter on for the actual exposure. Meanwhile, the near-instant feedback on the digital camera, not to mention the inexpensive medium of compact flash, makes experimenting easy. Here's another experiment without the sun in the frame, shot at f/1.8, 1/40 (manual mode is what you want, since the camera's metering is affected by the filter).
Obviously these shots are very red (except for the purple trees!), whereas the film will be black and white, but I kinda like it. Focus is another issue to deal with when shooting infrared, presumably because light at infrared wavelengths bends differently to visible light, making the focal point different. In practice the 350D's autofocus still worked sufficiently well for my experiments, but I'll be making use of the helpful red dots on my FD lenses when I try the film...
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Focus screen blues (continued)
I've been shooting for a while now with a less-than-optimal focus screen in my 350D. As previously mentioned, I had installed an aftermarket split-circle screen in the hope of a better manual focus setup but alas just ended up with something that wouldn't give me the correct focus and was scratched and dirty to boot (my fault).
Well tonight I got well sick of it - it was so bad I was favouring my film bodies over the digital and only using the 350D for throwaway shots, because I could barely bring myself to look through its viewfinder. This was enough to give me the courage to put my factory screen back in. I had attempted this previously (when I first put the split-circle in, actually) but couldn't get the AF points to line up. Tonight, no such problem, thankfully. I did leave out the thin copper shim that was originally in the camera, but things look OK, so I'm going with what I have now.
I'd still love a split-circle, but the one I tried did get a little dark at narrower apertures so I think I'll stick with the factory screen in my 350D and maybe try something else (a different brand, methinks) if and when I finally get something better (my wishlist goes like this: 500D, 7D, 5D... ;)
Well tonight I got well sick of it - it was so bad I was favouring my film bodies over the digital and only using the 350D for throwaway shots, because I could barely bring myself to look through its viewfinder. This was enough to give me the courage to put my factory screen back in. I had attempted this previously (when I first put the split-circle in, actually) but couldn't get the AF points to line up. Tonight, no such problem, thankfully. I did leave out the thin copper shim that was originally in the camera, but things look OK, so I'm going with what I have now.
I'd still love a split-circle, but the one I tried did get a little dark at narrower apertures so I think I'll stick with the factory screen in my 350D and maybe try something else (a different brand, methinks) if and when I finally get something better (my wishlist goes like this: 500D, 7D, 5D... ;)
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Death to Fungus
Tonight, cruising eBay for lenses, as I am wont to do, I came across a Canon 28-135mm IS f/3.5-5.6 USM lens (IS: Image Stabiliser and USM: Ultra-Sonic Motor, ie. quiet auto-focus). I already have the similar 28-105mm USM (no IS) lens, but would love the extra reach and IS would be handy. So far it's sitting on $22.50 with three days to go. Why? In a word - fungus. That's right, there's stuff growing inside the lens. Damn.
But it got me thinking about how I might go about cleaning it up myself (or how much it might cost to get it done professionally and whether that would be worth it - short answer is "probably", but hard to tell sight-unseen). Which got me thinking about the old 70-210mm f/4 I have, which had a bit of an infection itself, and I did a little reading...
This lens came with the EOS 650 that I bought not so long ago as my second film body (after the 3000N). I bought it mostly for the lenses (although I've been using the body too) - the 70-210mm and a 35-105mm and I think they're both out of the original EF lineup. Certainly they have the AF motor noise to prove it! Anyway, the 70-210mm had a little fungus on the inside (where else?) of the front element, and I was suitably terrified of actually opening a lens myself, but the three little Phillips-head were just too tempting. After, I told myself, I don't use this lens much, if at all, and if I kill it dead (which I thought unlikely), I can deal.
So, three screws out and the front element can be removed without too much trouble. I want to go easy on the glass so I try a little alcohol spray and a blower but the fungus won't budge. I try an experimental nudge with my thumbnail (which I keep long for playing guitar) and end up smearing it a little. Ick. OK, so my earlier reading suggested that vinegar (of the white spirit kind, not the apple cider or red wine kind!) was a good tool for this job... and it is. I apply some with a cotton-bud and the fungus basically dissolves. I blot it clean with a lens-cleaning cloth and things look good. This being a push-pull zoom, I can also get to the rear element easily and clean that up too. Make sure everything is dry, put the front element back on and screw it up. Done.
And the result? Well, it looks clean enough although I'll know better when I do some comparison shots against its previous performance. Happily, the lens with the fungus was the easiest one to pull apart, out of my collection. The others look a little more daunting... Meanwhile, I think I'll bid on this 28-135mm and see if I can't somehow clean it up. If I can get it cheap it may even be worth having it professionally cleaned. :)
But it got me thinking about how I might go about cleaning it up myself (or how much it might cost to get it done professionally and whether that would be worth it - short answer is "probably", but hard to tell sight-unseen). Which got me thinking about the old 70-210mm f/4 I have, which had a bit of an infection itself, and I did a little reading...
This lens came with the EOS 650 that I bought not so long ago as my second film body (after the 3000N). I bought it mostly for the lenses (although I've been using the body too) - the 70-210mm and a 35-105mm and I think they're both out of the original EF lineup. Certainly they have the AF motor noise to prove it! Anyway, the 70-210mm had a little fungus on the inside (where else?) of the front element, and I was suitably terrified of actually opening a lens myself, but the three little Phillips-head were just too tempting. After, I told myself, I don't use this lens much, if at all, and if I kill it dead (which I thought unlikely), I can deal.
So, three screws out and the front element can be removed without too much trouble. I want to go easy on the glass so I try a little alcohol spray and a blower but the fungus won't budge. I try an experimental nudge with my thumbnail (which I keep long for playing guitar) and end up smearing it a little. Ick. OK, so my earlier reading suggested that vinegar (of the white spirit kind, not the apple cider or red wine kind!) was a good tool for this job... and it is. I apply some with a cotton-bud and the fungus basically dissolves. I blot it clean with a lens-cleaning cloth and things look good. This being a push-pull zoom, I can also get to the rear element easily and clean that up too. Make sure everything is dry, put the front element back on and screw it up. Done.
And the result? Well, it looks clean enough although I'll know better when I do some comparison shots against its previous performance. Happily, the lens with the fungus was the easiest one to pull apart, out of my collection. The others look a little more daunting... Meanwhile, I think I'll bid on this 28-135mm and see if I can't somehow clean it up. If I can get it cheap it may even be worth having it professionally cleaned. :)
Thursday, December 24, 2009
I love my AE-1 Program (or, primes rock)
So I ran a roll of Kodak Ultramax 400 through my AE-1 Program. I wasn't expecting too much from this film - it was really a test roll for my recent FD lens acquisitions. And when I saw the prints today, the first few shots were out of focus or shaken so I was a little sad. Then I had a chance to look through the rest and was pleasantly surprised.
One of the most interesting shots was with the 24mm Sigma. I had managed to get the lens slightly "cross-threaded" on the mount and I couldn't get it to focus - I thought I'd broken it somehow but took the shot anyway, of the grand old Exhibition Building in Melbourne, and it turned out a look like those tilt-shift pictures you see (makes sense, I guess). Then I figured out what I'd done, mounted the lens properly and got a beautiful, focussed shot - amazing blue sky and brushed clouds, almost like an HDR (high dynamic range) digital image. Like so:
Next I tried the Sigma 600mm f/8 mirror lens. I pointed it at the little tower on top of the dome and got a beautifully sharp of something that was only a tiny detail in the frame from the 24mm lens. The background was that bright blue sky, so there were no "donuts" in the background "bokeh" that are a drawback with the mirror lens design. I also shot some long-range "portraits", both against a background of trees (yielding donuts) and a blank wall. So long as I managed to get the subject in focus, they were wonderfully sharp. The donuts are a little trippy but I think are an interesting effect if used tastefully.
Finally I shot some portraits with the 135mm f/3.5 (pretty close equivalent to the 85mm I love using so much on the 350D, focal length-wise, anyway). Again, nice and sharp with beautiful colours.
I'm tempted to say this is the roll of colour film that I've been happiest with, but that wouldn't be quite true, having looked back at some of the Fuji 400H and Velvia 100 I shot at the Melbourne Zoo on the EOS 50. Still, I'm really glad I bought the AE-1 Program and I have new respect for Kodak Ultramax 400.
One of the most interesting shots was with the 24mm Sigma. I had managed to get the lens slightly "cross-threaded" on the mount and I couldn't get it to focus - I thought I'd broken it somehow but took the shot anyway, of the grand old Exhibition Building in Melbourne, and it turned out a look like those tilt-shift pictures you see (makes sense, I guess). Then I figured out what I'd done, mounted the lens properly and got a beautiful, focussed shot - amazing blue sky and brushed clouds, almost like an HDR (high dynamic range) digital image. Like so:
Next I tried the Sigma 600mm f/8 mirror lens. I pointed it at the little tower on top of the dome and got a beautifully sharp of something that was only a tiny detail in the frame from the 24mm lens. The background was that bright blue sky, so there were no "donuts" in the background "bokeh" that are a drawback with the mirror lens design. I also shot some long-range "portraits", both against a background of trees (yielding donuts) and a blank wall. So long as I managed to get the subject in focus, they were wonderfully sharp. The donuts are a little trippy but I think are an interesting effect if used tastefully.
Finally I shot some portraits with the 135mm f/3.5 (pretty close equivalent to the 85mm I love using so much on the 350D, focal length-wise, anyway). Again, nice and sharp with beautiful colours.
I'm tempted to say this is the roll of colour film that I've been happiest with, but that wouldn't be quite true, having looked back at some of the Fuji 400H and Velvia 100 I shot at the Melbourne Zoo on the EOS 50. Still, I'm really glad I bought the AE-1 Program and I have new respect for Kodak Ultramax 400.
Monday, December 14, 2009
Focus screen blues
A while back I ordered a split-circle focus screen for my 350D. (I won't mention the vendor by name at this point because my issue is still unresolved and I don't want to prejudge the result.) I was getting frustrated with a very hunt-happy autofocus system (especially in low light) and was finding the manual focus option to be very difficult with the standard screen. Losing a lot of shots that I was sure I could get if I could only _see_!
The screen arrived a couple of weeks back and I procrastinated about putting it in, because the screens are very easily scratched and/or dirtied and next to impossible to clean. Now I'm wishing I had just left well-enough alone.
Long story short[er], the screen went in fine. But the viewfinder focus was wrong, because I had put it in backwards (it's hard to tell, OK?). So I flipped it. And it was still out, but closer. So I put the copper shim back in (the one they said you didn't need). And it was worse. And so on and so forth, taking the screen out a lot, having trouble placing it back in. And it got dirty. And scratched. And cleaning with isopropyl alcohol left a mark. And blah. I tried putting the original screen back, but couldn't get it to line up. At 2am I declared defeat, emailed the support address and went to bed for some fitful sleep.
I was so annoyed I didn't take _any_ cameras with me when I left the house today (well, except the one in my phone). As anyone who has seen me recently will know, this is highly unusual. I was that sad.
Support email came back and said I should try with the extra bits of sticky stuff to extend the shim. That made it worse. So I took out the shim. Better, but not right, and nowhere near good enough for manual focus (which was the point of this, remember?). I need to move the screen further back. Or make it thinner (tricky).
So, email to support again. I figure they'll either declare me incompetent, come up with some trick I haven't thought of (no, I'm not taking a scalpel to my camera!) or admit there's an issue and get me a screen that fits.
Hopefully I get some joy - I can see the potential of the split circle to really enhance my work and I can't wait to have a working one on my only digital body. Maybe shooting some film will cheer me up in the meantime...
The screen arrived a couple of weeks back and I procrastinated about putting it in, because the screens are very easily scratched and/or dirtied and next to impossible to clean. Now I'm wishing I had just left well-enough alone.
Long story short[er], the screen went in fine. But the viewfinder focus was wrong, because I had put it in backwards (it's hard to tell, OK?). So I flipped it. And it was still out, but closer. So I put the copper shim back in (the one they said you didn't need). And it was worse. And so on and so forth, taking the screen out a lot, having trouble placing it back in. And it got dirty. And scratched. And cleaning with isopropyl alcohol left a mark. And blah. I tried putting the original screen back, but couldn't get it to line up. At 2am I declared defeat, emailed the support address and went to bed for some fitful sleep.
I was so annoyed I didn't take _any_ cameras with me when I left the house today (well, except the one in my phone). As anyone who has seen me recently will know, this is highly unusual. I was that sad.
Support email came back and said I should try with the extra bits of sticky stuff to extend the shim. That made it worse. So I took out the shim. Better, but not right, and nowhere near good enough for manual focus (which was the point of this, remember?). I need to move the screen further back. Or make it thinner (tricky).
So, email to support again. I figure they'll either declare me incompetent, come up with some trick I haven't thought of (no, I'm not taking a scalpel to my camera!) or admit there's an issue and get me a screen that fits.
Hopefully I get some joy - I can see the potential of the split circle to really enhance my work and I can't wait to have a working one on my only digital body. Maybe shooting some film will cheer me up in the meantime...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)