39mp underwater

Good Morning Cor,

I hope to. The thing for me will be to learn how to work within the limits of macro issues. That being some or most of the critter being out of focus due to dof issues. Some posts back, I mentioned that I would be happy to get a critter or critters fully in focus in its/their environment so when I go to large print the image wouldn't break apart or the majority of the print being out of focus.

Do you have any samples that show a deeper dof and what did you have to do to get it?

Regards,

Troy.

Paul, after playing around with my view camera and some diopters (I could squeeze about 1.2:1 enlargement on the ground glass with my Xenar 135mm f/4.7), I see your point, especially the second paragraph about exceeding the capabilities...

Chalk that up to not enough detailed macro experience on my part.

Dan

 

Its an INTERNAL FOCUS DESIGN LENS! This means that the optical construction does not work in the same way as a conventional lens and as such it appears to operate very well within a restricted range but not far outside that range - this is becoming more common and probably the 'norm' for macro lenses. It has benefits - faster focus, no extension of the lens even at 1:1 - but disadvantages - image quality drop outside its basic parameters. This was the thrust of my comment - comparing a lens working within its operating design and with another which may be being used beyond its design parameters is tricky to say the least.

 

When I push the 60mm lens it loses sharpness throughout the image - typical of a lens being used beyond its capabilities. Keep it within or close to its design capabilities and it is very, very good. Its not about the image circle, exposure factor, etc, but about the image quality and optical construction.

Good morning Dan,

 

I didn't know there was a third [MF digiback shooter: DLS]. I think the H-series is on a different level though. Does he [Kim Lundshøj :DLS] have contact info to the public?

 

Thanks,

Troy

I'll get hold of my Phase One rep to see if he (Kim) is accepting contacts -- Most likely, yes; but I want to be sure. Google isn't returning (AFAIK) usable results for either "Kim Lundshøj" or "Kim Lundshoj"

Hello Everyone,

Just thought I'd post some images for fun. It has been bad weather for a while now and no good macro opportunities as of yet. Still December should be better.

Regards,

Troy

some more

some more

Hi Troy, finally we see some sunrays! even when we need more of them to compare, I like the way the hassy captures it, although I had seen similar lighting out of a 5D and D2X… Maybe you need to post some full sunballs , since in my mind sunrays have more to do with sync speed and sunballs with sensor capabilities…

The red tails looks a little overcooked to me, and the jawfish seems to be a little noisy...

I´m not throwing shots at you, just try to give my opinion in a comparative way, with other photos I seen in the past with other rigs.

On the other hand the colors are vivid, maybe a little overcooked but again... maybe is the way the hassy pops them out…

Keep´em coming!

some more

Thanks Troy. Looking at the shark shot my sense is that the sunball and rays are good, but not necessarily better than we see with other rigs. I still do not see exceptional handling of the transition from specular highlights to early detailed highlights, and I see some cyan fringing. The question is whether this is the best it can do or not. Maybe experimentation with higher shutter speeds will be helpful.

I like the feel of the first jack photo and the shark shot. Thanks for posting Troy.

Cheers

James

I like the trevally shot the best, but what's up with the red tails?

As a sunball comparison, I'm throwing in a very, very scratched (sorry) image shot with a simple 35mm camera (Sea & Sea) which you can probably have for 100 bucks nowadays

/christian

Hi Troy,

I like most of the shots. The school of Jacks is really great.

It seems like you have a lot of fun with your rig!

Keep posting...

PS: I dont think it is fair to judge picture quality from those mini jpegs

Makes me want to book a trip to see that UW Setup. Nice shots Troy.

From reading this thread, whatever floats your boat...at the end of it all it is all about the experience and the images of diving.

Thank you everyone for your comments. They are well received.

Troy

Can you please point out where you see cyan fringing? Then, the other guy can post full-sized crops to verify what is going on, i.e. is it in his raw conversion program; or is it in the downsampling in Photoshop?

I still do not see exceptional handling of the transition from specular highlights to early detailed highlights, and I see some cyan fringing. The question is whether this is the best it can do or not.

I've read this whole thread tonight (kinda feel like I need an aspirin now...)

Here's my take (and you will all recognize this as an opinion, and therefore agree that it's not really worth arguing about)

The images Troy has posted have something unique to them. The color saturation/clarity is remarkable... given that I've shot w/full frame, cropped frame, and no frame (film!) I think I'm allowed to voice an opinion on this.

My F4, F90, D100, D200, or Canon 5D have never led to this kind of color saturation (in web posted images... so comparing apples to apples).

I've got to believe that the MF has something to do with this...(and yes there are a ton of other variables incl. glass, lighting, physics, etc. but that's just ignoring the visible proof)

- Matt

Can you please point out where you see cyan fringing? Then, the other guy can post full-sized crops to verify what is going on, i.e. is it in his raw conversion program; or is it in the downsampling in Photoshop?

There is some slight fringing in the zone above the shark's nose; when I take the image into Photoshop and slide the Colour Balance to the red, (in this area only) there is an improvement in the appearance of this transition zone. I do not think this is a conversion issue, rather a sensor issue; but I am not a techie and could be wrong. Please do not get me wrong, I still think the quality of these images is excellent, but this area is probably the biggest challenge for digital (and film), and I don't think we've reached perfect yet.

Yes, I see what you mean: You have a sharp eye!. I think it may have to do more with the mixed flash-sunlight lighting balance as the light from both sources is filtered at different distances in the water, especially the "spikey" xenon strobe flash.

OTOH, it could be the CCD "blooming" more in green & blue than in red.

OTOH, it could be the Unsharp masking going a bit haywire: I've seen this in adaptive USM before.

There could very well be a several small things adding up to produce the localized cyan shift we're seeing. The real hardware vs software answer(s) lie(s) in the raw pixel data, not a tiny downsized image.

Charlie Matco

There is some slight fringing in the zone above the shark's nose; when I take the image into Photoshop and slide the Colour Balance to the red, (in this area only) there is an improvement in the appearance of this transition zone. I do not think this is a conversion issue, rather a sensor issue; but I am not a techie and could be wrong. Please do not get me wrong, I still think the quality of these images is excellent, but this area is probably the biggest challenge for digital (and film), and I don't think we've reached perfect yet.

It could also be the greenish "halo" that sharks have in the water. I am fascinated by the green/cyan glow around sharks, and it's often what I'm staring at when one comes by for a close pass.

Although, in this case, it looks like a sharpening artifact to me.

hello everyone,

For a few weeks there was a band of green water at the top and blue under 15-20ft. You can see the slight grade in the photo but in actuality it was a lot more evident.

Secretary Blenny

Troy

http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=20...8777&size=l