Forum Replies Created
Very nice Jack. That is an interesting technique, and it seems to really do the job! I have not tried anything similar. I have been doing a lot of long exposure night work for the streetlight series I am doing. The S2 has worked very well for it. The only problem I have had is with ghost images of the light sources. Since I am not using filters, I have a feeling it is just the reflective cover glass of the S2. It's rather a shame, actually, but I don't think there is anything that can be done about it. I was also wondering if it could be the plate glass front element on the 120mm (just got the 70mm today, so we'll see how that does!)…does not seem to happen as much with the 35mm, which does not have the filter, but that could just be circumstance. It seems to happen less on streetlights and more on very high intensity lights, such as the ones on ships in port and so on.
I also saw the effect on a hasselblad lens I tried on the S2, which makes me think that it might just be the sensor glass.
Here were three images from the series. The effect is visible in the second photo (with the 250mm f/4 FE, a bit hazy copy, so that might exacerbate it), and then two very small orbs in the last photo taken with the 35mm. This is not really the effect I mean. It can be really dramatic. I will try to find one to post.
Thanks very much Jack. I do prefer the white balance this way too, at least aesthetically, but I may change later. I would be interested to see your overpasses as well! You are right though about the S2 here — it works beautifully in Iceland. I was very impressed too, as I was outside for two hours and took 40 long exposure photos, and the temperature was -7C (19.4F), and despite this the battery still showed full after! Most photos were 10 seconds or so (so 20 with the darkframe), but some were up to 120s (240 with dark frame…). The battery life I have been getting out of the S2 has been fantastic, not unlike it was with the D3. I just have one battery, and I don't really feel like it is worth trying to buy another, at least not yet.
Nice shot. Looks like it did well. How did you like New York? Any more shots from this series?
Lovely photo Edwin!
Based on the only 2 S lenses I have used — 35mm and 120mm, I would almost say that the testing is pointless. The lenses are so incredibly good that they don't really have any weak points other than size. The only middling problem I have had is some issues with ghost reflections in extremely high contrast night photography (of streetlights etc against a black sky). So I would say just buy on focal length — there is nothing else between them!
Just as a counter, I have noticed rather real differences between the S2 lenses on a good tripod with the mirror pre-released and with it not pre-released. If you are using a tripod anyway, it is best practice to use the mirror pre-release. I have noticed it most on the 120mm lens at slow speeds (1s to 1/30th etc), but in general I would say better to use pre-release if you can. With respect to the focal plane vs. CS lenses, I only have the focal plane lenses so I cannot comment. If the focal plane shutter has to fire anyway, I would say that the CS lenses only make sense if you shoot a lot of strobe work.
Hi Arif,
Unluckily, I have had this before on 2 DMR's, the M9 and on Imacon and Hasselblad scanners. This is a function of CCD's and how they work. As crazy as it sounds, what is most likely happening here is that a random cosmic ray has struck one of the CCD pixel components and shorted it out. This causes a chain reaction down the pixel array resulting in the line you see there. It is not as uncommon as it sounds. The only way to fix this is to have Leica map out that pixel (basically, they assign it to act like the neighboring pixel…you would never notice the difference). This might be possible from a distance, or you might need to send the camera in. With my DMRs and M9, I had to send them in. With the M9, they just replaced the CCD under warranty. The Hasselblad and Imacon scanners allow you to calibrate the CCD in flexcolor. A Kodak rep explains this in the following youtube video (among other things). He gets to the issue at hand around the 8 minute mark. As he says, airline travel increases the problem, as does being near the poles (me in Iceland…not good), but it can happen anywhere. My DMRs got it in Japan and California, and the M9 here in Iceland. Not there one shot, there the next. : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98FZ8C6HneEIt looks like it is just like the R9, only bigger. If that is the case, it is not too hard. You just need to be quite delicate and careful. The screen is usually a little easier to get out than to get in. The hardest part is generally releasing the new screen once it is in the proper place in the metal frame. You need to let go with the tweezers very softly, or sometimes the screen will shift. But in general this is not a tough job, just one that you need to be pretty precise for. If you tend to have shaky hands, let someone else do it.
Thanks very much Jim. I will give that a try next time as well, and see how it goes!
I have used black Tamrac N-45's for my larger/heavier cameras for years. They are durable and have a soft foam shoulder pad covered in suede. The foam keeps them soft, the suede keeps them from slipping. They are fully adjustable and have quick release latches to take the strap off when you are working on a tripod. Mine are both going on seven or eight years of frequent use with heavy cameras, and they are both working perfectly. They are also cheap. http://www.amazon.com/Tamrac-Leather-Padded-QuickRelease-Camera/dp/B00009VQJZ
Ok, well I found what I was hoping for, and the color problem is mostly solved. I found a tutorial by Patrick Lavoie on photo.net, and it seems to get rid of the color moire at least, but not the pattern. Still, it is much better and less distracting. You lose some saturation, but it is better than simply desaturating.
The procedure is as follows. He writes:
1_double the background
2_apply a strong gaussian blur, one that make you still see some silhouette but barely..like 15-20.
3_add a small NOISE amount on top of this new blur image, around 3-5 gaussian monochromatic.
4_change the blending mode of this layer from NORMAL to COLOR
5_create a mask fill with black, use a brush with withe paint to remove the undesired moire effect.
So, doing that, I got something like this…also, it seems to work quite well for color fringing or other areas of chroma problems. In this image, I only used it on the wall of the building where the problem was most evident. It could probably use a bit on the roof as well, but I wanted to keep it simple.
Thank you both for the help. I am sorry I did not reply sooner. I left town right after I posted the thread, and then forgot to come back to it.
David — I will consider doing that next time, though I still appreciate the ease of just focusing on that which I want in focus, and taking the shot. But in this case, it may indeed be better to trick the camera. I would rather some post-processing fix, however.
Jack — you make a good point, but in this case, I don´t think it works all that well. I will see if I can find any more information. I have a feeling that fixing this convincingly may require some rather complicated post-processing gymnastics. Luckily it is generally only a problem in making very large prints.
Ok, thank you for the explanation. I am not trying to say you or allegretto's suggestions are not valid, I was just trying to understand them, as I could not see any reason why they would be needed. For example, deleting an image is not something I would ever worry about…conversely, I would rather have the test shot on the card just in case the first shot winds up being the best!
Allegretto — do you think it is difficult to tell DR and detail on the preview screen because the preview is a jpeg? I always assumed that it was because the screen was not up to the task of displaying the image since it is only 400,000 pixels or so. Have you found the jpeg histogram and clipping functions limited? Again, not trying to be dismissive, just curious, because it is not something I have had a problem with, but I have only had the camera for a few weeks now.
Why wouldn't you just take a photo and then delete it? It seems like it would accomplish the same thing, only without any buttons or special features.
As for a true RAW histogram, have you seen any deficiency in the regular histogram that makes this necessary? I am curious to hear about any particular issues, because I have not noticed any problems with using a jpeg RAW…I would guess that chewing through a 70mb raw file to generate a raw histogram would slow down the camera substantially.
Photojazz;1157 wrote: I hope not. The market is thin enough without them producing specialty lens materials. I say stick to stealth black, and make all you can. To me, the M9 P says, people like basic black, and to be able to blend in, not stand out in a crowd. It's the style of shooting many M9 fans do, less is more.
Totally agree. And I say this as someone with a chrome M7 with blue leather (maybe I was a little crazy when I ordered that). In general, the more expensive these cameras get, the more I want them to be nondescript. I have taped up my S2, (which still looks expensive of course, no matter what kind of tape you put on it) on the basis of the fact that I don't want to bring attention to the fact that the camera and lenses are worth more than the car we drove to the location in! Same thing when you are photographing someone — I don't want them looking at the red dot or Leica script that is staring straight at them, I want them to look in the lens, or at least not be distracted by some branding or logo. The silver lenses and bodies are not so bad, and I do think that if they can continue to make them they should, but not if it is at the expense of the production schedule for the regular lenses. My dealer in Iceland is still waiting for the 1st 35mm FLE to be shipped to him, and he put in the order at Photokina! That's over a year and they have not delivered a single 35mm FLE to this entire country!!! The last thing we need is to slow down production with more variety…
