Fun lens on the Alpha 7R

Picture here is a kind, nobody would be impressed, still nobody

would complain kind.  It was made by a lens of rather humble origin,

came from discarded toy camera. —– Considering it’s utterly cheap

existence (two plastic lenses structure) the picture isn’t too bad at all.

On the time, people see the picture on the 5″x3″ chemist print,

this kind of quality was perfectly acceptable.

In fact, I’ve talked about this lens, few post ago.

And now, the lens has been properly (in certain extent  😀 )

re-structured for Alpha 7 camera. (Beautiful isn’t it ?) Ha ha ha.

(So, the lens can take landscape to portrait without refocusing

or change F-aperture kind = anyhow, no controls here at all.)

Only the trouble I found with this combination was = mysterious

blurred image they makes.  It was under a blight day light. 

The AUTO setting on the camera, A7R chose ISO 1600 and

shutter speed was  1/160.  

Why the picture was blurred ? — I set up a tripod (not a heavy weight,

still proper Gizzo tripod) — strangely, still the picture was blurred. 

It was nothing but a mystery.  (Obviously, I need to test further though,

at moment, this IS a lens (other than Pinhole) I got for this camera.

(I’m waiting to receive lens adapter for this camera.) — Whether this

body got a resonance to  1/160 shutter vibration, or the camera activating

other function to cause adverse effect ? = So, I tested the camera on

manual setting :  ISO 3200-1/320, ISO 1600-1/160, ISO 800-1/80,

ISO 400-1/40, ISO 200-1/20. Iso 100-1/10, Iso 50-1/5.  All hand-held.

ISO 3200 – 1/320

ISO 50 – 1/5

Those photos above were the shot on the test.    Non of them

showed heavy blur = it seems, the AUTO and  1/160 combination did

the Blurring business.  😀   — on the AUTO setting, other function

of which I’m not fully understood the implication, meddling in.

(Such as when the A7 thought, the image is too high contrast, the

automatic HDR operation comes in = gives three consecutive

exposures = unexpected hand may not keep still.)

I guess, something adverse effect of AUTO might have had happened.

It’s still a mystery Sir. 

* * * * *

To be fair to a Paying Customer, this is the quality if you pay the price.

This photo was taken by  Canon EF 40mm F2.8  on 5D Mk-III

— can you see the difference ?   (It’s costing  £100 more.)

.

Moving or shaking

To create focus-shift soft image, it is nesessary to

use a slow shutter speed = in consequence, pictures

easily get bluured —– don’t worry, bluured or

shaky picture is still the pictures.  😀

Photo above = I like this painting like effect.

Anyhow, I know, nobody would complain. 

In fact, to anybody, it’s not a matter at all.  

Ha ha ha   😀

[]

 

Pinhole Machine in the Field

It’s not a Pinball Machine.  And a photo above is a Japanese maple ! 

As I explained in the Previous post, it is a combined / selectable Pinhole.

Single Pinhole, Multiple Pinholes and a Concentric-Double-Density Pinhole

were all in one panel, with or without a Wide-angle Front Lens.

Those were taken by the Concentric-DD pinhole.

They too, by the DD pinhole with the typical radiating halation.

And those images were taken by the Multiple (4) Pinholes.

If you carefully check the photo, you will find the 4 repeated images.

And DD pinhole image again. (Some years ago I made similar image !)

In the same time same subject but by the Multiple Pinholes.

Taken by a single pinhole though, with a very slow shutter speed =

camera was shaken, bird has moved = hence utterly blurry image.  🙂

Still, they were the very painterly images which I wanted.

By the DD Pinhole.

Last moment of sun hit the Single Pinhole and created

fantastic diffraction pattern.

Single Pinhole with half a second shutter speed = camera shake.   😀

And this image —– 1.6 second exposure.

(I would rather say, not too bad for a hand-held shot !)

I think, the Lens (?) worked well for the purpose to produce

impressionists like / painterly image !   🙂

(You must have seen the most unusable photos here though,

if you like to have so-called good photo, use Phone-camera.)

[]

Shake shake (2)

There was a very similar photo of this, taken by a completely different technique

in this blog. = It is interesting to see an image of the 3D movement (depth) in

that photo was still captured as a 2D spread (shift) of the element.

What ever the technique or accident created its image, the matter is how the image

boggle the mind.    And what ever the origin of the image, some of them stuck and

remained in the depth of the mind very very long time.

[]

Shake shake (1)

There is nothing special of those photos, no trick, they are just

blared photos because of the camera shake.

Camera shake because of the slow shutter speed = 1/2, 1/4 sec’ kind. — And

to have such slow speed, lowest ISO setting and a dark ND filter was used. 

Make the situation worse, I was in a moving bus.   🙂

So, it’s easy to have un-sharp pictures —– just shake the camera.

(Of course, if you like.)   🙂

[]

Soft Image by Lens Vibration

After seeing the results of Somerset House shooting, I realized that the

“Focus-Shifting Technique” may not suite for that kind

of subject. —–> Then, I should try the 

Camera  Shake or Lens Vibration.

 There was a  good sample in my past

 experiment.    (Though, to replicate the

 same, perfect effect was not very easy.)

So that, in this time, in order to give a good shake to the camera, I devised a

vibrating element (small motor with ex-centric rotor) mounted on the lens. First, I tried it with Sigma Zoom 28~200mm while mounting the motor parallel

to the lens’ axis.(Photo above left)   But together with an effect of the gravity,

lens vibrated simple up and down.  Therefore, I changed to mount the motor 

perpendicular to the lens axis. (Photo center, Canon EFS 18~55 mm Zoom.  

And the Photo right, Tamron Zoom 70~300 mm)  

= As a result, the lens vibrates much more complexed way

= making a blur every direction.  — Still, there was much more decisive factor

here = the Sigma’s Zoom was quite hefty size and the weight, in comparison to

the almost weightless Canon EFS ZOOM 18~55mm which optical unit must be

lot easier to be shaken. —– (Position of the motor or its direction, such as on top

of the lens or 4:o’clock, 10:o’clock position and the camera’s direction etc are

also crucial)  It was the matter of the balance between the vibrating force and the

inertia of the optical unit or the camera body = hell lot of complicated dynamics.

On the end, a simple rule was, that if it wasn’t good, change the position of

the motor and try again. 🙂

This is the same flower as before, but here by the Lens Vibration on the

Tamron Zoom 70~300 mm at 130 mm . —– check the photo clicked and

enlarged to see its original sharp details and the added soft blur.  

Then to have a comparison with previous photo by the Focus Shift.

I know, I’m doing a very destructive aggressive approach to the photography,

somewhat akin to a musician smashing his own instrument though, I’m not

doing this for the sake of Conceptual Blah Blah but simply to create 

aesthetically nice soft image. —- It’s a paradox Sir.  

And, I’m having a fun— a lots.   😀  

( I need to go back to the Somerset House again and a field shooting to prove

that those exercises are not for wasting the time.   Ha ha ha. )  

[]

Soft Effect by Camera Shake

While experimenting the effect of the camera shake, I got the idea to use the old

images on the PC screen as a subject. (Give a shake to a screenshot.)

Shaking photography become an industrial scale —– and it’s much easier to give

a different way of shake in the room = hand-held or a tap on the camera, mounted

on a flimsy shaky tripod. —> It created pretty nice soft blurr. (Photo above )

On the screen, this was the original image taken by Zeiss 85mm F1.4 Lens.

The photo above, the soft effect was made by a free program Picasa. = It’s obvious,  

a mechanical shake gives much more interesting effects. — and a fun !

Though, the screenshot having an inherent trouble to show the grid of the screen.

(If you enlarge this and next image, the grid would be seen.)

If there wasn’t a trouble of the visible grid, this was a rather pretty image.  Pity.

(When right amount of the shake was given, the soft effect dissolve the line of grid. 

Too much shake spoil the image but too little leaves sharpness and the grid too.)

There is a possibility to use the Image Stabilizer for an opposite effect =

make an image blurred !   (Though, it needs to hack-in to the control program

otherwise the lens has to be modified !)

[]

Camera shake

(This image above was shot by tri-color pinhole and 10 second exposure. )

Among the photographers in the net-sphere,  Karen McRae of “Draw and Shoot” 

must be the master shaker of the camera.   Not only incredibly precise macro

photography, she covers fantastic landscape, some of them were mixed with

subtle camera shake, multiple-exposure, layard images etc.

(I strongly recommend you to visit her site and see them by yourself !)

Her effective use of camera movement for the sake of creative imaging, such

subtle blur of the image, showed not only the movement but also a

flow of the time, depth in our time and space =

even a feeling being in the spiritual infinity.

(I’ve been trying to learn and simulate her movement of the camera,

while calling them “Karenisque Photography” — I succeeded very little. )

(The trace of the light while camera has been shaken = 10 second exposure here)

( While try to copy the movement of her photo, I realised that she must have

exposed the camera even minutes long — with 10s of test shots if not hundreds.)

—– On her photo of ” lingeringlights 1.jpg ” = camera might be held and exposed

even 30 second long.

But, the use camera shake to the everyday objects, = it become clear, not only 

the choice of the subject but also the lighting (weather / cloud) overall darkness

become crucial. —– otherwise, the photo become just a mess.  🙂

Karen’s use of camera movement was very complexed = not only the overall movement,

but also a combination of a follow-shoot (such as to keep aiming to one subject while

moving in a car) the background would be totally blurred  but the aimed subject would

maintain less blurred image. = still, it’s just a technique.  

The matter is the end result. = and she’s been creating utterly puzzling images. =

I couldn’t guess what she did it —– So, I described it a “Magic”.   🙂

[]

Green Karenisque Photo

If the camera was shaken while the shutter was open = image get blurred.

Still, if the shutter duration was very short (fast shutter speed) and made

the length of blurr short and negligible,  we can accept it is sharp enough.

(So, when you shoot moving subject, use higher shutter speed = image was

not still though, our eyes may not able to see such detail and think it sharp.)

But when the image showed a lots of blurr, we see it different.  Intellectually it

wouldn’t make any sense as the subject though, we see it a kind of sign,

unknown symbol or illegible message. 

—– We just open our mind while abandoning to think what it IS. 

When you see a blurred photo like this, you might thought that the camera was

vigorously shaken or twisted.  Though, in reality, it was made by a small wobble

of the wrist when shutter button was pressed, that all.  If you put two rulers or

something straight from right hand side center of rotation to one streak of  light,

you may measure the radial angle of the movement. = It’s only about 3 degree !

(Still, it is a combination of the movement, the shutter speed and the lens

focal length. = if the shutter speed was longer and the lens (Zoom position) was 

longer, the brurr would be much more.)  

When I was in my Uni’  I had  free access to our Photo dark-room and able to do

all sorts of Photographic experiments.  And on top of this, I had access to the

engineering workshop of the Technology Dept’ not mention their skip was filled 

with discarded materials and the broken machines = I could make all sorts of

things, while using even big engineering machine.  

So, when I wanted to try blurring effect, I made a Camera Rotating Bracket  

which can rotates the camera at the center of the image and corners —–

then I realized that to make rotating blurr does not need to rotates the camera 

but just radially wobble the direction of the lens.  (It’s the same, to draw a circle,

you don’t need to rotates a pencil with caliper but just move a pencil circular.)

But shake the camera straight is a bit different from rotates.

How fast is depend on the shutter speed and the pattern of subject.

Just try and see the effect.   (And try again and again. )  

[]

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.

[]