How weird ! ? ? ? — Where the Ghost came from ?

While checking the photo taken by motorized Canon FD 50mm lens,

I found that those photos were utterly odd.

Those two were the consecutive photos, next to each other.  Though, 

the data recorded was — the left photo = A0452 , 4.2MB / Right photo

= A0453, 3.6MB and strangely  both were taken 14:29:44 (= exactly the

same time — of course, on the same 44th second, my 5D could have shot 

5 frames though the camera has been set to shoot only a single frame).  

What odd of those photos were —– obviously the camera shot the same 

flowers, yet they don’t look the same. = some flowers were stationed 

still, looks not exactly the same.  If all the flowers in the right photo

really existed on front of the lens, why they were not in the left photo.

And if the left photo was the real one, where all those additional flowers

= ghost images came from.  There was no similar image on any of the

preceding shot = no possibility of the memory mix-up in the camera.

A0452

A0453

If you download each photo and see each of them by alternately clicking 

next and back again = you can see which flowers keep the same position

and which flowers appeared and disappeared.  —– ? ? ? —– How wierd ?

How those flowers could disappear.   Were they existed there at all ?

Have you seen like this ?  Such happening was the first ever in my life

= the spooky images I never encountered before.   

Of course, I didn’t manipulate the photo at all (a bit brightened though) 

and the photo wasn’t a copy of the other.  —– Could anybody explain,

was that caused by the camera’s malfunction or else ? — But how ? ? ?

Please give me your opinion.

[]

   

Flower Patch (6) — Canon FD 50mm F1.8 Focus Shift

While a patch of flowers are blooming, I should test the Lenses as many as possible.

So, on this post, it was the Canon FD 50 mm F1.8 which was modified to have a motorized

focus.  Funnily enough, the controller of this operation was not that device I’ve designed

for focus-shift but for vibrating a lens.  Despite the battery voltage was low

(nominal 3.7 V battery could give 4.2 V soon after a flesh charge), I found that the

 same device could work for focus-shift as well with some adjustment of the timing.

Unlike the other Lenses of Canon EFS 18~55mm or Tamron &0~300mm, this

50mm lens was worked well on a hand-held shooting, and the pictures’

highlight got pretty smooth halo on them.  = That was what I wanted.

The lens was mounted in the plastic barrel which came from a broken Canon

compact camera G9, and with its barrel, the lens can extend to a close-up range

= almost 1/2 size though, unfortunately a blurring halo is an arch enemy of a

macro photography. —– still, some time, the result looks not too bad.  

(See the Bokeh on the blue flower, photo above, (click to enlarge) = they

don’t follow the “Depth of field” ! —– I don’t know how the 5D processed it )

When the lens was re-constructed in the G9’s barrel, I didn’t put the Iris,

therefore this lens is always fully open F1.8 = in this condition, quality of 

the image was rather good.   (You may feel, it’s too funny of me to say that

— Yes, a man after fuzzy image still see an importance of the sharpness)  🙂

[]

Flower Patch (5) — by 2-Element Homemade Lens (B)

2Ele Nikon

And the lens here was the other one, for Nikon mount type.  

Nikon fitting can be mounted 

on a Canon Eos body but not 

the other way round because 

the Nikon body (its frange-back 

on the Lens mount) is 2.5 mm

 thicker = Canon Lens on a Nikon body

can’t have an infinity focus but in the other hand, a mount 

converter on Canon for Nikon can have 2.5 mm to play with.

(Photo above, the lens was fitted with Nikon to EOS adapter.)

—– the reason why I further made Nikon type of this lens was,

“I wanted to have this fuzzy image in 32 MP sensor”— serious !   

(but the Canon is going to have 50 MP soon, how interesting.

—– Why 200K kind of image needs 20Mb size details ?

= this is THE Paradox — or joke Sir.   😀  )

Those two have a similar structure though, looks very different.

= Nikon type is much smaller still, as its front lens got stronger

curvature, it got stronger distortion.  And unlike Canon type,

I didn’t put an Iris (hole in a black-tape) the image has more flair.

—– (for a sake of choice, I left this fuzziness as it is.)

I got quite few lenses which give me sharp image, so it’s nice to have other

choices of the lenses which could create fuzzy, painterly images from subtle

to utterly impressionists painting like one.  The beauty of this exercise is,

I don’t need to rely on the tool (so called program) somebody else has made.

My art has to be created by myself and for it, I don’t use a readymade template.

(of cause, I didn’t make 5D camera myself, still some time I do.)   Ha ha ha.

[]

Flower Patch (4) — by 2-Element Homemade Lens (A)

There are two “2-Element Homemade Lens” = both were based on the

(supposedly) same toy camera lens (seems to have 27 mm focal length) but

one was using HOYA short-eyesight specs lens to lengthening the focal 

length, suits for a full-frame Canon 5D.  The other was using a strong concave

lens, came from a discarded zoom’s front element, and I made this for Nikon 

(though, for this test, I’ve used it on 5D with “Nikon to EOS” mount adapter.)  

As the original lens was designed for focus-free, they are the easiest  lens to 

use = unlike Pinhole, at least I could see the finder image, still no need to focus 

= just click, thanks to the camera’s AV mode.   🙂

And the photos in this post were taken by the HOYA-Canon type.

As focus-free, the lens could capture from quite close range to the distant subject

with very reasonable quality with an added “good” softness and the good deal of

halation which makes me smile with fun.  🙂

(though, I haven’t established whether its softness was the toy camera’s inherent character

 or caused by the added lens —– whichever the cause, it wouldn’t spoil my fun.)

And the images made by the toy camera lens (hence, close-up only) was in this post.

[]

Flower Patch (3) — by Double Density Pinhole

When the sun was bright and the distinctive (esp’ in color) subjects were there

= it’s the time to take the Wide-angle DD-Pinhole out.    As a kind of image, this 

lens could produce the most typical “Impressionistic” painterly image.

I very much like the image though, I may not have found the best subject

for this Lens yet.     (May be I need to go to the countryside where 

old masters took their canvas out.  🙂 )

[]

[]

Flower Patch (2) — by Anastigmat Lens

The shot from the same flower Patch as before but by the 100 year old 

German Anastigmat Lens.  There was no fancy operation or trick, but just

click a DSLR Canon 5D on AV mode, while the lens was fully open F5.4.

(Focus was done by a Pentax Helicoid Extension Tube)

On this last picture, there are funny halo on the whitish flowers = almost like

a Focus-Shift or Lens Vibration though they were only a straight shot if not

by a hand blurr (but not likely) —– I’m not sure what caused it.  The 100 year 

old lens has no crisp image still able to show certain details but nothing more.

[]

Flowers by Vibrating Lens — Retake

Well, this was the retake of the previous post. — Since I found the most of the

photos there got a blurr by a hand-shake not by the vibrating motor intended.  

So I tried again using tripod. (You my need to see each photos, click, enlarged

and check the Bokeh imposed on the highlight (= bright yellow flower) and 

the sharp details maintained on the low-contrast area (= green leaves etc) )

I think, you might be convinced now the effect and the feasibility of this technique 

though, the question of What for may remain.

—– may be purely my endulgement, loves of the soft image.    

I would say, why not. 

(99% of the art are utterly useless, anyway.)  😀

————————————————————-

PS: The Lens I used were Canon EFS 18~55mm IS-II, Tamron Zoom 70~300mm,

the homemade device I used looks like this.

[]

 

Flower Patch by the Vibe-lens

I found a nice flower patch —– so, I took the pictures with the Lens Vibrating

Device for its first field test.   Yet there is the fundamental paradox, shake

the lens with vibrating motor to get painting like soft image but not as such 

to give too much blur, while flowers were blown by the wind and a holding 

hand shakes as well. —– So, some were successful but others were shaken 

too much still, as long as picture looks interesting, it’s OK.  🙂

(Lens used were, Modified Canon EFS Zoom 18~55mm IS-II,

Tamron Zoom 70~300mm, Canon 5D Mk-III)

With normal view, the flower looks like this.  🙂

Enjoyed ? —– or disturbed ?    Ha ha ha.  😀

[]

Vibe and Shift — (I mean together)

Isn’t this bokeh beautiful ? —– otherwise the photo looks just like

normal (photo left) —– What I gave to this photo was a shake.

(The lens was Tamron Zoom 70~300 mm)   As the vibrating motor

 was attached on the front filter ring, when it was vibrating, the 

focus ring was slipping off the prefocused position too.   Hence the

exposed photo gained a blur and an out-of-focus bokeh together.

(I think it looks like a softness of the Zeiss lens.  🙂 )

 While developing the device system

 which will give a good vibration 

 while shutter opened, I needed to

 tinker a lot on the electronic circuit.  

 As I don’t have any more Canon G9’s

battery, I resorted with Panasonic Lumix camera’s battery which has only 3.7 V

and its low Voltage gave me a lots of headache of instability.

Anyhow, I had to give numerous test click again and again while changing

the component etc etc = so, those photos were the by-product of the making.

The photos above here were created when the device was mounted on the

Canon EFS 18~55 zoom lens. = with funny halation, this photo looks like

an old anastigmat lens’.  🙂     Somewhat sweet isn’t it ?

 When photo was taken, while the lens 

 was vibrating, the hold of the camera 

 often shaken as well, creating just

 blurred image.

 (Never mind nobody is perfect.  🙂 )

 ( —– Such blurr could be utilized

 somewhere other photo session.  🙂 )

— When I finished the building work,

I’ll take the camera out for a field test.

(hopefully, before the Summer ended.  Ha ha ha  )

[]

Lens ID — EXIF or Selfy

On the previous post, in order to show the sample photo of each lens, 

I took a lots of sample photos. —– then, to compile and name them, 

I found a difficulties —not always I could tell the photo by which lens.   

The each file of the photo normally having EXIF data though, it needs 

to have the lens’ ID from the lens’ rom memory in other words, lens

got to be a dedicated type.  

Unfortunately, lots of my lens isn’t genuine or dedicated type, so that

there was no EXIF data (still, I have 10 genuine lenses from Canon

— other lenses I’m still using with converter, adapter may be 20 

 altogether ?)  therefore often I have to guess which lens it was.

 ( When EXIF said 0mm lens, 1/8 second and if ISO setting was 12800 

= it’s likely a pinhole ! —– On the end, I decided to take “Selfy” on 

a mirror or a photo of the lens itself to record which lens was used

to take its sample photo.

Incidentally this was the Wide-angle Double Density Pinhole. (clopped photo)

By  this, low-contrast, low-color-contrast test shot, some of them showed

that they were not suited for this kind of subject !

= still I got good chart to select each of them.

[]