Some waters in 850nm

[StephanN]

As the title says, some photos taken at a nearby lake (Weikerlsee) and the river Traun, a tributary of the Danube. This night is going to be pretty noisy, so some relaxation time before

 

Camera: Canon EOS 5DSR, converted to full spectrum (first time I've really used this one)

Lens: Canon EF-24-70

Filter: 850 nm IR-filter, plus 9-stop ND-filter

 

I had covered the eyepiece with that thingy that comes with the camera, and the lens hood was on, but I did manage to get some flares where the sun was on the right side and I didn't notice that it did shine on the front filter, oh well. Also, in case you're wondering about the high ISO, I stupidly brought only one ND-filter, so with the f-stop I had to go higher. Still, with the camera it's not really a problem.

 

First a tree by the lakeside, f/16, 60s, ISO 800

 

 

 

Next, a view of the lake itself, f/16, 60s, ISO 800 (with the long-time exposure, the tree in front really gets more attention)

 

 

I moved over to the river Traun, where a long time ago there had been plans to build a bridge, but because the adjoining area is a nature reserve, the project was abandoned. However, the stubs of the pylons and end-piece were never removed.

 

f/16, 60s, ISO 800 (the left pylon is not very prominent, but I didn't want to wade into the stream, even if air-temp was around 15 °C, this would have been a chilly adventure. The view is towards the confluence of Traun and Danube, so the wood and hills behind the water are already on the other bank of the Danube)

 

 

Ramp-ruin, of course with graffiti on it. It was quite windy, so actually I'm surprised that the one tree just behind the ramp is pretty sharp, while the ones behind are smeared out, f/16, 180s, ISO 400

 

 

The next two are the same motiv, with different exposure times. In a way I like both, with a small tendency to favour the second, f/16, ISO 800, the first 30s, the second 180s

 

 

 

And a detail of the ramp-bit, this time shorter exposure time as not to completely wash out the clouds, and with the f-stop setting the cloud is not in focus anyway: f/2.8, 8s, ISO 800

 

[photoni]

it's droll to read that you used an ND filter and then you used ISO 800 ... when your Eos can shoot at ISO 50

the photos are beautiful, the first is my favorite.

Happy New Year

Toni

[Andy Perrin]

Yeah, the combo of high ISO and ND filter is not making any sense to me. Just…reduce the ISO and leave the other ND at home too?

[dabateman]

Well 180 seconds, 60 seconds is more of what caught my eye than the ND.

You might still be able to get cloud motion at couple seconds,  low ISO, and No ND.

 

I like to use the multi shot feature, where you can snap 1 to 10 images and they get merged into one for you.

This is how to do it for your camera:

https://support.usa.canon.com/kb/index?page=content&id=ART162856

But shoot how you like.

[colinbm]

Good IR & you got the cloud movement too.

[StephanN]

Well, I ought to have known better than just to write "I stupidly brought only one ND-filter, so with the f-stop I had to go higher", instead I ought to have spelled it out.

 

The ND-filter was a 9-stop filter, so looking at the first photo, in order to get down to ISO 100 without the filter, I'd also have had to go down to 1s. The clouds were not moving particularly swiftly, so with 1s the movement would have been infinitesimal. Even using the multi-shot feature - which I have used before - I'd not have seen anything close to what I wanted to see. The last photo, taken at 70mm, with 8s, may highlight that with 24mm the clouds would have appeared all but stationary. I didn't particularly care for taking 90 photos and then merging them in photoshop. With my 5-stop filter, which I had left at home, I would have gone down to ISO 100 or 50 and used the multi-shot way.

 

I know you didn't mean to sound condescending, but before jumping to conclusions you might have asked about the filter, right? (I'll add this info to the first post) And I'll go on shooting the way I like to, thank you very much - just as everybody does, I suppose

[dabateman]

Sorry I hope I wasn't condescending. 

I had a slightly feeling the air was still looking between your 30 seconds and 180 seconds images.

Just not too many people remember on the spot all the many features that are jammed into our cameras and I genuinely want to help if you forgot about multi image mode. My Olympus cameras can only do 2 images, which is sad. Others allow for up to 10 (Nikon) or 9 (Canon).

So 9 in camera merged 30 seconds images gives you quite a lot of room up or down the exposure possibility. Also with function/ control on, you get a delay time without the sensor on heating up and creating noise.  You can stare at the last image for 3 seconds,  to get those clouds moving before firing the next shot.

 

Multiple exposure is what the Sigma ISO 6 mode or Olympus ND modes are, or the old Kodak SLR/N ISO 6. Just fixed at 6 images without ability to play around. 

[Andy Perrin]

“The ND-filter was a 9-stop filter, so looking at the first photo, in order to get down to ISO 100 without the filter, I'd also have had to go down to 1s.”

 

I still don’t get it? 
-9 stop ND + 8 stops ISO = -1 stop for 60 sec

vs

No filter and -1 stops ISO for 60 sec

 

Isn’t that the same thing?

[photoni]

5 hours ago, Andy Perrin said:

Isn’t that the same thing?

 

no Andy ...

 

f/16, 60s, ISO 800
+1 f/16, 60s, ISO 400
+2 f/16, 60s, ISO 200
+3 f/16, 60s, ISO 100
+4 f/16, 30s, ISO 100
+5 f/16, 15s, ISO 100
+6 f/16, 8s, ISO 100
+7 f/16, 4s, ISO 100
+8 f/16, 2s, ISO 100
+9 f/16, 1s, ISO 100 without ND 9Ø

 

or

f/16, 60s, ISO 800
f/11, 60s, ISO 400
f/8, 60s, ISO 200
f/5,6, 60s, ISO 100 for me is best with ND 9Ø

[Andy Perrin]

Ah yeah. Ok makes more sense now. I had ISO800 to ISO100 as 8 stops down instead of 3, forgetting ISO goes linearly.