Camera Stability Test

In the previous post, I talked about the Image Stabilizer a bit though I’m not a fan of it.   Since, I haven’t seen any photo which was benefited from it so far.  May be because, even without it I’m quite capable to shoot good enough picture hand-held. (even 500 mm lens !)

People may get a benefit of its Placebo effects = Peace of mind stabilizes the hand.  😀 

Still,  it was only “Impression from my experience”  —– not from the objective comparison.

—– So, in this occasion I purposely tested it.  

(but I wouldn’t say it was scientifically rigid —– Just clicked the camera as usual.) The test object was a “Pinhole-light” as you can see the photo left. = If the camera shakes, photo will clearly shows its movement at once.

I gave only one click for each speed, 1/125, 1/60, 1/30 but for Image Stabilizer (IS),  further 1/15, 1/8 and 1/4  were tested —– It was free-standing hand-held though, I was using my Chest-pod.  😉 

( Check the image of pinhole on the enlarged photo please)

Canon EF 200~70, F2.8 L IS lens on 5D Mk3  with IS On.  From left  1/125, 1/60, 1/30.   Lens zoom was set to  200 mm.

and further  1/15, 1/8, 1/4 —– even IS couldn’t save a shake on 1/4 .

The same as above but IS Off —– though, it didn’t make much difference.

Further slower speed = 1/15, 1/8, 1/4 —– 1/8 started to show a shake.

(Its horizontal movement showed,  Chest-pod stops vertical shake more !)  = It’s mean, IS made only one stop difference.

Tamron 500 mm F8 lens was tested on Canon 5D Mk3  on 1/125, 1/60, 1/30.

The same Tamron 500 mm was tested on Nikon D810 body,  1/125, 1/60, 1/30.  

Results shows almost no difference on the different camera body.

Canon EF 70~24mm F2.8 big heavy lens was set to 50mm and tested  1/125, 1/60, 1/30.

And small Micro Nikkor 55mm F3.5 lens was tested on Canon 5D Mk3 body.

—– Different size and weight of the lens showed not much difference.  

My conclusion was, as I thought before, the Image Stabilizer makes little difference, it was mare one stop.  (Anyhow for 200 mm lens, hand-held 1/4  (if not 1/8) is a hopeless situation.)  

So the lesson was, that if you are a good shooter, a sharp photo you made was = because you are a good shooter, not because of Image Stabilizer.  And if you are a bad shooter, no Image Stabilizer will rescue you.

 Those lenses are the lenses I tested with.  

Some are the latest current model but 55 mm Micro Nikkor and Tamron mirror lens are more than 40 years old. —— still working perfect (optically  😉 )  

And the kitchen was where I did those test shots.  The shooting distance was about 2m, so, I shot them while standing here (half step forward).  All from the same distance.

[] 

Stabilize the Camera — Chest-Pod

 There are many way to stabilize the camera.  Starting from the way to grip the camera.

 Ultimately a use of Tripod or Mono-pod, even a use of a Bean-bag.   

Still, it’s all down to a mind-set of the photographer = Whether to pay an attention

against a possible camera-shake and become aware of own doing?  

If it is a case “Doesn’t matter that the Stabilizer built into the lens should take care of

that problem”.   —– This is the most funny situation.   It is only a psychological trick.  

The stabilizer may save a photo while cancelling a camera shake for further 3 stops = such

as in a situation of 200 mm lens, it would be safer to use a shutter speed 1/250 or faster  

and with the aid of stabilizer it “may” drop to 1/125 or 1/60 —– still “may not” works.  

In such case, I would set 2 stop higher ISO setting to get 2 stop higher shutter speed.  

—— In the same time a  “Maestro” may say “other than ISO 100 color is not in its best”

—– Oh, really ? !  The BEST mean it is still in a relative matter = NOT the absolute.  

Our right-eye and the left-eye are not necessary even seeing the same color.

(Test it your self if you are not aware yet.  😉 —– If not aware this discrepancy,

how the one could boast about “the critical Color”  😀  )  

[]

I used be working close together with the publishers, their printers, plate-making engineers,

and one of my closest climbing mate of mountain has studied Printing Technology and

became an expert of the photo-scanner (such as Crosfield’s machne) —— I heard many

wired stories of “Special Sorcery” in their trade —– still, when it makes the print on the paper,

such as slight difference of the paper which is different a roll to roll, or even a humidity in

the air changes absorbency of the paper hence changes the color of print,  etc. etc.  = there

can not be any reliable absolute or perfection.  It is just someone’s preference.  

Anyhow, computer to computer, this CRT to that LCD screen, the color is always different

= what fuss about such minute difference.  😀  

[]

As I grown-up in the time when the color film was ISO 64 or 100, B/W was 400 and even with

push-development,  ISO 1600 or so (Kodak Royal Record Pan = ISO 12500 was existed though)

I had to stabilize the camera other than ISO speed.  So that, I tried many kind of  chest-pod.

(though there are too many — even I don’t remember how many I bought and made myself.)  

So, I show you two of my handmade.

This is a chest-pod of current use on my DSLR.   The simplest, hence the most neat one !

It was made by aluminium pipe and a short piece of  C-channel (which was cut and bent).

(A trouble was, the Airport Security suspects that this is a part of a disguised weapon.  😀 )

—– Unlike western people,  I hold a camera right side down  (it’s a Japanese tradition)  

 therefore when I shoot vertical-way, this chest-pod come against my left shoulder

just under the collar bone. 

And this is the other one I made for EOS Film Camera which doubles as an external

battery chamber.  ( AA x 5 rechargeable  batteries instead of 2CR5 Lithium battery)

And it functions as a chest-pod exactly the same way as the other one.  But this one can

fold down under the camera bottom. ( I don’t make a rubbish for a sake of Youtube.  😀 )

The advantage of this shooting style is, the hand which triggers the shutter, its elbow was

firmly lodged onto the body, hence it is far more stable than the style having right arm in

the air and move a finger to trigger.  

—– May be because of the fundamental flaw of the camera holding style in the west, the

camera shake is unavoidable, hence, it gave an opportunity to the manufacturer to produce

“Stabilizer” and sell it for £500 more price !    (I don’t think it costed such amount for them. )

—– In a video image, shaky picture is annoying but on a still, “two stops slower” seems not

much use —– better use same £500 to another shopping, and set 2 stop higher ISO, —– above

all, have a practice to gain a stable holding of the camera would be far more advantageous.  

Since, to gain calm, stable mind to stabilize the hand would be far more beneficial to the 

one’s whole life in general.     Anyhow, not all the lenses you got, has a stabilizer, and

living with unstable mind wouldn’t bring any happiness.    

Better think it in different angle and better change the mind-set and the way you shoot.

(If you doubt, have look a photo here and the photos by 500 mm lens in the previous post. )

(Here, the Zen practice comes in.  😀 ) 

[]

Body Parts

Those photos are just a casual snap of the people playing with computer.  

But using 500 mm lens hand-held. = naturally, there was not much room to use

such long telephoto lens in a small room, picture became a kind of close-up.  

Yet still, it was 2 m away, people didn’t mind to be photographed much. —– and

I found a quite unusual usefulness of this lens, despite it is rather dark F 8.

(ISO was set to 1600,  shutter speed was  1/15 ~ 1/30, AV mode — just to mention) 

I hope you enjoy the photos.  😉 

Next time I hope to upload more appetising body-parts.  😀  😀

[]

Ring Flash / Flash Story

——– (This Ring Flash was made to use with the Fish-eye lens on the

——– Yoshi-handy handmade camera, 36 years ago !  😀 ) 

In some posts ago,  I’ve shown Studio Flash and ring Flash tube.  

May be I should talk a bit more about Electronic Flash-light. — Why It’s called “Electronic

Flash” was, before, Flash-light meant Bulb Flash = the people over 60 might remember,

even if it was not a typical bulb shape, how about Flash-cube / Magicube at the time of

Kodak Instamatic camera, they are still flash bulb, but only small.  🙂

Flash bulb was an “Explosive device” = thin aluminium foil was packed into a glass bulb

with Oxygen and ignited by an electric spark, with a “Bong” noise !  

( I only know from Antic collection though, yet before  Flash bulb, it was an explosive 

magnesium powder = it’s literally explode ! —– hence, all the assistant of a photographer

used to have a lots of spot on their face, burnt by the exploding magnesium powder.  😀)

  []  

Unlike such hot staffs, electronic flash is using a discharge of high voltage electric energy

through a Xenon gas filled tube.  To make this, a capacitor inside of a Flash was slowly

charged-up to high voltage, then discharge it in an instant to produce very intense bright light.  

Like an electric spark, it needs to be high voltage, and the larger the capacitor,  

the light produced from it would be the brighter.  

This is the reason why a camera’s built-in flash, which got only small capacitor inside, was

not bright-enough to reach distance.             In contrast, a studio type big Flash having a bank of

capacitors connected parallel to store huge energy, 

and the big flash tube was made by a quartz to

withstand the heat shock created by a

discharge of huge energy.  

And to charge-up those capacitors, studio type is

using the main electricity and a

portable type, clip-on type are using electronic

voltage converter to rise the battery voltage

to 315 ~ 350 V.  

[]

As I said, the electric energy is first charged into

the capacitor.  

The capacitor is an electric device, which was

made by insulated two metal plates or foils

to store electric charge.  In order to store as much

as energy, very thin two aluminium foils were

tightly wound together.    And to separate two

metal foils, paper or plastic film ect. which called 

dielectric material was sandwiched between.  

But most of the capacitor used in a flash equipment is a

type called Electrolytic capacitor which is not using common insulator, hence smaller in size.

   []

It is not well known to the people that those Electrolytic Capacitor has a limited life.  

Especially if the equipment was not used long time (more than a year) they might be dead

and a moment when it was switched on again after long rasp of the time, the capacitor

would be internally short-circuited and gone for ever. —– ?   Why the insulation breaks ?

[]

If you tested the conductivity of Aluminium, you may know, despite the Aluminium is a

very good conductor,  Anodised surface shows no conductivity.   With the Anodisation,

the surface  of Aluminium was covered with the aluminium oxide which is an insulator.

Instead to use a separate insulator between two Aluminium foil,  Electrolytic Capacitor

is using this oxide coating developed own surface as a dielectric / insulator.  

So that, as long as the capacitor was kept receiving electric current, they maintain

the oxidized coating on the surface of aluminium foil.   But if the equipment was left

unused long time, the insulative coating deteriorate.

—– And a moment when it was switched on again, and the voltage rose high,  the

insulation breaks down and makes two foils short-circuited and start to generates heat,

or the power transistor pumping the high voltage into the capacitor burns-out.  

If the capacitor over heat  it would explode.   (In fact, the situation is always the same

where ever electrolytic capacitor was used — such as even an audio power amp.)

  []

The remedy to this situation is, the same as to initialise a capacitor in a factory.  

= slowly charge up the capacitor while waiting the insulating coat grows on the

surface of the aluminium foil (in its anode-side, hence it called Anodisation.)

—– To do this, professional people use variable transformer (Rheostat) and sloooowly 

rise the voltage while giving hours of time.  

(If you try, — You need to constantly measure the voltage of the capacitor —– first

second or two of switch-on, when you see the voltage rise to 5~10 V, then switch-off — if

the voltage shows “slowly” dropping, switch on again to see it reach to 15 V —- then

switch-off and wait till it’s drop to 10 V and switch on to 20 V again (like two step

forward, one step back) —— in this way until it reached to more than 300 V then to

the full —– all the process will takes hours !   🙂  or 😦  

 —– But if you see the voltage drops rather quick, and  never rise above

the certain voltage, don’t push it further, and you have to

accept that the capacitor is already dead !  —– Sorry about  😦  

(still better than to see it exploded in messy manner.)

  []

In another approach, if the capacitor could be disconnected from the charging circuit.  

(But this is only for the experienced person.) —– Use the main AC power.  

Connect a Rectifier to live, and 100 K (may be reduced to 50 K, 10 K on the later stage)

register to neutral.   And use this rectified direct current to charge up the capacitor.  

In the first few seconds, when the capacitor’s voltage  rose to 10 V, then disconnect.  

When voltage was dropped to 5 V then charge it to 15 V (Keep a distance of up and

down proportional  —– repeat this again and again, while time to time having a break

(to have a cup of tea  🙂 and make a capacitor to regain a potential to charge-up to

higher voltage) and slowly bring the voltage to the full.  

From the main voltage in Europe, rectified voltage would be 310 ~ 330 V, about the

same voltage of the working flash.  But in the US  110 V, it’s needs  to use voltage

doubler circuit.   And a fully charged capacitor of 1000 microF, 2000 microF has an

energy to evaporate a tip of screw-driver, if it was short circuited — and hell like Bang!  

= Before you do any  work, always DO NOT FORGET to discharge the capacitor

through 5W 1K register.

(If you couldn’t understand  what I’m talking here straight, DO NOT attempt to try this !

—– to touch AC main, 200, 300 V DC is killingly dangerous for amateur !  

(Accident happens in a completely unexpected moment, in an unexpected situation.)

  []  

Assuming the capacitor is working perfect, the rest of the flash circuit is rather simple.

The thick two cables from capacitor were connected to the both end of a flash tube.  

And an additional cable was attached outside of flash tube = this is the trigger which

receives 3000 V or higher voltage pulse. —– To trigger this very high voltage pulse, a switch

inside of camera shutter-mechanism used to short circuit a small capacitor in the primary

side of trigger coil, then in the  secondary side 3000 ~4000 V pulse will be produced.    

But now-a-day, sophisticated electronic camera can not take such high voltage, —– instead,

a trigger to flash was done by low-voltage signal.  

= (In another word, to connect very old flash to a modern DSLR is highly risky.  

(If you got Test Meter, you can measure how high the trigger voltage of the flash, on the

connector of  Flash extension cable.  If it shows more than 15 V, (it could be as high as 100 V),  

never use it direct to the camera = Use a Slave trigger.)

  []

Once you understood the structure of flash-light, to modify it, is not very difficult.  

My Ring flash on the photo was made to take the power from Brown F900 power pack

but before it was connected to Kako hummer-head flash.   As long as it receives 300 ~ 350 V,

it will flash and the light-intensity is depend on the size of the capacitor.  

(By the way, Flash-tube’s life is also limited !  = Don’t expect it works for ever.  😀 )

(That Ring Flash Tube can take, up to  200 WS = C x V-square x 1/2 = Wat-Second

such as—–1000 microFarad x 315V x 315V x  1/2 = 50 WS = GN may be about 25~28  though

it’s all depends on the efficiency, size of the reflector, how old the tube is, etc. etc.)

[] 

End of Summer — Snap-shot by 500 mm Lens

If I didn’t tell you, you may not noticed that they were taken by 500 mm lens.

All the photos here except the obvious one were taken by a Tamron 500 mm

Mirror lens.  Photo looks pretty ordinary, and nothing special are they ?

Even with its 500 mm focal length, thanks to its fundamental design (incoming light

was internally reflected back and forward twice)  mirror lens can be less than 1/3rd of

its  focal length = in deed,  this lens got

only  11o mm long and 87 mm diameter

= say, mere one-size larger than my mug-cup.

So, the people on front of the camera may not

noticed that they’ve  been photographed.

= anyway they don’t mind others 10 , 20 m away. 

And of cause, I could easily take picture of a Mulberry, few left high on a branch. 

I found scattered confetti on a ground = it must be left by a wedding photo-do.

So, the summer 2013 has gone. (more or less)  😉

[]

Reflection on a pond

Those are the simple straight shot of the reflection on a water.  

If only it was not simple, was they were shot by 500 mm lens.

Please see the photos in large size by clicking the photo (and again.  😉 )

Long telephoto lens mean, it was in fact just in a small corner of the water.   😉

[]

500 mm Macro lens ?

The other day I tested an 800mm Mirror lens of which my friend just obtained.

In fact it was a gift from his Daughter.  Lens was for Canon DSLR though, funnily enough

he got no Canon SLR.  —— that’s why I was asked to test, whether for a sake of that lens,

is it worthwhile to buy a camera body.  🙂     These days, people seeing even a small compact

camera started to have extremely high zoom ratio, such as Panasonic’s  x60 zoom

(equiv’ 20 ~ 1200 mm)  they no longer “fear” long telephoto lens.

—– That lens was (amazingly !) good.     So, he is going to become a bird photographer.  🙂

I hope him to become an expert of  “800 mm” lens and capture a lots of bird photos.

As a matter of fact, I got a Mirror lens too, but not  800 mm, my one is  500 mm.

“Naturally”, not very often used though, it was a Tamron F8 Mirror lens = once dabbed

as the second best mirror lens among the 500 mm mirror lens after the Zeiss.  (mind you,

Zeiss Mirrotar 500 mm carries a price of  5 million yen —– but Tamron was 50,000 yen

—– I got it in second hand for 20,000 yen.  😉 )

Not just sharp, Tamron 500 mm was designed to produce good close-up image as well, 

hence its closest distance comes down to  1.7 m and able to take  x 1/3 close-up !

This is a clopped part of the photo. Depth of the field is so shallow still, not too bad isn’t it,  

considering it was nearly  2 m away.    (Can you imagine to look into the reflecting pattern

of batterfly’s eye from  2 m distance ! ) —– (Only when if we could manage extremely

critical focus under F8  darkness of view-finder ! ) 

( Fish-eye photo was an extra —– just for fun.  😉 )

Another trouble is, because of the angle of view is less than  5 degree = quite difficult

to know  “Where AM I watching ?”  especially, when the image was out of focus.  😀

As out of focus Bokhe become funny ring pattern —– you may hate, or some time

they looks more decorative. —– it’s a character.    It could be a good fun to play with !

[]

Color of Flash-light

As now, photography is open to anybody and bast majority of the camera user has no

interest to the technical aspects surrounding the photography, while expecting the

manufacturer provide everything what they needs perfect.  

Hence, they don’t even care whether it is DSLR or Phone-camera.  

[]

So, everybody believing flash-light is the flash-light and all same.   Though, it is not true

—– some are more blue.  Even a professional studio photographer may not noticed but

just believing “As long as they buy reputed studio flash, it is the industrial standard”.  

In certain extent, it is true.   The quality of the flash has been really improved. (and

became very cheap.)  😉

[]

The photo above, they are the flash-tube, most left came from Bowens. (are they still exists ?) 

Second is Balcar’s  —– (mind you this tube alone costed £200 !)   Third is for ring flash-light.

(This is the Ring-flash I made for the photos which was published in the Zoom Magazine.

= Ring Flash for Fish-eye Lens. —– Since, the subject was over-shadowed by the camera itself,

it was necessary to illuminate !    Still, the lens has 180 degree of view, flash has to be exactly

in the same plain of the lens-front. = If the flash was before the lens, it will be in the picture.  

If it was behind the lens, the shadow of the lens will appear in the picture.  😀 )

[]

Though, this flash-tube was very blue (about 6500 K) I needed to use a Kodak Color

Compensation Filter inside of flash. — Most of the flash produces  6000 K Color-temperature.

Though, the standard of the Printing Industry is 5500 K,  so that photo above, Bowens tube was

gold color tinted to warm-up the color a bit.  This slight difference makes the skin-tone better.

= So, you may try to tinker the flash-light, such as stick a cello-tape on the flash face and put a

red line of maker-ink (never draw an ink direct) —– it would make

the faces in a party looks more drunk.  😀

 

Slide Duplication / Digitization using Flash-light

They are the samples, which were Digitized on fluorescent light-box = I talked about before. 

But photos above were digitized using a TTL flash-light.

( They are in large size = click to enlarge and see the details (but ignore the dust ) 😉

It’s not too bad in highlight tone. ( in the shadow, some noises due to “Brighten-up” )

If anybody visited here twice, you may noticed that the photos are different from before.

—– I’ve changed them, in fact three times as I was not happy with the color of Dupe. 

What I wrote about [Home-made Light-box] —– as a Slide-viewer, it was correct though,

to use it for Duplication was wrong.   Color was far from ideal = in fact, dreadful. 😀

[]

I tried to tinker the color temperature etc. still not suticefied, and tried to use LED light

though,  fundamentally fluorescent light and White LED has the same characteristics.  

Whitish color of LED was emitted by the mixture of fluorescent compound, excited by

LED’s near UV light = same as the Fluorescent light tube.  Since it was produced by a mix

of BGR light, its light spectrum has the typical light-spike from its chemical, hence color is

never perfect.  –—- on the end, I came to the conclusion = it’s better to use a flash-light =

its Xenon discharge light which has a continuous light spectrum is much more natural.  

Unlike easily fooled human-eyes, an image sensor in a DSLR pick-up those

peaks and the spikes and produce wrong color which is harder to eliminate.    

 

To use a flash-light for Slide-duplication is not a complicated business.  

Just place a flash under the white perspex (may be 4″ / 10 cm away). —– I cut a 2″ (5 cm)

square hole in the center of 8″ high card-board box then put white perspex on top, and placed

a flash-light inside.  (of cause, flash is aiming to the cut-out hole straight.)

I put some layers of white tissue over the flash face to diffuse and reduce the light.  

I used Canon 430EX-II in the TTL mode but on -1/3 setting. (For High-contrast original, expose -1

and brighten up with after process might be better)  Flash and the Camera was connected by

an “Off camera cable“.  With this set-up, the exposure will be controlled in TTL though, to make

it a bit brighter or darker, it is easier to use a flash with manual setting (with minimum power

setting ) and adjust the exposure by changing F-aperture or ISO setting, as it can be done from

the camera side.  ( To change the setting on the back of flash is more awkward.)

While testing this, what I noticed interesting was that a dupe made by D800 with HDR seemes

not much different from a dupe made by C’ 5D Mk-III with flash-light (only one exposure) of

which the shadow was brighten-up by common photo program. = Canon’s image sensor and

their processing engine seemed to have wider Dynamic Range in the first place than Nikon.

(To see the comparison in this post.)  To be fair, this matter needs to have more critical test.

[]

Gauzed Image or in a Reflection — My Answer to Elena’s Paintings

When I saw the paintings in a fantastically talented artist Elena Caravera’s blog, of which

a girl’s portrait was overlaid by gauze like white, I found there is somewhat similar psyche

exists in the mind of the painter  = in order to give a psychological depth, intentionally cover

the painting and make the image fuzzier.

[] 

Strangely you may think, I’ve been creating “Not sharp” photos intentionally over 40 years.  

Since I started my photography taking the photos of Nature, and the close-up photography had

become my part-time job when I was in my Uni’,  to make clear sharp image became a norm

and a routine, then I started to go further departing from cosy home of normal photography.    

In our generation, some photographers gone to the rough-grain image such as Moriyama

or the subject the society despised such as Araki, etc.  but I was rather enchanted by the

ghost of the image, which we can’t see, or hidden behind of fuzzy or double images. 

Since then, I tried Soft-focus lens, Improvised, modified lens, Lens from an old folding camera on

a handmade camera etc. to see fuzzy image or the image on a reflective surface —– see through

a distorted glass material etc. —– I got thousand of this kind of photos.

[]

Photography is a COPY of the subject.  = The more realistic and the closer to the reality of the

subject, it become mere substitute of the real thing.  It’s better to see the real thing if possible.  

But when its reality was lost, its image started to have its own mind.  Whether it is in fact my

own mind or the curse to the image, it start to assert its own voice = the photo became

independent of the subject.  —– or, that’s what I’m thinking.  😉  

Though, I don’t know, what Elena is thinking.  😀

[]