This is supposed to include a link to the gallery image. The image is a view southwest of Estes Park, CO from Cheley Camps... And guess what, it WORKS!!!! I learned something else new today!

I spent a good deal of time fiddling with HDR images yesterday (not this view) and I think I can do almost as well with CNX2 to yield images like this (at last with the D800)

This image was taken with the D800, Sigma 12-24, ISO 3200, f/11, 1/6400 sec., and 5 control points in NX2.

Tom
D5000IR, V1, Oly OM-D E-M5
Nikkor Zooms: AF-S 18-105 f/3.5-5.6 VR, VR, AF-S 18-135 f/3.5-5.6
Nikkor primes: 24 f/2.8Ai-S, 28 f/2.8D, Micro 60 f/2.8, 85 f/1.4D, Nikkor-C 500 f/8 Refl.
Nikon 1 lenses: 10mm f/2.8, 10-30mm f/3.5-5.6 VR, 30-110mm f/3.8-5.6.
Voigtlander 58mm f/1.4, Sigma 70-300 Macro f/3.5-5.6.
Oly 12-42mm f/3.5-5.6, 12-50mm f/3.5-6.3, 12mm f/2.0, 45mm f/1.8, 75mm f/1.8.
Lumix 20mm f/1.7, 14-140mm f/4.0-5.8, 100-300mm f/4.0-5.6
Gitzo GT3541L, Manfrotto MT293A4, MP 680B
Markins M-20, RRS BH-25 Pro

Tom:

I was looking at the EXIF and was wondering why the high ISO?

Grady
MY GALLERY

A two-part answer Grady. First I was walking around and when I do I keep the ISO at 3200 because in my mind that is mid-range ISO. The second part of the answer is that it helps the D800 to have a fast shutter speed to avoid pixel blur, thus a good share of ISO is very helpful.

Tom
D5000IR, V1, Oly OM-D E-M5
Nikkor Zooms: AF-S 18-105 f/3.5-5.6 VR, VR, AF-S 18-135 f/3.5-5.6
Nikkor primes: 24 f/2.8Ai-S, 28 f/2.8D, Micro 60 f/2.8, 85 f/1.4D, Nikkor-C 500 f/8 Refl.
Nikon 1 lenses: 10mm f/2.8, 10-30mm f/3.5-5.6 VR, 30-110mm f/3.8-5.6.
Voigtlander 58mm f/1.4, Sigma 70-300 Macro f/3.5-5.6.
Oly 12-42mm f/3.5-5.6, 12-50mm f/3.5-6.3, 12mm f/2.0, 45mm f/1.8, 75mm f/1.8.
Lumix 20mm f/1.7, 14-140mm f/4.0-5.8, 100-300mm f/4.0-5.6
Gitzo GT3541L, Manfrotto MT293A4, MP 680B
Markins M-20, RRS BH-25 Pro

Hi Tom,
Do I miss something here? To me the picture is grainy, due to the very high ISO. I must say not bad for 3200 but still not good enough to print a 8x10 or bigger picture. The image is over saturated and the composition lacks any impact to add insult to injury is the amputated figure on the left I normally admire your pictures this is the reason for my opening statement.

Aart

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Well Aart, yes you may indeed have missed something. This image was primarily created to see if I could set up a post to link to my gallery, and secondly try some PP to attempt to create a pseudo (one image) HDR.

I wasn't very happy with the results of my PP, but the linking worked. The "amputee" is my wife and I didn't even notice her in the image because I was watching the shadows in the trees (right and left) and the ground in the foreground. This was a very underexposed image originally (which may explain some of the critique).

This was one of the three images (the least exposed) of the bracket set used to attempt an HDR of the scene (this may also explain some of the details of the critique).

And finally, this (the one in the gallery) is only 590KB big, and suitable only for a 7" x 5" print. The original is actually 25.9MB, two and half times the size allowed by the gallery for uploading, so I had to create a quick smaller image, again used only to test the linking process.

Alan, I am still operating under my "D700 rules", thereby using 3200 as a standard sensitivity. Since reading Hogan's D800 book, I am going to be altering that standard to a lower value, which, I have not yet determined.

Regarding the "amputee", this is the image that was supposed to be posted, but it still looks to me (even in the gallery that it is still only suitable for a 7.5" x 5" image(!). (I uploaded a 9.5MB file and it shows as a "452.1 kb" file - I don't understand this at all.)



Thanks for the observations guys.

Tom
D5000IR, V1, Oly OM-D E-M5
Nikkor Zooms: AF-S 18-105 f/3.5-5.6 VR, VR, AF-S 18-135 f/3.5-5.6
Nikkor primes: 24 f/2.8Ai-S, 28 f/2.8D, Micro 60 f/2.8, 85 f/1.4D, Nikkor-C 500 f/8 Refl.
Nikon 1 lenses: 10mm f/2.8, 10-30mm f/3.5-5.6 VR, 30-110mm f/3.8-5.6.
Voigtlander 58mm f/1.4, Sigma 70-300 Macro f/3.5-5.6.
Oly 12-42mm f/3.5-5.6, 12-50mm f/3.5-6.3, 12mm f/2.0, 45mm f/1.8, 75mm f/1.8.
Lumix 20mm f/1.7, 14-140mm f/4.0-5.8, 100-300mm f/4.0-5.6
Gitzo GT3541L, Manfrotto MT293A4, MP 680B
Markins M-20, RRS BH-25 Pro

Nice shot Tom. I will be in Estes Park Saturday for a week. I hope to get some nice landscapes and maybe a Moose or some Big Horn.

Joe

Thanks Joe, but as you might have already read, this particular frame isn't that great a shot.

Good luck finding some moose or big horn. I didn't think there were any moose around there - I haven't seen any, but I don't really know. I also haven't seen any big horn but I know they are there somewhere. When I was there two Januarys ago, the park rangers said that the big horn were easier to find when the state (not the national park) put salt down on the roads and the sheep come down to lick it up. What you will be guaranteed to find are elk - lots of 'em. Since you will be there tomorrow however you may not see this post until you get back home.

Tom
D5000IR, V1, Oly OM-D E-M5
Nikkor Zooms: AF-S 18-105 f/3.5-5.6 VR, VR, AF-S 18-135 f/3.5-5.6
Nikkor primes: 24 f/2.8Ai-S, 28 f/2.8D, Micro 60 f/2.8, 85 f/1.4D, Nikkor-C 500 f/8 Refl.
Nikon 1 lenses: 10mm f/2.8, 10-30mm f/3.5-5.6 VR, 30-110mm f/3.8-5.6.
Voigtlander 58mm f/1.4, Sigma 70-300 Macro f/3.5-5.6.
Oly 12-42mm f/3.5-5.6, 12-50mm f/3.5-6.3, 12mm f/2.0, 45mm f/1.8, 75mm f/1.8.
Lumix 20mm f/1.7, 14-140mm f/4.0-5.8, 100-300mm f/4.0-5.6
Gitzo GT3541L, Manfrotto MT293A4, MP 680B
Markins M-20, RRS BH-25 Pro

"I do I keep the ISO at 3200 because in my mind that is mid-range ISO"

That seems like a little bit of over kill to me. You certainly didn't need 1/6400th of a second to stop "pixel blur" even with a D800. Using the lowest ISO you can seems more realistic, but maybe noise is non-existent on a D800.

But what do i know; I don't own a D800.

Alan