King of Cameras, Almost Impossible Photography, How to Shoot Video, Canon 100mm RF Macro, Win Memory
Coming up on this month's episode of Photography Online, we attempt our most ambitious shot... We have a new challenger for the King of Detail.... and we tell you everything you need to know about memory cards. Welcome to a new show and a new year. As we've had a longer than usual break since our last episode
we've got an extended lineup for you today. In addition to everything that you've just seen, we'll also be looking at the new Canon 100mm macro RF lens and seeing what that strange control does on the lens barrel. We're launching a new feature called Video Academy where we show you how easy it is to shoot moving images. We've got a gallery of some of your waterfall photos you've been sending in over the past few weeks and we've got a couple of top end memory cards up for grabs in any format you choose - assuming you win that is! That's all coming up in the next 45 minutes, so get yourself comfy and settle in. As we've got so much to cram in let's get right on with the first feature regular. Viewers of
Photography Online will be aware that we've been trying to find the best full-frame camera on the market for capturing the most detail. The current occupants of the throne are the Nikon D850 tied with a Canon 5Dsr, but many of you have suggested other challengers so here we go. Welcome to the Photography Online test lab - otherwise known as Portree harbour here on the Isle of Skye. Now the reason why I choose this location is because of a couple of things. Firstly it's crammed full of tiny details such as signs and
roof tiles that we can really zoom in and examine the difference between these two cameras. Secondly everything is at infinity so we haven't got any depth of field issues to cloud our judgment. Now for those of you who haven't seen the previous installments of our King of Detail series, let me bring you up to date. The inaugural battle was to see if the newly released Canon R5 could beat the much older 5Dsr when it comes to the amount of detail captured. The results showed
that it couldn't, so this left us wondering what full-frame camera could beat the 5Dsr when it comes to detail? We asked for your suggestions and three cameras have been put forward more than any others - among them the mighty Nikon D850. We pitched this against the 5Dsr in our second installment and despite trying really hard, we were unable to split them. We then made the raw files available for you to decide but you too couldn't split them so we called that one a tie.
So this brings us up to date with both the Canon 5Dsr and the Nikon D850 jointly wearing the crown. So we have a new challenger for the King of Detail crown which is going to try and take on the Canon 5Dsr which is currently sitting on top of the throne alongside the Nikon D850 because if you remember from our previous feature when we tested the D850 against the 5Dsr here, we couldn't split the difference, you couldn't split the difference so these two cameras are currently the benchmark to beat when it comes to recording maximum detail. Now when this camera was first suggested by some of you guys I thought "I'm not gonna bother with that. I don't think it's gonna be a contender". But so many of you have suggested it I thought I need to take it seriously. So I think I've built up the anticipation enough. We're already at fever pitch - we can't possibly go any higher, so to put you out of your misery today's contender is.... the Pentax K1 mark II. Now on paper the
Canon really doesn't have anything to worry about because it's packing a whopping 50.6 megapixels the challenger has had the audacity to turn up here today with a measly 36.2. So how can this possibly rival the Canon 5Dsr and the Nikon D850 for recording maximum detail in the landscape? Well the reason why it's here is because it has a trick up its sleeve in the name of pixel shift technology and what this does is it's going to take four photos in rapid succession and between each photo it's going to move its sensor by one pixel and then the camera is going to stitch those four images together and the result is going to be a high resolution photo that's far greater than the native output of the camera. Now this all sounds like it might be a bit of a gimmick. We're about to find out if it's as big as its boots or if it's all hat and no cattle.
Another little psychological trick that the contender is playing is it's managed to get the initials sr on the front of the camera here but unlike the Canon where the sr is in silver, it has it in gold. I'd be worried if I were you! As always to ensure the comparison is as fair as possible I'm using the same lens on both cameras which today is the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art lens - an incredibly sharp lens which will allow these cameras to record as much detail as possible.
Okay let the battle begin. As usual I optimize both cameras to record the maximum amount of detail by shooting at the native ISO which is 100 on both cameras. I'm also using the self timer so as not to put any movement through the camera as it takes the shot. Plus I'm shooting at f/4 which
is where the Sigma lens is going to be singing as sweetly as it possibly can. Both cameras are mounted on a Kingjoy Aurora series tripod, which is the sturdiest of tripods that I've ever used. Finally, I've manually focused both cameras to eliminate any autofocus issues. With the test
shots completed it was time to head back to Photography Online HQ to examine the results. This was the full frame image from the Canon and this was the full frame image from the Pentax. As you can see, we've got some horrendous colors going on on the water reflection - presumably because this is a moving subject and it isn't consistent across all the frames it used to merge the final shot. Now not knowing what to do in this situation, I took another identical shot
and hey presto no problems this time. However, if this were my camera I would have lost confidence in it already as it doesn't provide consistent results - something which is so important. But let's use the better of the two Pentax images and put it side by side with the Canon. Even at this resolution the Canon looks far cleaner, but let's go into 100% to give the Pentax a fair chance. As you can see, even without going past 100% the Pentax offers no real contest to the Canon and therefore also the Nikon D850 so there's little point in going much further, but let's go to 200 just for fun. As you can hopefully see the Canon is noticeably sharper with more detail in every area. Zooming around the frame doesn't change the result,
with the Pentax not even in the same league, despite its pixel shift trick. Next up will be the Sony A7r iv with its 61 megapixel sensor. As soon as we get our hands on one of those we'll let you know if it can dethrone the Canon 5Dsr and the Nikon D850, so join me for that next time.
Thanks to Ffordes Photographic for lending us the Pentax complete with a Sigma 35mm lens. And also thanks to Sigma for sending us a Canon fit version so that we could do the test fairly. Some of you have questioned why we use Sigma lenses for these comparisons and the answer is that we need to use third-party lenses in order to get the same lens on two different brands of camera and the Sigma Art range of lenses are the sharpest on the market - often outperforming own-brand lenses. There's a huge choice of lenses in the Sigma Art range so check them out if you're on the hunt for a top quality optic. Now when we think about camera gear, the items that spring to mind first are camera, lenses, tripod, maybe filters, but there's one piece of equipment which is essential and is often overlooked - memory cards. With so many
options available nowadays, it can be confusing knowing what all the numbers and formats do, so here to tell us all we need to know - it's the youngest and most handsome member of the team... For those of us that have done analog photography, choosing the right type of film is a key part of the process. But should the same considerations apply when choosing a memory card for digital photography? It used to be really quite simple, with only a couple of formats of card on the market, each one coming with its choice of capacity and speed. But nowadays there are so many formats speeds and capacities that it can make deciding which is best for you quite tricky. There are however distinct pros and cons to each format so we are going to attempt to make things a little clearer. Unlike film, a memory card won't have any influence on the image itself. A digital photo stored on a budget memory card will look exactly the same as one stored on a high spec card. So what's the point in spending more money on a card? The answer is reliability and speed.
We'll look at these in a moment, but let's go back to 1994 and start at the beginning. The first memory cards on the market were compact flash otherwise known as CF cards. These were reasonably large in size which also meant that the camera had to be reasonably large. When CF cards were introduced, 2 or 4GB versions were the most popular, as back then cameras had much lower resolutions and therefore only needed low capacity cards. Over time, as camera resolution climbed into the 50 megapixel region, plus the inclusion of video options on many new models, much larger capacity cards were needed. If you used a 32GB card (once seen as being
totally overkill) on a modern camera, then you may only get 300 to 400 photos on it and only a few seconds of video. A problem with CF cards is that the capacity is limited to 256GB, which would have seemed outrageously large when they were designed over 25 years ago, but today that figure is normal. As well as a capacity, each card also has a speed which limits the rate of data which can be written and read from the card. Quite simply, the faster the cards the more photos can be written in a set period of time. This is usually referred to as megabytes per second. All cameras have a memory buffer which is where all images are temporarily cued as they wait to be transferred to the card. If this cue becomes too long, the buffer will
fill up and the camera won't be able to take any more photos until the queue has gone down. For this reason, getting a card which is fast enough for the photography that you do is very important. If you only shoot landscapes then you could argue that you don't need a fast card as you are unlikely to take more than a few shots in rapid succession. But for wildlife,
sports, wedding or street photography, having a limit to the amount of photos you can take in a short burst is far from ideal. This is where a fast card comes into its own, with the fastest cards on the market now able to keep up with even the most demanding photographers using the highest resolution cameras. But it is video where the speed of the card is most important as essentially the camera is shooting at 25 frames per second or higher and therefore needs to be able to shift an enormous amount of data to the card every second. As cameras became smaller there was more demand for smaller physical cards but with bigger capacities. In 1999 the secured digital more commonly known as the SD
card was introduced. These had a much faster potential read and write speed than CF cards as well as double the potential capacity. But then cameras got even smaller and there was a need for the micro SD card, which although a fraction of the size, amazingly still has the same physical storage limit of 512GB. The speed which data can be written is also the same as the standard SD card but the read speed is slightly slower. An advantage of a micro SD card is that they can also fit into an SD adapter for use in cameras which only take SD cards. The industry was happy with compact flash and SD cards for quite a few years but that was until 4k and 8k video started to become a thing and the need for even faster cards was growing. Enter the aptly named CFast card, which still retained the same physical
capacity of 512GB but doubled the speeds which data could be written and read. So now we had a card which had a huge potential capacity and fast enough speeds to keep any camera and user happy. That was until someone thought the world would be a much better place with something called an XQD card. Mostly seen in Nikon and Sony cameras, the capacity as well as the read
and write speeds of XQD cards is much lower than cards that were already on the market, so this begs the question - why? We have no idea, so if you know, feel free to drop a comment. But the fact is XQD unsurprisingly never really took off. They are expensive and offer less performance than other cheaper cards. So this brings us almost up to date, but with 8k video now common on many of the latest cameras, an even faster card with more capacity than CFast was required. Enter the CFExpress card. With an eye-watering 2TB of capacity and a read and write speed of over three times that which previously existed, these are the pinnacle of performance but as you might expect also quite pricey. Which brings us nicely onto the pros and cons of each format as it's not
all about capacity and speed - price availability and physical size are all valid considerations. For example if you have a camera which only takes XQD or CFExpress and you lose a card whilst on your travels and are not in a major city then getting a replacement could be next to impossible. Whereas if your camera took a card like an SD, then you could much more easily buy one, albeit not a high performance one, from a local shop. The disadvantage to smaller physical cards
is that they are easier to mishandle and misplace, so losing them is far more likely. They are also not as durable as larger cards so are more likely to break. Also the contacts on SD cards are exposed and therefore more prone to damage by the elements. To give you a price comparison of
various format cards of similar capacities, here's a list of what each one would typically cost. As you can see, micro SD and SD cards offer the best value for money, with CFExpress cards offering the best performance. Many cameras have two card slots which accept two formats of cards. If you have a camera which only accepts one format or a single card, then this will limit your options when it comes to what memory card you trust your images to. Compact flash cards are pretty much dead now, but SD cards continue to be updated, with UHSII cards having a second row of pins which means they can be used in any SD card slot but utilize their second row of pins with any UHSII camera. A UHSIII will soon be available too,
which will hopefully combine the convenience of the SD format with the performance of the faster format cards. It won't however make your photos look any better - that's still down to you! Thanks to Delkin who supplied us with all the different card formats and who are doing a giveaway exclusively for our Photography Online viewers. If you'd like to win one of two pro-spec 64GB memory cards in the format of your choosing, then you just need to head to their Instagram page at Delkin Devices and comment on the Photography Online post. There's a link in the usual place
and even if you don't win, Delkin are so confident in the quality of their products that they're offering a lifetime guarantee on all their cards. So if you only want to buy once it's a good idea to buy Delkin. Okay, well it has been a year in the making but our essential camera skills series 2 manual is due to arrive any day. I know many of you pre-ordered this so it shouldn't be too long before it drops through your post box. With 64 pages crammed full of the topics that we covered last year on the show, it will be available as a hard copy or you can get the digital download now for just £12.50. So if you want to know all about focal lengths, tripods, shooting seascapes,
focusing on moving subjects, how to use infinity focus and loads more then there's a link in the usual place to order both versions. It also comes with a handy cheat sheet to tell you what order you should be doing all the important steps in. If you don't already have series 1, then you can pick them both up at the same time and save on shipping fees. Now we always ask for your comments and suggestions and to prove that we do listen, one of the most common requests that we get is to do a beginner's guide to shooting moving images. This might be something that you've never done before. It might be something you've never been interested in, but as we're about to see, using video to support your still's work can be very effective.
Over the past couple of years of Photography Online we've covered pretty much every aspect of stills photography. Don't worry, we still have a huge list of exciting features to bring you, but one thing we're often asked to produce is something about making video. Almost all digital cameras now offer a video mode, but very few of us probably use this and there are a few good reasons why. There are a few key differences between shooting stills and video and in this upcoming series of features we're going to be covering them in detail, as well as how to overcome the obstacles you may face, or at least how to use them to your advantage. For now though, let's begin by looking at the few problem areas you may face if you're experienced in taking images but looking to transition to shooting video as well.
Static subjects which photograph well ,tend not to lend themselves to video. We often have to think about audio as well as a visual element which can dissuade many. Post-production of video is a scary thought for many, but it is just as easy as editing a photo once you get to grips with one of the many intuitive software platforms available. The dynamic range of most video which comes out of stills cameras is drastically reduced from that which is achieved with the same camera shooting stills. What do we do with the final result? Unlike a photo, there is no printing stage so we can't frame the final product and hang it on the wall.
We've all probably tried to do a bit of video in the past and many of us will have been underwhelmed with the results. This is largely because the principles that we apply to stills photography tend to go out the window. When we shoot video, we may not consider composition in the same way. After all, it is more difficult to do this with a moving subject. We may not pay as much attention to the light as we would do with a photograph and even if we do, it's far more difficult to get this right with video, so it's easy to end up with blown highlights and featureless shadow areas. There's lots more to consider when shooting video,
with storytelling being one of the most important aspects to consider. With the still image, the story is often open to interpretation by the viewer, but with the moving image, the viewer often expects the story to be told to them. While the video capabilities on the most modern cameras are getting better and better, there's one thing which most of us probably have which is the ideal tool for shooting video - the smartphone. It'll be easy to assume that the footage coming out of one of these surely can't be that cinematic but you might be surprised.
As a comparison, you're now watching footage of me shot on a digital camera and a pretty good one at that. Now you're watching footage of me shot on a phone. Notice any major differences? If you have one of the newer iPhones - 12 or later, then it should be Dolby Vision enabled. Dolby Vision allows the user to capture a much higher dynamic range than regular DSLR or mirrorless cameras are capable of, but the best part is that it then automatically processes the files to play back with amazing clarity and contrast. Colors are very true yet vibrant. Blacks are deep and rich and the highlights sparkle. It's basically like watching something that's come out of a Hollywood studio - it's that good. You need to be able to shoot, edit and play back within the Dolby ecosystem, which is currently supported by all the latest Apple products.
When it comes to shooting video, the only thing I can't achieve with this but I can do with this, is a narrow depth of field - much like you're seeing right now. However, there is plenty that this can do that this can't, so if it were a competition, I know where I'd be putting my money when using a digital camera. There's lots of technical things which I need to think about... exposure, focus and a gimbal is often needed to ensure a smooth and steady shot. The iPhone takes all this workload away from the user and allows us to concentrate on the creative side of videography, which is of course the most important part. If you have your own website or social media page when you showcase and promote your work then adding moving images to the mix can really help you stand out from a static crowd.
We live in a world where we only have a second or two to capture the viewer's attention. This is much more easily done with the moving image and is why TikTok is outpacing all other social media platforms which tend to concentrate on the still image. Many of us will have tried time-lapse photography in the past, but the output of a time-lapse sequence is a video, yet it can be extremely time consuming and technically challenging to get the desired results. You might be surprised then that you can get much better results with much less effort with one of these. Over this coming series we'll show you just how easy it is to create professional looking moving content which you can add to your portfolio and help promote your stills work, as well as yourself as a photographer. We'll also show you how easy it is to edit everything together with
a soundtrack to create a professional looking product which catches people's attention. Next month we'll be showing you how to capture the easiest of video subjects - those that move. So get ready and join me for trying a whole new experience of capturing moving images that are up to the high standards of your stills photography. We'll be continuing the Video Academy series over the next few shows, focusing on different aspects of videography - showing you just how easy and enjoyable it can be. Before we continue with this
extended show I wanted to thank everybody that joined us for our very first Photography Online Live show which we broadcast last month. This is a new show in partnership with Kase Filters UK, where viewers get the chance to discuss with the whole team all the topics that we covered on Photography Online. We also gave away £100 worth of Kase Filters vouchers, plus a Photography Online T-shirt, which of course is priceless! And we had pro landscape photographer Chris Sale join us as a guest. We'll be broadcasting a new 90-minute show, live on the third Sunday of every month. These are only available to our supporters who are on our POLive level or above. So if you'd like to join us for these fun and interactive shows, there's a link to become a supporter in the usual place below, or if you can see it on the device you're watching on - simply press the JOIN button. You can cancel at any time, so even if you just want to try it for a month and see how you get on, there's no major commitment required. And don't worry if you can't join us live,
our replay is always available to watch at your convenience so it's well worth giving it a try. Okay, so last month we featured waterfalls as our theme on the Subject Project, where we showed you everything that you need to know to get great waterfall shots and then invited you to send us your results. As always, our inbox has been flexed to the max and we're really sorry that we can't show every photo which you sent us, but we do appreciate you getting involved and we enjoy seeing what you've been up to. Here is a small selection of a few which caught our eye... We'll be looking at a few more of your waterfall shots on our next POLive show and discussing them in more detail, so that's just another reason to join us for that. Okay, so Nick's recently gone out and bought a brand new macro lens which has got a couple of unique features, so the producers are giving him 4 minutes to tell us all about it. In my camera bag I have lenses ranging in focal length from 50mm through to 200mm and I also have a 100-400mm should I require it. However, one lens which I didn't have (and
one which isn't exactly a necessity for landscape photography) is a macro lens. In the past, I've considered purchasing a macro lens, however I've never pulled the trigger as it's not one which I really thought would get regular use. In the middle of last year Canon released the RF 100mm f/2.8 L Macro IS USM lens and having made the move myself to mirrorless in 2020 with the EOS R5, I decided to add this lens to my camera bag and purchased it from Fford's photographic in november.
On several occasions in 2020 I had fun photographing fungi with my Sigma 50mm and Canon 70-200mm lenses. However, these lenses don't allow you to get that close and fill the frame with small subjects. There were a couple of times where I wished I could just get closer and have my subject larger in the frame, so I decided to look into getting a macro lens. Other macro lenses around the 100mm focal length from the likes of Nikon and Canon allow for a close focusing distance of around 30cm. Now the Canon RF 100mm macro lens allows you to get as close to your subject as 26cm. This in turn gives you 1.4x magnification,
allowing you to reproduce the subject at 140% of its size on the camera's sensor. This isn't just a lens for getting close to small subjects, it can also be used for other genres such as landscape and portrait photography. In fact, the very first time I used this lens I used it to take a landscape photograph to test its sharpness. Talking of portrait photography, this lens also has a new feature called spherical aberration control, which upon rotating a ring allows you to adjust the look of the outer focus areas in your image, more commonly known as bokeh. The spherical aberration control ring on
the lens turns in two directions - negative and positive. When turning it to the negative side, both our foreground and background subjects become softer, giving a dreamy effect. Whereas when we turn it to the positive side, our foreground subject becomes softer with the background bokeh becoming crisper. I can't really see this feature being useful for my macro photography. However, it could be useful for portrait photography where I want to create something a little bit different to pin sharp images.
Now this lens also has the image stabilization built into it, so combining it with the likes of the EOS R5 and R6 makes it easier to get handheld macro shots. I've only had this lens for a month or so now, so I haven't really used it a great deal yet. However, I do intend on getting to grips with macro photography more and especially look forward to the fungi season later this year.
Thanks Nick. Now one of the regular features that we've been bringing you since the launch of the show is Mission Possible - where we document our attempts to get ambitious and challenging shots. Team member Ben is actively working on one to photograph Ben Nevis, which is Britain's highest mountain, trying to make it actually look like it's Britain's highest mountain, as it often looks more like a hill. He'll be shooting that over the coming weeks so expect
to see the results in the not-too-distant future. However, our longest running project is our first Mission Possible which we started way back at the beginning of 2020, but we've actually been working on it since mid-2019. We get asked by many of you to update you on our progress... well it's time. If you've been watching photography online since we launched at the start of 2020, you'll have seen us planning a rather ambitious shot which involves lining up three objects, a quarter of a million miles apart, two of which we have no control over.
After checking 3 weather forecasts, 2 out of 3 of them suggested there was the potential to get the conditions we needed, and as we know, 2 out of 3 ain't bad, so we made the 100 mile journey to our location. All right, well we're back but it's been nearly 2 years since we've been standing in this spot, so I reckon I need a bit of a recap. As to why we're here? Yeah. Yeah so we've got a tree that's probably... I don't know, how good is your distance judging? I reckon that's 2 kilometers, one and a half... I'd say one and a half kilometers away. So it's a mile away. No it's not that far is it - it's a kilometer away! um and the moon is going to be rising hopefully directly behind the tree and we've been trying to get this for 2 years now, because this only happens, or the opportunity to get the shot only happens 3 times a year and today is one of the times. Last year we didn't get any chances because it was just clouded out, which again it is kind of quite a lot of cloud around. What do you reckon? Well there's a gap just above the tree
which is moving that way so I haven't lost all hope yet but it's not looking particularly good. However, tomorrow is another opportunity. That is true. So I can come back, I know you can't but I can come back if it's not very good today, but the idea is to get a picture of the tree... obviously we can't move the tree, we can't move the moon, um so by my calculations it might not be exactly here. We might end up panicking and going slightly that way or slightly that way
but when we get our first glimpse of the moon, if we get our first glimpse of the moon, we're trying to line up the camera with the tree with the moon so the tree is silhouetted perfectly with a full moon behind it. So that's the shot and obviously it's very ambitious because A: you only get three opportunities a year to do it and you have to rely on the weather playing ball. So not only do we need clear skies but we also need it to be not windy because this is such a long lens that even the slightest of wind is going to be wobbling this. So today's perfectly calm, so tick that box, but... a bit of cloud cover, yeah and have you got the right moon face today? The moon's in the right phase. It's a little bit early in terms of time of day because the moon
will be there 10 minutes before the sun sets, but tomorrow it will be there 15 minutes after sunset, so it'll be much darker tomorrow which will help with the whole contrast of it but um tomorrow's forecast to be cloudier than today so... Yeah this is apparently bright sunshine right now! This is why I like doing shots like this, because they're so ambitious and it might take another year to get this or it might take another two years to get this. Hopefully it won't take any longer than that because after another couple of years, the chances per year start decreasing and there will become a point where there isn't actually an opportunity for about six years.
Wow okay. So we need to get this done and dusted in the next two or three years. You'll be using your walker by then so... yeah! Well you're young and fit.. yeah.. so uh.. but the sense of satisfaction that you'll get when you get this shot... because this would be so easy to Photoshop. Anyone can get a picture of the moon... but why would you? Exactly! That's the point - why would you? Because you're only fooling yourself. When you can show people the photo that I have in my mind, assuming that I get it and I can assure you that their instant opinion will be "how did you merge the two photos together"? I go "no that's real!" um and so you know their appreciation of the image will be elevated. So remind us how (I mean we're obviously kind of in the middle
of the hills here), how did you actually come across this viewpoint because you can't see this you know i know the road's right nearby... There's a road just here which you can probably hear, I was driving back... I don't know.. three or four years ago um to the Isle of Skye because we're two hours from Skye here. That's the other thing is that how many times we turned up here? Four times I think. It is. So it's a four hour round trip, so 16 hours of driving that we've done to try and get this shot and we've got nothing to show for it so far, but there was one time when I was driving back along here and I came around the corner and it was just exactly the right time of day and the moon was up there in the sky. It wasn't behind the tree but I saw the tree and the moon wasn't too far away and I just thought "wow what an amazing shot that would be if the moon was right behind the tree", so I then started doing some research as to when it would be there again and it's not very often but it is there so the shot's possible.
It's not that we're trying to do something that's unachievable. It's definitely achievable but it's just very ambitious. So we're set up. Are we in the same place as last time? I thought we were further down over there last time but the moon's slightly further to the left today than it was last time but there's still a certain amount of guesswork. Now last time we were here, we had lots of people commenting saying why don't you just use PhotoPills and do use this and use all these apps. The problem is, they don't give us the degree of accuracy because they they know what
if i had a phone here it knows where the moon is and it knows where we are reasonably accurately. I mean it might... they do help in the initial kind of planning? But what it doesn't know, is it doesn't know where that tree is, that's the problem. It doesn't know the height of that hill. It doesn't know the position of that tree, so we it can only tell us two of the things that we need to know. It can't tell us the one that's in the middle, so there's a certain amount of guesswork that's going on here, but even if we just get a glimpse of the moon through the clouds today, that'll give us some vital information so that when I come back tomorrow, I know whether I should be up there or should be over there. So the time is exactly 15:25
now and the moon theoretically should be right behind that tree, but we can't see it because there's cloud. However, we'll wait for a minute because even if we just get a glimpse of it going up above the tree, then at least I'll know if we're in the right... and it's also it's kind of bright as you're all going to get the kind of I guess tomorrow would be will be better timing because it's um tomorrow it happens at uh just before four o'clock, so it'll be much darker by then but I don't want it completely dark because obviously you just get blackness where you where the hill is, so we want some detail in the hill but we want the moon to be really kind of luminant in the sky and it's not going to do that before the sunset and it's still 15 minutes to go before until sunset. So every time we come, we learn something new but if we
don't see the moon oh look there it is off the right see it? oh way over! Okay so let's move move camp and try and position ourselves so that the moon is right behind that tree. By adjusting the position of the camera I am able to effectively influence the position of the moon in relation to the tree by around 4 degrees in longitude and 1degree in latitude, but the window of opportunity lasts for less than a minute so I have to work quickly. If I zoom in on this and focus it so you can kind of get a sense there we've got this massive moon here and we want the tree in the middle of it. Now obviously that's not going to happen today because... and also the moon is way too low in in luminance for what I want but we'll
record that anyway because you can kind of get a an idea as to what's going on there so you know the top of the moon's getting quite bright now so let's knock the uh exposure back a bit. There we go.. otherwise it gonna... that's typical isn't it that the cloud is exactly behind the tree to have spoiled that but I think tomorrow (assuming we get the the right weather conditions) another 20 minutes later when everything's darker, the moon's going to be a lot brighter so that'll give us the shot that we want I think. So that's what you call "a nearly shot", "an almost shot", but at least we can we can kind of start to get an idea of how that will look when everything is lined up correctly. But that's as close as you can possibly get without getting the shot, but tomorrow is another chance and if tomorrow is no good next month there's one more chance and then there's nothing again for another year... so yeah... As the moon tracked away from the tree, the clouds cleared (of course) and it was simply a case of putting all my hopes on returning the following day when the timing of the moon would be even better.
So it's the following day and the tree is up there somewhere but believe it or not as I arrived, the tree was crystal clear in beautiful sunlight and there was cloud below it and cloud above it and there was just this window and I got very very excited and then as I've walked here, which is just 10 minutes from the car, this low cloud has just suddenly come in and completely obscured it. We've got uh probably about 15 minutes before the moon is in the optimum position so i'm just going to sit it out and hope that the cloud clears again. I mean it's completely clear up above so this is really localized low cloud so there's every chance that it will move but there's every chance it won't so fingers crossed. This is so frustrating because I keep getting tantalizing glimpses of the tree and then it will just disappear again. So I can just about see the ridgeline. I can't see the tree at the moment. We've got two or three minutes
before that moon pops up... and it's perfectly clear here, it's perfectly clear above. This is the absolute ideal conditions - there's not a cloud in the sky, there's just fog everywhere and it's only probably...I don't know... 30 meters above the ground. If the temperature was one degree warmer, this wouldn't be here, so that's how close this is. So I can just see the moon through the fog now, but I've got no idea whether the tree's to the left or the right, so I don't know where to move. To relieve my boredom I took a shot of the faint moon through the fog. Now I had no way of knowing at the time but if we enhance the image in Lightroom, it reveals something quite amazing.
It turns out I was in exactly the right position with the tree just visible in front of the moon. Again - another amazingly close call, but ultimately nowhere near close enough. Ah oh well. So next opportunity is in a month's time and if that's no good then it's next December.
Marcus has just started actively working on an even more ambitious Mission Possible project, so we'll be showing you what that's about soon. By the way, if you'd like one of the Photography Online beanies that you saw Marcus wearing, then just head to the Mc2 Photography shop, where you'll also find T-shirts, lens cloths, tripods, and a lot more items which you'll see us using on the show. Well that's us out of time for another month but it won't be too long before we're back with another action-packed show, when among other things we'll be showing you a few settings on your camera that you might not know about, we'll be illustrating the difference that tripod spikes can make, plus giving a few sets away, and we'll be continuing our Video Academy series so I hope that you can join me for that. Don't forget we're back next week with our live show which is exclusively for our PO Live and above supporters so join us for that if you can. Thanks for watching this extended show and if you've enjoyed it please do give us a thumbs up and tell your friends all about Photography Online. We've got some really exciting features lined up for the coming shows, so help spread the word so that nobody misses out. Until next time take good care, but most of
all take good photos. With the moving image the viewer usually.. for *&$£ sake, what is that last line? There were a couple of times where I wish I could just get closer and make my... my.... It's crammed full of tiny signs and roof tiles - small details which we can zoom into and really compare the comparison! Compare the comparison?! which has got a couple of unique features so the producers have given him 4 minutes to tell us all about it..... that's three! Oh my goodness. With only a couple of formats on the card market... You might be surprised when I tell you you can get much better results with much less eff can't i can't say it... so they're currently both the benchmark to beat when it comes to maxthimum..... maxthimum.... maxthimum
okay so Nick's recently born a bee dahh.... that's why we don't do walking shots.