on 9/06/2003 05:54, Matt BenDaniel at matt@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> At 15:54 06/08/2003 -0300, Fernando Gonzalez Gentile wrote:
>> What I cannot figure out is how did you manage not to overexpose the
>> foreground objects.
>
> At dark sites, the sky is brighter than the landscape.
Wow... you're teaching me something valuable.
>
>> Maybe because they're red (why red_please),
>
> Astronomers use dim red lights when they need to illuminate what they're
> working on. That has the minimum impact on imaging and human dark adaptation.
Must be related with retinae physiology. Also, eating some 20 carrots a day
ought to be useful. They taste well with virgin olive oil, which by itself
is supposed to lower cholesterol ratio and therefore keep retinae blood
perfusion in Mint+ conditions :))
>
>> I got a little overexposure on this situation, and remember to
>> have +1 compensation only. Maybe I should have trusted the circuitry better.
>
> I never use automatic exposure for star trails. It yields unpredictable
> results and drains camera batteries.
You might test the OM2(n). Back in '85 I did. I chronometered two OM2 with
their respective 50/1.4, one ser number 500000 the other 900000, the first
one with a GZuiko the other with a Zuiko MC. I cross changed the lenses too.
In my completely dark bedroom, I focused a red diode and measured exposure
from 1.4 to 16. Shutter was the same on both cameras within 1 - 2 sec.
I repeated the test at ASA 400 and 800 settings, same accuracy. Still have
my handnotes somewhere.
Never had a battery suckout, believe me. As it says in the .pdf I recently
downloded from .dementia.org/: "The model OM2 was designed for very weak
electricity in its electronic parts of the automatic exposure device so that
it can measure and control an extremely low level of luminance (-5.5 EV at
ASA 100)" Then the risk of static electricity when repairing (page 1).
I suspect OM4Ti is not as reliable. I pointed this out in a msg. around
April 27 when asking another listee why didn´t he choose his OM4 for his
star trails photos (nonTi OM4).
I understand that a professional standard requires both handheld light
metering and intuitive knowledge.
Reading backwards, found your opinion on the Tamron lens
> I did some research and discovered that the Tamron 17mm has received excellent
> reviews and is almost a "cult" lens. So I bought one:
>
Enjoy,
Fernando.
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|