Ultrawide on a 5d Mk2 – a Vivitar 17mm f3.5

This lens worked out pretty well on a Canon 60D crop frame sensor (here) and it’s also quite handy on Olympus OM series film cameras. ‘Full Frame’ digital though is a lot more demanding, especially at the far edges of the frame so how well does this vintage lens shape up on the mighty 5D Mk2? I need a wide-angle lens for this camera so it’s been dusted off for a test. All shot in RAW and converted in DXO Optics 9.

Vivitar 17mm f3.5 Canon 5d Mk2

The waterfall at Kimmeridge Bay in full flow. The flare to the bottom left is a ‘feature’ of this lens – I quite like it and here it fills a dark area of the frame.

On the bulky 5d Mk2 even this relatively heavy old MF lens feels fine. It’s lighter than a 24-105mm ‘L’ so it’s quite reasonable to carry around without becoming fatigued. The filter size is 67mm and infinity to minimum focus (25cm) takes a rack of around 180 degrees. The majority of this rack is taken getting from one metre to 25cm so you probably won’t see that bit of the scale very often.

This lens seems to cause the 5D MK2 more metering problems than any lens I’ve attached to it. Evaluative and centre weighted modes both occasionally produced wildly overexposed shots so keep an eye on the playback histogram after each shot.

Vivitar 17mm f3.5 Canon 5d Mk2

On the 5d Mk2 via an Olympus OM to Canon EF Fotodiox adaptor. Nicely balanced and a pleasure to use. Manual focus is very difficult due to the huge depth of field so the LCD of depth of field scale are preferable.

One of the traditional uses of such a wide-angle lens is for course landscapes and initial impressions are impressive at f8. The colours are natural and everything looks sharp enough – without pixel peeping.

Vivitar 17mm f3.5 Canon 5d Mk2

What it should do well – and it does. There isn’t much curvature on horizons (pincushion distortion) as long as the horizon is near the centre of the frame though it’s not that bad generally.

The other traditional use is interior shots and with an angle of view of 90 degrees it’s quite good at that too!

Vivitar 17mm f3.5 Canon 5d Mk2

Remarkably I haven’t seen any chromatic aberration which usually plagues wide-angle lenses, but there are a few odd internal reflections and flare when shooting into the sun which you can either live with and use creatively or just try to avoid by being very careful with your compositions.

Vivitar 17mm f3.5 Canon 5d Mk2

As with all wide-angle lenses converging lines look particularly dramatic – you end up looking for them everywhere. The closer you are to the subject the more dramatic the effect is.

Vivitar 17mm f3.5 Canon 5d Mk2

As there’s so much depth of field you can also use the depth of field scale to ‘shoot blind’ and just hold the camera near the ground like the following shot. After lots of experimenting it seems the depth of field scale is a bit optimistic – use the next widest aperture scale (i.e. set f16 but set a hyperfocal distance for f11). Maybe it was ‘good enough’ for film but it’s not for critically sharp results on the 5D…..

Vivitar 17mm f3.5 Canon 5d Mk2

Using such a wideangle lens for close-ups isn’t advisable due to distortion which increases the closer you get. The closest focus distance is 25cm – use it if you dare!

And another using the same technique – one of the few shots of snowdrops I’ve taken which I like – and I’ve taken loads!

Vivitar 17mm f3.5 Canon 5d Mk2

Bokeh with such a wide-angle lens only appears when the lens is closely focussed. It’s slightly fussy but not bad.

After all these promising results, time for some proper test results. This scene was chosen to be especially demanding for a wide-angle with bare branches acting to test the sharpness.

Vivitar 17mm f3.5 Canon 5d Mk2

The full test frame.

At f3.5 centre :-

Vivitar 17mm f3.5 Canon 5d Mk2

f3.5 edge :-

Vivitar 17mm f3.5 Canon 5d Mk2

Well wide open it’s not that good at all – the edge is terrible, but having read detailed test results for such lenses – even modern ones – the extreme edges of wide angles are often poor. Conclusion – avoid f3.5!

at f8 centre :- Vivitar 17mm f3.5 Canon 5d Mk2f8 edge :-

Vivitar 17mm f3.5 Canon 5d Mk2

Improved as you’d expect, though still not exactly brilliant!

at f16 centre :-

Vivitar 17mm f3.5 Canon 5d Mk2

f16 edge :-

Vivitar 17mm f3.5 Canon 5d Mk2

Much better – relatively… The extreme edges of the frame are still not great but better than I expected.

All things considered, this is remarkably good for a £100, thirty year old lens. As long as you keep it at f8 to f16 the performance isn’t too bad at all and on a par with many modern ultrawides (especially mid-priced zooms). It’s so much fun to use that I don’t really care too much about the soft edges – with such a wide angle of view they don’t seem too important. If you’re a perfectionist or pixel-peeper though this may not be good enough for you.

For someone who needs such a wide-angle lens infrequently this is good enough for me (and becoming a favourite lens). The lack of chromatic aberration is remarkable, the flare which crops up now and again is quite attractive (to me anyway) so all in all it’s getting a hearty recommendation for the price.

I’ll finish with another shot from the waterfall sequence – the slight vignette is caused by stacked ND filters, not the lens.

Vivitar 17mm f3.5 Canon 5d Mk2

Thanks for looking – hope you find this useful.

If you’re interested in using other MF lenses on your DSLR have a look at the other reviews on the film, camera and lens review index tab.

Full Frame on a Budget – A Canon 28-105 f3.5-4.5 USM on a 5D Mk2

This post is a bit of an oddity. Usually the only older lenses I play with are vintage manual focus lenses from the film era – Zuikos mostly – but this is a discontinued film era Canon EF autofocus lens from around 2000. EXIF info for once is quite welcome.

Canon 5D, 28-105 f3.5-4.5

105mm @f5.6 – a bit of a ‘grab shot’ which went well.

Why bother? Well it’s more or less the same zoom range as a 24-105L F4, it’s much cheaper (£130 second hand vs £500 second hand for the “L”)  and importantly, it’s much lighter (201g vs 670g). Filters are much cheaper at 58mm than 77 mm though it has no IS like the ‘L’. Also I’ve got on loan and I’m curious!

Canon 5D, 28-105 f3.5-4.5

On the 5D the light weight is very welcome. It almost makes the heavy 5D MK2 into an effortlessly portable camera.

 

It’s constructed with a tough plastic exterior and a two barrel zoom action, the minimum focus about 50 cm (marked as ‘macro’) and the USM focussing is smooth, quick and quiet. It feels quite tough if a bit brittle, but it is fifteen years old. This is the earlier model, an improved model (1999-2002) made some minor improvements.

Canon 5D, 28-105 f3.5-4.5

A Canon 24-105 ‘L’ and the 28-105 ‘not an ‘L’. Smaller, lighter and just about as versatile. Apologies for the distortion.

 

To be clear from the start, this isn’t the sharpest lens around so I won’t do a lengthy series of test shots. At 28mm the edges are soft wide open, things improve through the mid focal lengths then decline as 105mm is reached. However if you keep it at f56-f11 it will produce decent images at all focal lengths which are more than adequate for most purposes as the following should demonstrate.

Two huge enlargements from the first image are below – the tower and some of the gulls shot at 105mm @f5.6. DXO Optics 9 has already tried to remove CA from these images but a small amount remains, even if it is only a few pixels.

Canon 5D, 28-105 f3.5-4.5

Canon 5D, 28-105 f3.5-4.5

Colours are generally good though as with all older lenses, a quick ‘auto levels’ is always useful.

Canon 5D, 28-105 f3.5-4.5

68mm @f4.5 Nice clean colours in good light.

Flare is quite well controlled even without a lens hood. This was metered without the sun in the shot, the exposure ‘locked’ using the ‘*’ button, then recomposed.

Canon 5D, 28-105 f3.5-4.5

28mm @f8. Kimmeridge Bay at an extremely low tide – the lowest in twenty years apparently.

Macro mode is reasonable too with some slightly busy bokeh. The auto levels has produced some rather grungy colours in the lower right but other than that not too bad.

Canon 5D, 28-105 f3.5-4.5

105mm @f4.5

An extreme chromatic aberration test here looks good – though this is more down to DXO Optics than the lens itself. Turning off CA correction in DPP produced some nasty purple fringing on the sunlight reflections.

Canon 5D, 28-105 f3.5-4.5

63mm @f16

 

Canon 5D, 28-105 f3.5-4.5

28mm @f8 on an overcast day – not bad at all.

All in all quite a reasonable all-rounder for the price. It would make a good starter lens while you saved up for a better general purpose zoom and would be useful on shoots where kit might get dirty or damaged. Old zoom lenses from the film era are rarely as good as modern ones but this one is better than most.

At this point you’re probably thinking I’ll come up with some killer reason to use this lens. There really isn’t one other than the price and weight. It’s ‘OK’ for most purposes but fifteen years have seen some serious improvements in lens technology and digital imaging is much more demanding than film. If you’re not going to print past 10×8 it’s fine – otherwise something more modern may be in order. I really like the light weight and the convenience though!

If you’re interested in using other old lenses on your DSLR have a look at the other reviews on the film, camera and lens review index tab.

Thanks for looking – hope you find this useful.

 

Ilford Pan-F in Tetenal Neofin Blue

Having messed about with Ilford 3200 in an attempt to get some truly monstrous grain (previous post), it’s back to the other end of the film speed spectrum with an old favourite – Ilford Pan F. All shots on an Olympus OM2N in aperture priority mode (with appropriate exposure compensation).

Olympus OM2N Pan F Neofin Blue

25 ASA with a 50mm f1.4 at 1/30th second and an excellent start!

 

Olympus OM2N Pan F Neofin Blue

The centre of the image showing very little grain .

Rather than use the same old developer I thought was worth trying something different after reading this :- an article from Practical Photography back in 1960 describing using Neofin Blue with a now long gone film Ilford Micro Neg. Interestingly this reminded me of several characteristics of Adox’s CMS20 film. Neofin Blue is a high acutance one shot developer for slower films – the fast film version was Neofin Red now discontinued. The link above is to a really interesting website if you’re into photographic history by the way.

Olympus OM2N Pan F Neofin Blue

There are five ampoules of developer in a pack working out at around £1.60 per film if used at the standard dilution. The dilution can be halved for economy if you wish.

Pan F is happy at 25 and 50 ASA, though the contrast at 25 ASA in ID11 developer is pretty strong. Will it do the same thing in Neofin Blue? I’ve never used Tetenal chemistry so this should be interesting.

Olympus OM2N Pan F Neofin Blue

The 50mm f.14 again at f5.6 – nice.

Mixing Neofin Blue has an extra calculation – one ampoule of 30ml in 500ml of water is the standard dilution. Other dilutions are possible (half an ampoule, more water etc) which will result in a multiplier to the development time. I stuck with the standard dilution as it’s the first time I’ve used it. The development time was a short 4.5 minutes which seemed very brief but worked perfectly.

Olympus OM2N Pan F Neofin Blue This is good! The harsh contrast I’ve experienced with ID11 at 25 ASA just isn’t here at all, the grain is very well controlled and the tonality pleasing.

What about 50 ASA?

Olympus OM2N Pan F Neofin Blue

@50 ASA and this is hardly different from the 25 ASA results which is welcome. 25 ASA just isn’t fast enough sometimes.

 

Olympus OM2N Pan F Neofin Blue

The centre of the previous image – being able to see the thin cable attached to the top of the tower and exiting left is impressive (the branches are slightly out of focus)!

 

Olympus OM2N Pan F Neofin Blue

Being fairly slow film this is good for long exposures – this was around one second through an R25 red filter at f16. Vivitar 17mm f3.5

 

Olympus OM2N Pan F Neofin Blue

Some of Pan-F’s dark characteristics remain – those shadows are very deep even if i missed a few dust spots – sorry.

Most of these were taken using a new minimalist kit approach – one camera body, a 50mm f1.4 or 1.8, a 28mm f2, a 135mm f3.5, two spare rolls of film and a spare set of batteries. A wonderfully light and flexible set of equipment which can be carried in jacket pockets without a heavy camera bag. As the 50mm lenses get used more than any other I could leave the other lenses behind and go really minimalist! Try it one day – it’s very refreshing and the results are good so far.

Olympus OM2N Pan F Neofin Blue

50 ASA on an overcast day allows the gratuitous use of wide apertures and some flashy shallow depth of field. This is with the 50mm f1.8 – it’s bokeh is a bit busy here.

All in all an excellent result. At 25 ASA the contrast is better controlled than ID11’s results, and at both 25 and 50 ASA the grain is excellent for a high acutance developer. The ‘dark’ look of Pan F has been nicely preserved too. It’s not quite as grainless as Adox CMS20 but then I didn’t really expect it to be. A highly recommended combination!

Thanks for looking – hope you find it useful.

p.s. There a reviews of lots of other films on the film, camera and lens review index tab.

Grain at Last! Ilford Delta 3200 in Rodinal.

Or alternatively (suggested by Nick in the previous post’s comment section) ‘The Search for the Holy Grain’.

Ilford Delta, Rodinal, Olympus OM2N

Worbarrow Bay with Portland just visible on the horizon on the left. I thought this very heavy grain may be caused by under/over exposure but the negative looks fine.

In an attempt to get some really grainy results I’ve been trying some faster films with little success – I want a really grainy image like those obtainable using now discontinued films such as Kodak TMax 3200, Scotch 3M 1000 or even Kodak Hi Speed IR.

Ilford Delta, Rodinal, Olympus OM2N

The central portion of the above shot. That’s a lot of grain… I was after grain but maybe a bit less than this!

At 1600 and 3200 ASA Ilford Delta 3200 is (annoyingly) very well-behaved when developed in ID11, so the next step is Rodinal which sharpens up detail at the expense of harder grain.

Ilford Delta, Rodinal, Olympus OM2N

Tyneham church entrance. The sky has overexposed – as I took a meter reading from the ground here – and the grain hasn’t shown on the scan. Interesting.

Ilford Delta, Rodinal, Olympus OM2N

The centre of the previous shot – grainy goodness in spadefulls!

All shots from one roll in an OM2N using a 17mm f3.5 lens in manual mode as the max ASA setting is 1600 – so set the exposure and take a stop off. The Rodinal was at a 1+25 dilution at 20 degrees c for 11 minutes.

Ilford Delta, Rodinal, Olympus OM2N

Centre weighted meter reading and some grain in the sky as it hasn’t overexposed. This is just about right.

The grain is most evident in skies when no exposure compensation has been set for the main subject. If a meter reading is taken from the ground (rather than the whole scene) the clouds become over exposed and the grain can’t be seen – so a choice of technique.

Ilford Delta, Rodinal, Olympus OM2N

On a fairly bright winter’s day exposures are possible at 3200 using 1/1000th of a second and f16 to f11. On a brighter day a red 25A or polarizer would be needed – unless your SLR can shoot faster than 1/1000th of a second or you lens run to f22/f32 of course.

Ilford Delta, Rodinal, Olympus OM2N

Sorry – another shot of the same building. I got a bit carried away here.

These were all taken an Tyneham and Worbarrow Bay in Dorset. The ruins are what’s left of a small village which was taken over by the army as a combat training zone in World War 2 with the promise to the villages and landowner that it would all be returned – it never was.

Ilford Delta, Rodinal, Olympus OM2N

Anyway, back to this film/developer combo. Well I can’t complain that it’s not grainy. What’s odd is how variable the appearance of the grain is. In some cases using the same exposure for different shots of the same subject produces markedly different grain, even though the negatives look fine. Shots with lots of mid-tones seem to show the most grain when normally exposed, highlights when overexposed are fine and shadows are fine too surprisingly though the darker greys are a bit ‘grungy’.

Apart from the first picture in this series, the rest of these are just what I was after so I’ll stick with this for a few more rolls. Oddly several shots earlier in the roll showed the same ultra graininess but all the subsequent shots had less obtrusive grain :-

Ilford Delta, Rodinal, Olympus OM2N

Another shot from earlier in the roll.

So – a few mysteries and mishaps, but I like this a lot (you may not!) and it’s good to finally find a film/dev combo which achieves the look I was after.

Hope you find this useful, thanks for looking!

p.s. There a reviews of lots of other films on the film, camera and lens review index tab.

 

Finally Getting Some Grain – Ilford Delta 3200

The search for some really grainy shots continues, and the latest batch of shots seems to be heading in the right direction.

Olympus OM2N, Ilford Delta 3200, D76

Some decent grainy goodness at last – not quite there yet but this is a ‘work in progress’!

This mini project was inspired after being reminded of Scotch 3M 1000 slide film in an old photography book. I used to like fast Scotch film a lot – sadly it’s now been discontinued for many years. It didn’t try to hide its grainyness – instead the grain was an integral and deliberate part of the image. It was a little like trying to recreate a 19th century painting technique called pointillism using film. Modern 400 ASA films have proved reluctant to ‘grain up’ to the challenge so more extreme measures are called for.

Olympus OM2N, Ilford Delta 3200, D76

Overcast days are best for this technique- too much light overwhelms the OM2N’s 1/1000th second shutter speed without a filter of some sort..

It turns out this ‘closest yet’ effort was really very simple – expose Ilford Delta 3200 at it’s ‘box speed’ 3200 which just involves a little work on the OM2N. The OM2N goes to a maximum 1600 ISO and is at it’s limit, so no there’s no -1 exposure compensation in aperture priority mode. It’s just a case of setting the exposure manually and then taking a stop off. So simple really as long as you remember!

Olympus OM2N, Ilford Delta 3200, D76

These were developed in D76 – it’s Rodinal for the next try to really harden the grain up. After that it’s 6400 ASA – with an ND filter I think.

Olympus OM2N, Ilford Delta 3200, D76

These were taken on a cold, overcast day in Lymington near the New Forest in Hampshire UK. Lymington seems to be dependent on the yachting/tourist fraternity – in January it’s quite quiet and empty.

Olympus OM2N, Ilford Delta 3200, D76

Worn out, old patterns complement this technique nicely – but only in the smoother areas (the window) as this wall was already pretty gritty already.

Now for a close up of the grain structure :-

Olympus OM2N, Ilford Delta 3200, D76

The full frame.

 

Olympus OM2N, Ilford Delta 3200, D76

And a portion of the centre – complete with a few drying marks. Oops.

Finally a rural church – always a good choice for a book cover.

Olympus OM2N, Ilford Delta 3200, D76

This was taken before a heavy storm – hence the dark clouds. The snowdrops add a certain something.

Well, almost there, but this has been more difficult than first imagined. Thirty years ago grain was a major problem using 35mm film, but the past few experiments have shown that it’s really quite difficult to get really grainy results with modern emulsions. Ilford 3200 seems to produce some promising results, but pushing Kodak Tri-X to 3200 ASA might work well – more experiments!

This is the best reason to use film – the combinations of film, developer and exposure provide some fascinating possibilities and learning opportunities. The 5d Mk2 and the 60D are enjoying a break for a while until this particular project is over – this is the best photographic fun I’ve had in ages.

Oh – and Ilford 3200 in D76 is quite good too!

Thanks for looking – hope you find this useful.

p.s. There a reviews of lots of other films on the film, camera and lens review index tab.

The Search for Grain Continues – Kodak Tri-X. Lots of Shots and Some Photographic History.

Approaching a review of Kodak Tri-X provokes some nervousness. Tri-X has been around since 1954 (though reformulated many times since then) and was the black and white film which defined a photographic era for fashion and journalism in the 1970’s and 1980’s, creating a dark gritty look which is still used today. It’s still the best-selling mono film (according to Kodak).

Kodak Tri-X, 35mm, Olympus OM2N, D76

Salisbury Cathedral again on an overcast day. This needed some PP but the dark ‘look’ I remember is still there. Zuiko 28mm f2 though not as grainy as I’d remembered.

The great Don McCullin used Tri-X for his famous photographs of the Vietnam war. For David Bailey, Irving Penn, Alfred Eisenstaedt, and Cartier Bresson it was a mainstay too. In short it’s one of the few films which has legendary status so I’d best be thorough! For a fuller description see here for an excellent history of this film.

Kodak Tri-X, 35mm, Olympus OM2N, D76

Inside the cathedral and that tonality is lovely – enough to feel optimistic! Vivitar 17mm lens.

When a film has been going for 60 years it’s got to be good – but does the modern version capture that ‘look’ I loved thirty years ago? Best shoot a few rolls.

Kodak Tri-X, 35mm, Olympus OM2N, D76

A further interior – and good too. Vivitar 17mm lens. The textured stone of the interior masks the graininess as always.

All these shots rated at 400 ASA on a Olympus OM2N with a variety of Zuiko/Vivitar lenses and developed in D76 – D76 and Tri-X must be a classic combination. Scanned on the usual Plustek 7500 and subjected to some levels and contrast adjustment.

Kodak Tri-X, 35mm, Olympus OM2N, D76

The last from Salisbury and a bit of a gothic type shot – working as hoped. Vivitar 17mm lens.

The film feels like a quality product in a well made cassette with solid felt light baffles. It’s difficult to break into for loading on a film spiral – always a good sign. It loads easily onto the spiral too.

Kodak Tri-X, 35mm, Olympus OM2N, D76

Hard light suits this film. The humble Zuiko 50mm f1.8.

Drying it doesn’t attract much dust and is quite a ‘hard’ emulsion when dry. When you’ve had 60 years to perfect a film it should be one of the best I suppose!

Kodak Tri-X, 35mm, Olympus OM2N, D76

Zuiko 50mm f1.8.

One of the properties of Tri-X was to capture a subject’s essential details – complete with grain, dirt and darkness in the process. It was famous for it’s deep black tones and is often used to emphasise the grittier side of life – with a bit of PP in the contrast department it does it well.

Kodak Tri-X, 35mm, Olympus OM2N, D76

To portray dark grittyness this is excellent. Zuiko 28mm f2.

Exposure latitude is wide too allowing shooting in a wide variety of situations.

Kodak Tri-X, 35mm, Olympus OM2N, D76

Shooting into the light and a nice result – flare, grain and all.

However – is it grainy enough? That’s what this search is all about!

Kodak Tri-X, 35mm, Olympus OM2N, D76

The whole frame.

And a small enlargement :-

Kodak Tri-X, 35mm, Olympus OM2N, D76

This small section of the negative looks quite detailed with reasonable grain for 400 ASA.

Nope – I’m looking for more grain than this. Let’s try uprating it to 1600 ASA and push processing it for 12 minutes.

Kodak Tri-X, 35mm, Olympus OM2N, D76

This is a little more like it in low light. 50mm f1.8.

Outdoors in soft sunlight :-

Kodak Tri-X, 35mm, Olympus OM2N, D76

Time for a frame enlargement and here’s the full frame. Zuiko 135 f3.5 (a recent acquisition!)

 

Kodak Tri-X, 35mm, Olympus OM2N, D76

And here’s a small section enlarged. Slightly harder grain than a 100 ASA film but not that much.

Well it’s made things a little more grainy but not as much as I’d hoped. Tri-X is made to be pushed to higher speeds so it shouldn’t be too much of a surprise. These were developed in D76 but it’s (annoyingly!) done a good job on the grain structure that I’m thinking for the next roll it will have to be souped in Rodinal which should harden the grain up a bit. It’s amazing how good modern film is by comparison with 30 years ago. All of the high-speed films tested so far have proved highly resistant to heavy grain formation – so much so there’s not a huge difference between them and 100 ASA film. Even Ilford 3200 was tame at 1600 ASA.

Finally – for those who don’t like slopping chemicals around – can Tri-X be replicated digitally in DXO Filmpack? There’s a preset for it so let’s see.

Here’s a Tri-X ‘original’ :-

Kodak Tri-X, 35mm, Olympus OM2N, D76

And here’s a DXO converted shot from an EPL5 :-

Kodak Tri-X, 35mm, Olympus OM2N, DXO Filmpack

Close enough I’d say, though film development and PP variations (in both cases) mean that DXO can only really do an approximation of the final ‘look’. The stonework on the house is brighter in the later shot due these being taken many weeks apart – the DXO shot has the advantage of some sunlight on the wall face.

Well what to make of it? Tri-X is still an excellent film just past it’s 60th birthday and as good as it’s competitors if you prefer a darker look (think of it crudely as a fast Ilford PAN-F). As a photographer who still shoots lots of film as well as digital, it’s worth a thanks to Kodak for keeping this stuff in production. My recommendation is to give it a try – I’m about to order 10 rolls!

Thanks for looking – hope this is useful!

p.s. There a reviews of lots of other films on the film, camera and lens review index tab.

 

A Stormy Day and Some Long Exposures (and some myths debunked!)

We’re having some stormy days in Dorset lately which is a good excuse to get the tripod and neutral density filters out and do some long exposures on the coast. All shots on a Canon 60D using a Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6 lens.

Canon 60D, Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6

Kimmeridge Bay and Clavell’s Tower. 10mm focal length, 15 seconds at f16, heavily tweaked in DXO Filmpack using the Rollei Retro 80s film profile – then even more contrast was added! The composition was helped by the very strong wind blowing the clouds and waves straight at the camera.

There isn’t a great amount of light around, but if shutter speeds of up to thirty seconds at ISO 100 are to be used, a x8 (three stop) ND filter isn’t enough by a long way. There were all taken using a stacked pair of x8 and x64 (six stop) Hoya ND filters and even then f16, f22 and f32 were all used to get long enough shutter speeds. The first myth to be debunked here is that old rule ‘never go below f16 – resolution will suffer because of diffraction’ – here the advantage of a slow shutter speed easily outweighs any slight softness created by a small aperture so just use it anyway!

Surprisingly there was no vignetting from the stacked filters.

Canon 60D, Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6

3.2 seconds @f25. This one at the same location was taken with a view to converting it to a ‘moonlit light’ type shot. The brightness is dropped and a blue tint added to give the illusion of a moonlit bay. I’ve just finished reading ‘Moonfleet’ so that’s probably what made the shot come to mind.

The second golden rule which didn’t seem to apply was that muck on a wide-angle lens at small apertures will spoil a shot as it will be visible. I’ve always meticulously cleaned the front filters of such lenses, but despite the front filter being caked in dried salt and sand by the end of this shoot nothing was visible on the shots – at 10mm focal length using f32 in some shots! Something else not to worry about!

Canon 60D, Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6

A bit more abstract – f13 10 seconds. Post processing as per the first shot.

It’s best to take lots of shots at different apertures and shutter speeds as the variation between different wave timings and slow shutter effects is remarkable. I couldn’t predict how the waves were going to hit the beach so just took ten or so shots at each tripod location – even then some weren’t too good. This is pot luck in short!

A heavy tripod is recommended and even then don’t extend it but use it at it’s lowest setting with the centre column down. Strong winds were shaking the camera with the legs extended by even one section and if it blows over onto rocks in salt water it’s probably time to wave the camera and lens goodbye….

Canon 60D, Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6

2 seconds f10 with the wind blowing from left to right. Post processing as he first shot.

I had more difficulty than ever keeping the horizons straight so several of these were straightened in pp. Composition in a gale is more difficult than it looks even using the flip out LCD and grid lines – the viewfinder is very dark due to the ND filters and close to the ground which means it isn’t very comfortable to use.

Canon 60D, Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6

5 seconds @f5.6.

For these conditions shutter speeds of 2 seconds to 15 seconds produced the best results. At 30 seconds the sea became too ‘blurred’, below 2 seconds and not enough movement was captured.

A very different location – the sheltered marshes behind the dunes at Studland and the pool surface was just being ruffled by the wind.

Canon 60D, Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6

5 seconds @f10. Generic Ektachrome film profile in DXO filmpack brought out the red hues which contrast with the blue sky reflection.

Next a similar shot at the same location.

Canon 60D, Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6

5 seconds at f10 – a blue cast seemed to suit this one but it would work well in black and white.

Finally it’s worth mentioning that the most important kit when shooting stormy weather near the coast isn’t camera kit at all – good outdoor clothing is essential otherwise you’re likely to get freezing cold and wet – not good for concentrating on photography (sorry to nag).

DN0A0105

What not to do (as I did) – get caught by a large wave (it’s on it’s way out in this shot) which overtops not particularly waterproof boots, giving you freezing cold, wet feet for the rest of the day. Oh – and almost lose your camera at the same time! Thanks for the picture Jayne even if you were laughing when you took it. The first picture on this post was taken when this happened so it was worth it.

The best part of shooting in bad weather is that you feel that you’ve done something productive rather than sit around indoors and I really must do more of it. With better boots, a towel and a spare set of socks next time though.

Thanks for looking – hope you like them!