Jump to content

Chrissie

Members
  • Content Count

    505
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    23

Everything posted by Chrissie

  1. Have you tried the exposure compensation dial?
  2. Well, since you were asking how to reduce, and I didn't know where you had started out from, I could only give you this general hint. But your selection is in fact the lowest that's documented in the help guide. Good luck! Maybe you can let us know how it finally worked out.
  3. Any setting that gives you a smaller bitrate than what you've currently set. "Bitrate" are those funny Mbps values in the linked document. You will anyhow be limited by the smallest bandwidth of either WLAN, LAN, switches, routers and/or bandwidth as supplied by your internet connection, which may be part of the total transmission chain.
  4. Yes, that's possible. I'm confused by what you may have meant by the "18% grey" thing, though. I used the Sony/Zeiss 1.8/55 for this test. You need to set the Mode Dial to "M", (manual), select shutter speed and aperture to the desired settings. In addition, ISO needs to be set to "Auto" (Menu: Camera 1 / page 9 / ISO => select "Auto", then allow for a sufficiently large range where the Auto ISO can float within, as described in the "Hint" paragraph on the "ISO" help guide page (se last link):
  5. WARNING: I've wasted both money and many hours of time, trying to get a similar product, CAMFI II to work with my a9. Their software was buggy as hell across countless software releases, before I quit wasting my time. May have improved by now, but I doubt it. And many advertised features were not supported on Sony cameras. Including but not limited to - Taddah! - focus stacking! Before considering buying the Camranger II product, I strongly recommend reviewing the list of "Unsupported Features" on the camera of your choice. For the a6400, this list includes - Taddah! - focus stacking!
  6. @Thad E Ginathom that's not a nice way to talk to a lady. You should have asked her to come a little closer, to achieve the same effect - and maybe more. 😉
  7. In the context of BIF I would consider the optimization of depth-of-field an advanced topic, and wouldn't put that additional burden on a motivated beginner. BTW: cranking up the ISO to make up for a lack of light has downsides of its own, a.k.a. "noise".
  8. Which does not discredit the waiting approach per se. Consider my case: I happen to live in Switzerland. If I had made up my mind to shoot polar bears, for instance, I would probably have to wait until the end of my lifetime, without ever getting to meet a polar bear where I live. Instead, I would have to go, where polar bears usually hang around, in order to get a chance to shoot one. Disclaimer: I'm aware, that polar bears are a protected species. By "shooting" I'm only referring to the activity of taking pictures of them.
  9. P.S.: As an engineer, I tend to focus on the technicalities of the task, like I did above. But, there's a lot of non-technical things involved, too. If you want to shoot game, it helps to develop the mindset of a hunter. The behaviour of wild animals may seem erratic and unpredictable, which it is, but only to an extent. Those animals have habits and a typical behavior, too! Study your target species. Learn, where they gather, whether they are solitary or prefer flocks of their kind, what makes them sit down and what makes them take off. Observe any influence of meteorological and/or other conditions. After all, flying does take effort, and birds are lazy, too. They prefer effortless gliding/soaring over flapping their wings, for example. So it helps, to understand where thermals typically develop, etc. If you develop these kinds of knowledge, it makes animal behavior much more predictable. You can take advantage of that knowledge by being prepared before the chance for a shot arrives. Or, by waiting at a time and location, which is more likely to produce such chances than elsewhere or at different times.
  10. Dr. John, yes, BIF really is an inspiring and challenging topic for many. As a general rule of thumb, I would not try to replicate a set of parameters which gave fine results some fifty years ago. After all, technology and your equipment have evolved a lot since then. Things to consider today, in my humble opinion, and in the order of priority, are: First of all, you probably want to avoid motion blur, which may be caused by your hands not being as rock-steady as they used to be some fifty years ago. In this case, IBIS / OSS is for you. Let the equipment assist you in image stabilization.Turn IBIS and/or OSS "On". In case your lens supports this: set OSS to "mode 2", which will not try to compensate for a horizontal panning movement while you're following a bird in flight with your camera/lens. Those birds have a tendency to move fast. Small birds in flight are harder to capture than large birds in flight. To avoid the movement of the bird itself to introduce motion blur of its own, you'll need a fast shutter speed. The rule of thumb is, to use at least 4 times the reciprocal of the focal distance of your lens. Example: If you have a 400mm lens, you should use a shutter speed of 1/1600 or faster. As far as depth of field (DOF) is concerned, which is controlled by the aperture you set: values around 8 usually promise the best compromise between sharpness/resolution and reasonable depth of field. I'm aware, this is a bit vague, but avoid extreme values for the aperture setting like "1.4" or "32", unless you know what you're doing and when this can be reasonable. (In which case you wouldn't be asking for advice in the first place). Once you've set the shutter speed to a value (or range) according to the focal length of your lens, and the aperture according to the recommendation as above, you will have to let the ISO float, i.e. let the camera body set it to whatever fits the first two parameters. I typically choose the "M" setting, which allows me to select shutter speed and aperture value individually. Good luck, and please do keep us posted on your results and progress.
  11. Thanks for the praise - makes me blush ... Birds coming too close haven't been a problem for me yet, quite to the contrary. And since I own an a9, having 24MP "only", I'm used to fully zoom in in order to have enough pixels covered, in case I want/need to crop. In this particular instance, I was "thinking like an eagle a Red Kite", looking out of the window and figuring this would be a perfect time to go out hunting, if I was a Red Kite. Which was why I was out on my south-facing, hillside-overlooking patio, literally waiting for this bird to arrive, before it actually did. Kind of predictable, if you set the "now" threshold low enough ... 😉 And so I got this nice shot where the bird in its approach looks straight at you, at almost the same elevation. My takeaway is: be fully prepared, before the situation for a shot arrives.
  12. Red Kite (Milvus milvus), Northern Switzerland A9, 100-400GM f/13, 400 mm, 1/2000, ISO: 400
  13. @Alejandro Espeche: Coming back to this little gem: 8-) I've been thinking about the "try to keep bird back in the EVF" part: I perfectly understand, why to use the center of the lens for best in-focus results. But doesn't keeping the bird back in the EVF entail the risk of cutting the tail of the bird off, like shown in your illustration? To me this sounds like you're factoring in a little delay between the "finger press" on the shutter button and the actual shot being taken, allowing the bird to have fully entered the frame by the time the camera finally takes the shot. Which brings me to the Priority Set in AF/C setting. I have this set to "AF", instead of "immediate" response, because I'm aiming for best sharpness, even if this would go along with a tiny delay between button press and shot taken. Is my thinking correct this far? Finally, my most recent result of my efforts, which mainly benefitted from me and my camera for the first time ever having been ready to shoot _before_ the bird arrived ... 8-)
  14. Sony does have seconds in its EXIF data. At least on my A9 it has. Sample
  15. Since you're specifically asking for an "RGB" histogram: I'm afraid, this is not possible. However, If you're fine with an "intensity" histogram without differentiating for RGB, then maybe you'll want to take a look at this.
  16. Now this is clearly becoming way off-topic, but I beg your patience. I just returned from walking the dog outside, for the night, and kept thinking about this exchange. It's no wonder, it took an "eastern" mind like @Thad E Ginathom's (from India) to make my "western" mind (Switzerland/Germany) aware of the fact, that "waiting" is primarily a state of mind, not of the body. As a dog-owner, or at least the husband of the real dog-owner 😉 , I see how we train the obedience of the dog by commandeering her to "Wait!", which goes along with her compelled physical inactivity. While invisibly to to the naked eye, her mind is very actively waiting to be released from this forced inactivity. Very interesting indeed. And again: thanks @Thad E Ginathom for broadening my mind like this.
  17. Interesting thought! 8-) The mind may be waiting, while the body goes on with its monotonous activity. Very much possible, not only among wind turbines I'd say. Thanks for pointing this out.
  18. I like this picture because of the very nice gradient in the sky, although apparently those wind turbines are clearly not "waiting"... 😉
  19. So we have an "undeniable" shutter firing, as identified by you by its sound, yet no apparent picture was taken. Let's settle for now on the undisputed observation, that a sound was emitted. The internet is full of reports from SonyAlpha users about such sound phenomena after power down, and a wide range of explanations is being given. The most detailed and plausible explanation of which (in my view) was given by this guy. Of course you are free to believe any other explanation, which you may find when searching for the following key words: Note, how those key words focus on the observation, leaving out their interpretation.
  20. Maybe we should first confirm, that the shutter indeed fired, after you switched off your camera. What makes you believe, the shutter fired? Did the camera take an additional picture? Or did you possibly interpret a "sound" from the camera as a shutter firing? Please provide more detail.
  21. Wally, the confusion runs really strong in you. But I don't blame you: It's quite common among the clueless, to mistake competence as arrogance.
  22. On a completely related note: here's some news from our recent new member OKAF, received via private message: Obviously, OKAF is the enrichment this forum has long been waiting for.
  23. Wally, the following applies to you: So: no surprise as far as you're concerned.
  24. Kid, in case you're unaware: you're the one who needs help. Not me. I'm the one, who could provide help. But I won't. Not to you. Learn some manners first. This place does not belong to you. You don't get to define the rules for a community of volunteers.
  25. You came here and didn't even introduce yourself. Then you're displaying a lack of solidarity which I find disgusting. To say the least. If you think, solidarity is an obsolete concept, why did you come here for help in the first place? Just asking for a friend ... EOD
×
×
  • Create New...