wwp@yahoogroups.com:
Re: Nikon 2.8/10,5 Sigma 3.5/8 or Tokina 10-17 ?
Alex Makienko 2009-May-11 13:49:00
Luciano,
This is just one of the beautiful places in the Algonquin Provincial Park, north-west of Ottawa, Canada. We were running downhill to get back to the car before sunset and I shot this pano almost on the run, in a few seconds. This is an example of possible mistake while shooting - sun was positioned exactly on the middle vertical line of the frame and sun was low, that's why the flare is huge and is located exactly in between of two other neighboring images so it was impossible to patch it. I love this place and uploaded this pano to my website despite of poor quality. I hope to get back there this summer and replace the pano by a new one. Actually I plan to redesign my web site completely by the end of the year and you'll see much more panos with much better quality. :-)
Cheers,
Alex
----- Original Message -----
From: Luciano
To: #removed#
Sent: May 11, 2009 9:16 AM
Subject: Re: Nikon 2.8/10,5 Sigma 3.5/8 or Tokina 10-17 ?
Flares, dust or waterdrops... why you guys don't photoshop it off from your
panos? Alex, your words "This is one of my worst panos..." is sad, please
don't say it again, just photoshop it and be happy! ;p)
btw, cool place, the valley behind the woods, where is locate?
Cheers,
Luciano
On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 11:37 PM, Alex Makienko <#removed#>wrote:
>
>
> Hans,
>
> The spots in the image you refer have absolutely the same nature as here:
>
> http://dimensions360.com/index.php?screen=show&id=7087d155&galle...
>
> This pano has been taken under an intensive shower - dense water dust was
> coming from the powerful waterfall (yes, the lens had been thoroughly
> cleaned before and, of course, after shoting :-)). What you see there is
> IMAGES of waterdrops on the front lens of Nikkor.
>
> Here:
>
> http://dimensions360.com/index.php?screen=show&id=e222c0bc&galle...
>
> the nature of the spot is completely different. This is one of my worst
> panos and a pure example of Nikkor's FLARE.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Alex
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Hans Nyberg
> To: #removed# <wwp%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: May 10, 2009 8:54 PM
> Subject: Re: Nikon 2.8/10,5 Sigma 3.5/8 or Tokina 10-17 ?
>
> On 11/05/2009, at 2.00, Alex Makienko wrote:
>
> > C'mon! Do you think I'm a rookie? ;-) Please be sure that having 30
> > + years in serious photography (including professionsl one) and
> > being MS in physics (you probably know that optics is the part of
> > physics) I know how to keep lens clean.
> >
> > For your information: Flares shaped like spots, polygons and
> > somethong like that are NEVER caused by grease, fingerprints,
> > scratches etc. These defects cause parasitic beams, star-like
> > spots, additional lighting and anything else BUT spots and flares.
> > I hope I do not need to refer to a fundamental optics to confirm
> > that. Please just trust my experience in physics (and optics
> > particulary) and photography.
>
> Sorry Alex but I beat you. I have 56 years experience in photography
> of which 42 is as a professional photographer,
>
> Of course you get flares with poligons because of a lens which is
> not cleaned.
> Here is an example taken a couple of years ago.
> http://www.panoramas.dk/panorama/flare/dust.jpg
>
> This is the Canon 15mm one the best fisheye you can get. It has
> practically no flare very little CA very little lightfall and
> sharpness is exellent.
> However I took my brand new lens and went out to test it without even
> taking the lens cap of and look at the frontlens.
>
> I did not think of that it had to be cleaned before I used it, and
> on top of that I also by mistake on my new 5D stopped down to F19
> which accelerated the problem.
>
> I see this a lot on panos made even by very experienced
> photographers. And people complain that the lens has flares but in
> reality it is just a dirty lens stopped down to 16 or even 22.
>
> Hans
>
> Hans Nyberg
> Panoramas.dk<http://www.panoramas.dk>
> Features Fullscreen Panoramas from the best VR Photographers in the
> World
> email: #removed# <hans%40nyberg.com>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.12.24/2107 - Release Date: 05/10/09
> 07:02:00
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.320 / Virus Database: 270.12.24/2108 - Release Date: 05/11/09 05:52:00
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]