advertisement


Your interesting pictures

Ok here is one outside my bedroom window the other day.

sun.jpg



And here is one of Salisbury Cathedral yesterday. Disappointingly this lens displays quite a fair amount of distortion on the image which is kind of startling on large buildings.

My assumption is zooming in on the subject will get rid of some of the problem, but I am also assuming a better lens would deal with a full pan? like this.

I have tried a simply straighten in PS, but I think it needs something more. Very hard to make it look correct.

Nice colours though.

sal.jpg
 
"Disappointingly this lens displays quite a fair amount of distortion on the image which is kind of startling on large buildings."

That's Chesterfield, isn't it?
 
Hi Alex it is with the new D50. In the Jessops on the day they had two lenses on offer one the clerk informed me was better, but the package was £150 more.

In the shop its very very difficult to work out why the lens was better, it certainly seemed more substantial and I guess in retrospect might not cause such distortion?

Duncan I am not sure if you said something amusing which I have not got, its entirely possible, but I really must insist, its Salisbury Cathedral.
 
You should make the images smaller for displaying on the web Gary -- say 700 pixels on the longest dimension. Those are almost too big for a browser even at 1600x1200.

The "distortion" is caused by perspective effects not the lens. Becuase you tilt the camera upwards to get the whole building in the building will lean backwards and the walls which should be parrallel will tend to converge. To counteract this you need to keep the camera absolutely flat (not as easy as it sounds).

Matthew
 
Garyi,

As matthewr says, about 700pix on the long side, and you can correct for perspective in Photoshop. You need to to use the Transform/perspective tool and then distort to get the balance back to something more natural. Something like this:



The D50 is an excellent camera. Have fun!
 
nodrog said:
As matthewr says, about 700pix on the long side, and you can correct for perspective in Photoshop. You need to to use the Transform/perspective tool and then distort to get the balance back to something more natural.

Alternatively, use a large format camera where you can tilt and shift the lense to correct converging parallel lines. There are some "perspective shift" lenses available for 35mm cameras (no idea about digital), but they don't work very well in practice.
 
Sorry about the image size, I am still getting used to the shear size of the images, those are at 30% of the original size.

They look fine on my monitor. hehe.

Thanks for the tip Matthew. However on the E10 it was not nearly so obvious, but I wonder if this has anything to do with the aspect ratio. The D50 is wide screen (If you like) and the E10 was more like a standard TV.

Would this make any difference?
 
Gary,

Joe, what settings did you have that on please?
50mm, f/8, 20 seconds, ISO 200, long exposure NR on


Presumably a tripod?
Nope, I rested the camera on the edge of a deck. I did use the self-timer, though, to reduce shake from tripping the shutter.

Joe
 
Joe the shutter was open for 20 seconds?

The trouble I have with long exposures is any lights, for instance hifi lights or whatever land up very blurred, not through shake, this is done on tripod with a remote. Where am I going wrong?

I am always deeply impressed with night time cityscape scenes which are pin sharp, I would not stand a chance on this.
 
Garyi, could this be caused by the mirror flipping up and down - this can cause a slight shake which can blur very long exposures? Some high end cameras offer mirror lock up for this reason so the mirror stays up during the action of the shutter so there is no vibration going into the camera body.
Rich
 
Rich, the D50 does offer mirror lock up, however most of my attempts at this was with an Oly E10 which although SLR did not utilise such an arrangement with the mirror thing, so this was not an issue.
 
Gary,
Joe the shutter was open for 20 seconds?
Yup, 20 seconds. The exif data never lie.



The trouble I have with long exposures is any lights, for instance hifi lights or whatever land up very blurred, not through shake, this is done on tripod with a remote. Where am I going wrong?
I'm not sure. If camera shake has been ruled out, the most likely culprit is the focus being slightly off or the lens being poorly corrected for spherical aberration. If it's the latter you have two choices -- get the $2.5k Noct-Nikkor aspherical 58mm f/1.2 or try a smaller aperture, say, f/8 or smaller, on your zoom.



I am always deeply impressed with night time cityscape scenes which are pin sharp, I would not stand a chance on this.
That's what the Noct-Nikkor was created for, keeping the points of light just that -- points, not blobs.

Here's a crappy shot with the 50mm f/1.2 wide open. Notice the blurring around points of light.
n16-p2m.jpg


Here's a crappy shot with the Noct-Nikkor wide open. Notice the lack of blurring around points of light.
n16-p1m.jpg


(Just examples I've found on the Net. Neither shot is mine.)

Joe
 
Here's another, Gary, taken about two months ago. (All of the more recent shots are of my one-and-a half-year-old daughter, so probably of little interest to anyone but me mum.)

95972527_294612b8d9.jpg


Joe
 


advertisement


Back
Top