Beautiful light house image 👍🏻. What might look really interesting is if you selected the lighthouse in camera as red, but made everything else B&W. Definitely would pop with that red 😊
Makes sense. You gotta use it when you need it. Given certain purposes even with some diffraction in the photograph it is still perfectly usable. Some people make too much of a fuss about it. I remember sharing some lens comparison photos using the 16Mp sensor em10mk2 mentioning I stopped down to f8 in some comparison shots. Someone said "the test doesn't say anything because at f8 there will be plenty of diffraction". Paint me entertained. 😂
It always amazes me just how worried people get about it... To be honest I try to not get too wrapped up in the pixel peeping side of things... I prefer making photos! Thank you for the comment!
As a MFT shooter, an interesting video, I agree there seems to be a lot of negative speak about technicalities, as you say, we just need to take pictures! Just wondering what happenened to the multi exposure image of the lighthouse with the reflection? I was expecting to see it, and in colour? The B&W image seemed to be from a slightly different angle?😀
Isn't it ironic that the way you "overcame" diffraction was by taking 200 shots within 3 minutes and then post "blended" them together. While the problem with diffraction is that light rays are blending together in camera, by post "blending" together 200 shots, isn't that almost like post induced diffraction?
Kind of I suppose - apart from the things I wanted to be sharp were sharp (and that’s because of the software and the way it blends). TBH I wasn’t happy with that solution… just going for a stronger ND next time
@@JasonFriendPhotography I suppose it's the software algorithms that knows where to sharpen the images. Otherwise even with a tripod on a windy day the slightest vibrations movement will cause 200 shots to show blur when combining them. If that's the case you might as well just use sharpening and color deepening lightroom techniques instead of always having to take 200 shots. 200 shots! I don't even take that many photo shots in a session.
@@BerriBerriJam Neither do I! But I only took 200 shots to create a really long exposure. As for movement... I wanted to record movement in the sea and clouds - and of course if my tripod moved then the lighthouse would have been soft... as it would have been if I was using a filter. So both ways will get the same desired result (blurry water) but I have to say that using a 10x filter is way, way easier and definitely more fun.
Beautiful light house image 👍🏻. What might look really interesting is if you selected the lighthouse in camera as red, but made everything else B&W. Definitely would pop with that red 😊
Funnily enough I did consider that with the black and white shot... I may go back and have another look. Thank you for the suggestion!
Makes sense. You gotta use it when you need it. Given certain purposes even with some diffraction in the photograph it is still perfectly usable.
Some people make too much of a fuss about it. I remember sharing some lens comparison photos using the 16Mp sensor em10mk2 mentioning I stopped down to f8 in some comparison shots. Someone said "the test doesn't say anything because at f8 there will be plenty of diffraction". Paint me entertained. 😂
It always amazes me just how worried people get about it... To be honest I try to not get too wrapped up in the pixel peeping side of things... I prefer making photos! Thank you for the comment!
As a MFT shooter, an interesting video, I agree there seems to be a lot of negative speak about technicalities, as you say, we just need to take pictures! Just wondering what happenened to the multi exposure image of the lighthouse with the reflection? I was expecting to see it, and in colour? The B&W image seemed to be from a slightly different angle?😀
Well spotted! The tide came in and I had to rapidly move! So I was about a metre inland for the actual final shot
Isn't it ironic that the way you "overcame" diffraction was by taking 200 shots within 3 minutes and then post "blended" them together. While the problem with diffraction is that light rays are blending together in camera, by post "blending" together 200 shots, isn't that almost like post induced diffraction?
Kind of I suppose - apart from the things I wanted to be sharp were sharp (and that’s because of the software and the way it blends).
TBH I wasn’t happy with that solution… just going for a stronger ND next time
@@JasonFriendPhotography I suppose it's the software algorithms that knows where to sharpen the images. Otherwise even with a tripod on a windy day the slightest vibrations movement will cause 200 shots to show blur when combining them. If that's the case you might as well just use sharpening and color deepening lightroom techniques instead of always having to take 200 shots. 200 shots! I don't even take that many photo shots in a session.
@@BerriBerriJam Neither do I! But I only took 200 shots to create a really long exposure. As for movement... I wanted to record movement in the sea and clouds - and of course if my tripod moved then the lighthouse would have been soft... as it would have been if I was using a filter. So both ways will get the same desired result (blurry water) but I have to say that using a 10x filter is way, way easier and definitely more fun.