Port Huron Video Tests

 The video saga continues.  And with much better results.  I'd been waiting all week for Saturday.

The weather forecast was for storms all over the state.  The decision was to head to Mackinaw City or Port Huron.  Since both location had virtually no chance of nice weather, I went for Port Huron.  Turns out, that worked.

But getting to PH was a journey.  The video journey.  

So far, I've figured out what the GoPro is good for, and not so good for.  Let's start with the positive.  it is set for wide angle.  With a very a small sensor.  And infinity focus.  It has an auto leveling function, where the horizon for the most part is level.  It has a 'smoothing' function where the image is not shaking, such as when the truck is on unimproved surface.  Very handy features.  It will take videos at 5k, but is somewhat limited on other functions.  The not so good side is it is fixed wide angle.  Although there is a 'narrow' mode, it is only less wide angle.  For an action cam this makes sense.  For my interest in videos, not so much.  I want the close up.  That being said, I won't be sending it back.

What really drove home the wide angle elements to me was this clip.  This is from a drive in the Refuge where a Heron flew across the front of the truck.  When it happened, I thought it would be great on the GoPro.  In reality, not so much.  Looked small and far away.

However, the GoPro sparked the interest in videos for me.  There aren't any feature length videos in my plans.  I am, however, looking to 'enhance' some of my photos when I can.  There's more to a F22 demo than afterburners.  With a video clip, there is movement and sound.  Same for the Thunderbirds and Blue Angels.  And if the GoPro won't get me what I want, then maybe the Nikons will.

In my video viewing experience, I know more about what I find in a 'bad' video.  For now, a good video just is.  First on my list of unpleasantries is video jumpiness.  This is not video shakes from being handheld, but action too fast for the video frames.  I my research, I found normal video frame rates are 30 frames per second.  To test this, I shot video of a car passing in front of me at a theoretical 35 mph.  Theoretical in that 35 mph is the speed limit in the sub-division.  At 30 FPS, the images were shaky, not smooth.  What would a jet at 450 mph look like?  The image of a car crossing at 35 mph looks much better at 60 FPS.  The Nikons will handle a 60 FPS at 1080 - and that's good enough for me.  But what does a Nikon video look like?

And that takes us to Port Huron, for video testing.  Nikon video testing.  I had the D500 paired with the 70-300 and the D850 paired with the 24-70.  If I was walking around an airshow, this is my kit for now.  I didn't take a tri or mono pod to PH.  With the prediction of stormy weather, that was one less piece of equipment to deal with.  I'll deal with the next level later.

What did I learn?

First, the Nikon DSLRs have a very bad reputation for video auto focus.  Nikon made great strides in this area with the mirrorless models such as the D780 and the Z line.  But I have what I have.  I'm too late in the game, both age and financial, to switch to mirrorless.  So I need to see what the auto focus is really like.  And I found out.

I will also note, that while showing some of the errors of the day, the errors are mostly my issues.  It's a journey, right?

Left to its own, the AF will come in.  But it would be better if I could start out in focus.  And after experimenting, I could get the start of the videos much closer to an acceptable focus.  Staying with the focus subject, one of the other things I noticed when I reviewed the videos on a larger monitor was the auto focus tracking occasionally would search.  I read that depending on the subject and environment, might be better to go to manual focus., At least now I know why this might be better.  Set it and forget it.  This sequence would have been much better in constant focus.

The D500 with the 70-300 did OK, but stretch out the lens magnified every little 'shake'.  There is software that will help out, but for now the level of video editor I have does not include this option.  And some form of pod would have helped.  But for now, this is annoying!

Most of these issues were with the D500 combo.  With the D850 and a shorter lens the videos were much 'better'.  

You can still see the camera shakes, but here it only feels like a home video, whereas with the wind surfer the shakes were really bad.

The was the next to last video shot with the D850 combo.  It's not bad, looks home video.  But what gets to me is the clear, sharp image.

I like the detail on the water and on both watercrafts wake.

Journey fist steps.  Still have to work on color grading.  But have good test files to work on.

New Lens Focus Validation

AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
It's big and heavy.  Not a walk around lens.
Five (5) pounds to carry around.  And on the D500, and D7200, it acts like a 300 to 750 mm.
I was looking at this lens or the 80-400.  For what ever reason, the 80-400 cost a lot more but the reviews are insane (good insane).
I went with the 200-500 as it has great reviews when used with the D500 from a number of posts on the UHH.  The 200-500 is a pretty good compliment of what I have now.  A 300 to 400 jump wasn't as big a bang, and I would probably have to sell the 70-300.  Keeping the 70-300 will work, that is more of a walk around lens.  As I found out today, the 200-500 is a lot more event driven lens.  Not good for all occasions.
The only negative remarks I heard from the lens was a few people posted that the auto focus didn't match up with the camera.  When you see these types of posts you never know the entire story such as were the cameras altered in any way?  Most posts said they had to send the lens back two or three times before they could get a good focus.  Camera or user issue?  Nikon hater?  (They're out there)  All I take from this is I should really get a test/acceptance drive done as soon as possible.
That was today's mission.  The subject would be the first day of the #1225's Polar Express runs for the year.  It would have been better to get some birds at the Refuge, maybe next June?
For my tests today, there is no UV filter.  There is no software sharpening.  This shot is as bare bones as I can get.

#1225 Rolling - Lens Test

NIKON D500/200.0-500.0 mm f/5.6

480 mm, 1/2000 sec, F/5.6, ISO 640 (Auto)

EV 0, Manual Mode, Size DX

Looking at 100%, the image is very sharp.

Looking good at 200%.

On the lens barrel is it 320 mm.  Very close to the middle range.  I'm going to go with the auto focus on this lens is pretty good.  Think I'll keep it.

Toy RC Helicopter

This weekend's subject was photo stacking a smaller subject than the Walking Shoes projects.  I have a small, very small, RC helicopter I bought a few years ago to keep me occupied for a Christmas Day.  The Cats were not amused.
The toy has been sitting on the shelf since then.
Before I get into the toy, I thought a look into what I am now calling the dungeon.  I've set aside a corner in our basement for my photographic equipment.  I have two tables set up - one has the mat cutting equipment and the other is the table top studio.

So far, the single lighting source into the umbrella is doing the trick.  I have been very happy with the results.  That tip alone was well worth the gas money to Procam and back.
On to the helicopter.
The goal was to test the Helicon Remote (PC) and Focus programs with something other than the default settings.
Over the course of the day, I found out a few things that sound like I should have known them before today, but like most things I have learned I needed to see it for myself.
The first thing I figured out, is don't be so fast to jump to a RAW format.  As RAW files are larger, guess what?  Yep - they take longer to process.  That probably cost me a hour.  Lesson learned, unless there is a reason for RAW format or you are just testing go with a medium JPG format.
Another lesson, it appears that the smaller f/stop (larger opening) doesn't always mean a clearer product.  i found in the course of the shooting that for some reason, the tail section would never come out clear when I was shooting f/2.  Not sure if it was the complexity of the section, or the backdrop or a combination of the two.  I would see clear shots in the stack, but in the processing it never came out.  I'm sure there is a way to clean that up, but that is time I'd rather not take.  When I shot a stack at f/4.5 and f/8 the tail section came in very nicely.  Lesson learned, if you have the time take multiple sets with different aperture settings.  I believe it can make a difference.
Next lesson, complex subjects can be frustrating.  I'll define complex as having multiple points of focus that overlap.  In this case, I spent a lot of time moving the rotor blades so they didn't overlap the body.  The more independent each element, the better.  It took me a while to get this straight, and coupled with the RAW image lesson, there was a lot of time consumed.  Lesson learned, practice, practice, practice.  Note: I always go back to my first stacking adventure, the DMRRC shoot.  These were not so much complex shots, for the most part the scenery was uncomplicated.  There was depth, but none of it was overlapping.
And probably the last lesson for the day, when it comes to rendering the photos there is always room for improvement.  In this case, methods A and B worked best when the radius and smoothing values were set to 1.  And while that was fun trying to figure those settings - option C worked the best with no extra effort.  The Helicon vendor website said that most of the default settings would work most of the time.  Don't believe it - explore.
So on to the Helicopter, again.
Using two different DOF web calculators with the following:  Camera D7200 crop sensor, distance to subject of 24 inches with 50 mm lens set to f/8 gives me a DOF of just under 2 inches.  The helicopter is 7 inches long, plus maybe 2.5 inches for the front rotor blade.  Something isn't going to fit.
This is one of the mid-photos in the stack where the focus is just forward of the rotor.

The front looks OK, but from roughly half way back on the tail the sharpness is fading.

With a 16 shot photostack, this is the image:

And a close up of the tail section:

The tail section is sharp all the way through.

So that is the stack part - done in JPG.

And the Blog version:

As this project was done in JPG, I'm stuck with the coloring of the backdrop and soften the object shadow a bit.  Still in the learning process.

High ISO with Polarizer

Continuing my practicing photos with high ISO, I headed out to Port Huron.  I figured there would be plenty of action shots between the boats and the birds.  I shot many images of boats going from 'no wake' to wide open and could follow/pan pretty easily with the 200 mm  lens.  I had lots of luck with clarity and had many more good shots than bad.  It was a good beginning.
Shooting the birds in flight was a bit more difficult.  They did not get the memo to fly close to me and in a direction I could use.  At least none of them crapped on me.
I did see some of them guarding the lights, and with the mix of blue sky and white puffys, there were some opportunities.
I wanted to shoot at ISO 1000 but I was using a polarizer, so bumped it down to 800.  With that set up, I had a shutter speed of 1/640.  I always use a polarizer around the water.
What I learned.  I've shot (photographically) a number of Gulls.  There is definition in the chest feathers.  On this shot, there is no definition.  Like he's wearing a T-shirt.  I'm going to take it that in the RAW image with enough time I might be able to bring something out - but I'm OK with this as it is.  There is a lot of white between the Gull, the lamp and the clouds.  All of it is nice and defined.
The final product is cropped pretty tight, if i was going to do something more with this image I might have to take a different approach.

Shutter:  1/640
Aperture:  F/11
ISO:  800
Mode:  Manual
Focal Length:  135 mm
Polarizer

High ISO Shots

My next big photo op is roughly one year away.  I am heading west with a few friends to attend the Reno airshow.  As in Reno, Nevada.  Wow, I have some work to do!
First, this takes me a bit out of my element.  I like nice static subjects.  If I miss it, I can go back.  I'm not much for one and dones.
I've been looking at web sites for aviation photography and a few things I've learned.  One is I'll need to go shopping for something more powerful than my 200mm lens.  Doable.
I'll also need to be able to take shots at 1/2000.  The guideline for taking photos of prop driven aircraft is 1/40 to 1/125.  The blur of the prop makes the shot.  But for jets and very distant shots with longer focal distances, the higher speeds are essential.
One option to achieving higher speeds is to open up the lens' F/stop.  I'm real comfortable at F11.  I'll go to F/8 if I need to but that's about my limit.
Another option is to increase the ISO.  Being brought up in the 35mm days, 100, 400 and 800 are my familiar numbers.  The advertising on my D7200 says I should be able to get up to 1600 without too much issue.
OK, let's find out.
I've seen a number of sites that demo ISO noise effects.  Mostly the changes are in the area of color and definition, plus the introduction of 'noise'.  I should be able to compensate for definition to keep away from a really soft look.  I should be able to saturate as necessary for color.  The noise?  We'll have to see.
Now what I really need is a subject.  And as luck would have it, the snowmobile races that I went to last year - were going on today.  This is as close to air races as I'm going to get today.
To get where I want to go, I'm using Manual Mode.  I have the lens set at F11 and the speed at 1/1000.  I took a few evaluation shots and found that when shooting in the sunlight, 1/1250 painted a very nice histogram.  With a year to prep, I have one data point.

ISO 1,000
Speed  1/1250
Aperture  F11
Mode Manual
Focal Length  27mm
(Just in case you missed it before.)

The JPG that Nikon created was OK.  On the RAW image, which is the one above, all I did was let Photoshop add some depth and I added just a bit of green saturation for the grass.

First test passed.  I think the image is fine.  Next test - will the D90 do as well?  (It's going out west too!)