Hi on August 13 at 9.30 am I will have my turn to visit the Lower Antelope Canyon. I own a Sony alpha 7 III and I'm torn between using my Samyang fe 18mm f2.8 fixed focal length or the Sony fe 24-105 F4. Do you have any recommendations? Even on any machine settings, obviously hoping it's a sunny day. Unfortunately I know that the guides tend to be hasty and I would like not to waste my time, also because I think it is not recommended to change the optics in the canyon.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Antelope Canyon, what lens?
- Thread starter Paolo9331
- Start date
I have had a look and we did the tour in 2012 and did the upper tour with www.antelopecanyon.com. The site still works, but, sadly, as said by others, no specific photography tours anymore. The next day we did the lower canyon, but unfortunately I can't retrieve with which company we booked. I did see that due to flooding only half the canyon was accessible that day.
At the time I was using the Sony A900 and has the 24-70/2.8 attached. Most photos are taken on 24mm, but some of more pretty ones were taken on 70mm. I also did use a tripod as I noticed shutter times up to 2.5 seconds. ISO varied from 200 to 800 and aperture was sometimes even to F11. So, all in all, I guess that your 24-105mm will do well. And writing about it, perhaps you may want to consider (renting) the newly announced 20-70/4 G which sounds as a great compromise for these kind of tours.
I looked at the metadata for my Lower Antelope images from 2014 and it looks like I only used a 16-35 on full frame with almost all images taken at either 16 or 35. It's definitely not a place to be changing lenses frequently so a zoom might be a wise choice since it gives you options. The question is can you live with 24 on the wide end?
Blueshound
Well-known member
I was also in Upper Antelope on a photography tour in 2014. Great experience, but high quality image files are only possible with a tripod and a reasonable amount of time per shooting location. If you're OK with quite high ISO shots and limited perceived depth of field, you can get "memories" with a decent camera and lens, perhaps almost as well off with a 'phone camera with a good low light algorithm.
Looking back at the Exif data on my keeper shots, I used from 16 to 28mm (FF equivalent). So I'd want something such as a 16-35. I wouldn't care about fast apertures, as not enough would appear to be in focus without stopping down.
The literal definition of a slot canyon is one wherein an average adult can touch both sides at the same time. A generalization perhaps, but that will give you an idea of how narrow Antelope is in many spots. And there will be people trying to push past you constantly. And kicking up dust. I personally wouldn't consider lens changes.
I was fortunate to be able to shoot three exposure bracketed frames for each image. After the first spot, I quickly realized that my usual 5 exposure frames were going to take too long, so switched to 3, two stops apart from each other. This allowed me to maximize not only exposure but dynamic range, which is key because of the interior dark shadowing contrasted with the bright sun that can be seen in some of the openings to the sky.
Exposure times ranged from around a half second to over five seconds, at IS0 200.
Other than the use of tripods, the key thing with these photography tours was that the guides (one at each end of a group) would very briefly stop others from pushing past, and getting in the shot.
Below is a link to a Flickr album with a few images:
https://flic.kr/s/aHsmMFET53
Brian
--
Photos: www.flickr.com/photos/blueshound
Looking back at the Exif data on my keeper shots, I used from 16 to 28mm (FF equivalent). So I'd want something such as a 16-35. I wouldn't care about fast apertures, as not enough would appear to be in focus without stopping down.
The literal definition of a slot canyon is one wherein an average adult can touch both sides at the same time. A generalization perhaps, but that will give you an idea of how narrow Antelope is in many spots. And there will be people trying to push past you constantly. And kicking up dust. I personally wouldn't consider lens changes.
I was fortunate to be able to shoot three exposure bracketed frames for each image. After the first spot, I quickly realized that my usual 5 exposure frames were going to take too long, so switched to 3, two stops apart from each other. This allowed me to maximize not only exposure but dynamic range, which is key because of the interior dark shadowing contrasted with the bright sun that can be seen in some of the openings to the sky.
Exposure times ranged from around a half second to over five seconds, at IS0 200.
Other than the use of tripods, the key thing with these photography tours was that the guides (one at each end of a group) would very briefly stop others from pushing past, and getting in the shot.
Below is a link to a Flickr album with a few images:
https://flic.kr/s/aHsmMFET53
Brian
--
Photos: www.flickr.com/photos/blueshound
Last edited:
Lan
Veteran Member
Really depends on what you're trying to capture? Personally I'd go with the 24-105 though, as I tend to find the details more interesting, and the flexibility of the zoom would be useful.
Here are a few of my favourites from my trip to Antelope Canyon in 2011. I can't remember whether it was upper or lower though...
Bashful Horse; Antelope Canyon, USA
Oranutango; Antelope Canyon, USA
Rock/Face; Antelope Canyon, USA
Tears of a Rock; Antelope Canyon, USA
I hope you like them
All of the above were in the 40-50mm range.
Here are a few of my favourites from my trip to Antelope Canyon in 2011. I can't remember whether it was upper or lower though...
Bashful Horse; Antelope Canyon, USA
Oranutango; Antelope Canyon, USA
Rock/Face; Antelope Canyon, USA
Tears of a Rock; Antelope Canyon, USA
I hope you like them
All of the above were in the 40-50mm range.
Last edited:
Ron Outdoors
Senior Member
I was there a few years ago, Upper and Lower. They are different enough to see both. I was using m4/3 at the time. A Panasonic 12-35. So, your 24-105 would be a good choice. A fair number of people do visit, so you might only have a brief moment to get a shot off without people in the picture. Not much time to change lenses, so the zoom might be best.
Ron Outdoors
Senior Member
This is from 2017. I wasn't on the Photo tour, but part of our group somehow got split and stuck behind it. Nice to stop and take my time and view for a couple of minutes.
Oops, this looks like the Upper Antelope. The Lower is steeper and more narrow.
--
www.ronhartman.net
Oops, this looks like the Upper Antelope. The Lower is steeper and more narrow.
--
www.ronhartman.net
Last edited:
I went there in 2014 with a Fuji X-E2 (I think) and had a couple of wideish lenses with me. I think the main thing you might want to consider is a tripod. First of all it gives you some space as hardly anybody would walk in front of a tripod and also because you can set the ISO to a reasonable value. It's not that well lit down there, you know ;-)
21mm full frame equivalent
I also had a 24mm and a 35mm equivalent lens, but found the results a bit meh compared to the super-wide.
35mm full frame equivalent
I would take a photography tour (I didn't but found this Native Indian who took me there) as they have this policy: photographers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! - and everybody has to leave the foreground! It can be a bit full of people down there and with a photography tour at least you don't have to worry about all those people ;-)
And would mount the 18/2.8 and a tripod. Take a punt and see how you go. Lens changes can be a bit tricky as there is dust to make the sun-rays visible.
Have fun!
Deed
Martin Datzinger
Senior Member
Definitely the zoom and a tripod. The prime is worthless in there.
Nice pics ;-)
I would agree. I've been to the upper and to the lower AC. As you want some DOF, you need to close aperture at least a bit. A really wide open lense does not make much sense. Also, as mentioned here, the details are also interesting. Altought I am not a fan of the new 20-70, this would probably be the right lense here. In the OPs case maybe the 24-105 then.
Changing lens is not really an option, as mentioned already. It is really a pity that the photographer tours are not available anymore. So you need to raise ISOs without a tripod, which is even more unfortunate as the light conditions are difficult and you would need dynamic range.
I would agree. I've been to the upper and to the lower AC. As you want some DOF, you need to close aperture at least a bit. A really wide open lense does not make much sense. Also, as mentioned here, the details are also interesting. Altought I am not a fan of the new 20-70, this would probably be the right lense here. In the OPs case maybe the 24-105 then.
Changing lens is not really an option, as mentioned already. It is really a pity that the photographer tours are not available anymore. So you need to raise ISOs without a tripod, which is even more unfortunate as the light conditions are difficult and you would need dynamic range.
Last edited:
Blueshound
Well-known member
Absent the ability to use a tripod, there are a couple of other approaches that should work.
1. Raise the ISO to the point where you can use an appropriate shutter speed for hand holding and enough aperture stop down for reasonable depth of field. Once home use one of the best noise reduction apps, such as Topaz Denoise AI, Topaz Photo AI or DXO.
2. For each scene, shoot a continuous burst using S-AF, using the best hand holding technique that you can manage. Again, use a higher ISO and moderate aperture for just enough DOF. All camera settings need to be on manual, no auto settings. You want to shoot a minimum of 8 frames in burst mode, and up to something like 32 at the top end. Even with good hand holding technique, the small movements will allow for a type of pixel shift, given suitable post processing. (Shaky Human Pixel Shift!).
Once home, you will need to use Photoshop to bring the frames in as layers. Then run Auto align. Then turn visibility on and off, one frame at a time, looking for frames that are obviously more shifted than most, deleting the most shifted ones. Next select all frames in the stack, and convert all to Smart Objects. This can take a while, depending on your file sizes and the speed of your computer. Go make a coffee.
Finally go to Smart Objects, and run the option to average the layers using Median mode. Apply the Median Stack mode (Layer → Smart Objects → Stack Mode → Median).
This will result in one image with substantially reduced noise and good clarity. This is because the image details are static, while the noise is random, and the averaging process removes anything that is not common between the frames.
I've run numerous trials on 2, and it has worked well, using both m43 and Sony FF cameras. If you shoot the burst, you can try either or both approaches (assuming access to Photoshop).
Here's an example in a Flickr album of 8 frames from an A7RIII, taken at ISO 6400, that I averaged as outlined above. No NR reduction was used in the processing. This was uploaded at almost full resolution, so be sure to view it full size in Flickr.
Brian
1. Raise the ISO to the point where you can use an appropriate shutter speed for hand holding and enough aperture stop down for reasonable depth of field. Once home use one of the best noise reduction apps, such as Topaz Denoise AI, Topaz Photo AI or DXO.
2. For each scene, shoot a continuous burst using S-AF, using the best hand holding technique that you can manage. Again, use a higher ISO and moderate aperture for just enough DOF. All camera settings need to be on manual, no auto settings. You want to shoot a minimum of 8 frames in burst mode, and up to something like 32 at the top end. Even with good hand holding technique, the small movements will allow for a type of pixel shift, given suitable post processing. (Shaky Human Pixel Shift!).
Once home, you will need to use Photoshop to bring the frames in as layers. Then run Auto align. Then turn visibility on and off, one frame at a time, looking for frames that are obviously more shifted than most, deleting the most shifted ones. Next select all frames in the stack, and convert all to Smart Objects. This can take a while, depending on your file sizes and the speed of your computer. Go make a coffee.
Finally go to Smart Objects, and run the option to average the layers using Median mode. Apply the Median Stack mode (Layer → Smart Objects → Stack Mode → Median).
This will result in one image with substantially reduced noise and good clarity. This is because the image details are static, while the noise is random, and the averaging process removes anything that is not common between the frames.
I've run numerous trials on 2, and it has worked well, using both m43 and Sony FF cameras. If you shoot the burst, you can try either or both approaches (assuming access to Photoshop).
Here's an example in a Flickr album of 8 frames from an A7RIII, taken at ISO 6400, that I averaged as outlined above. No NR reduction was used in the processing. This was uploaded at almost full resolution, so be sure to view it full size in Flickr.
Brian
UncleVanya
Senior Member
Tripods are no longer allowed. Nor are camera bags. Sadly.
Blueshound
Well-known member
My experience is that it is easier to make Smart Objects than the alternative, which is to manually calculate and set visibility ratios for each image in the stack.
Brian
Just googled and whatched two tutorials about median stack, great technics ;-)
LarryRC
Senior Member
It appears that there is a permissions issue blocking the viewing of your examples.
Blueshound
Well-known member
Thanks for letting me know. Below is a link for the entire Flickr album, called "Shaky Human Pixel Shift".
Hopefully the link will allow anyone here to view the contents of the album. There are several examples of the afore-mentioned technique. Many of them also include the other big "feature", which is the ability to double the resolution of the sensor that took the original burst. I didn't include that step in my earlier description, as I was focused on the noise reduction benefits for a scenario such as Antelope Canyon.
Some of the examples are posted at full resolution, and can be viewed large. One example (Honolulu Skyline) also has a single frame without the NR, for direct comparison. Those two images had exactly the same develop settings, to make the comparison as valid as possible.
Some of the examples are from a Panasonic m43 camera with a 20mp sensor, however the final result is 10513px x 7699px @300ppi, and posted at full resolution.
https://www.flickr.com/gp/blueshound/Zx322w5207
Hope this is of interest, Can someone let me know if the link works?
Brian
--
Photos: www.flickr.com/photos/blueshound
Hopefully the link will allow anyone here to view the contents of the album. There are several examples of the afore-mentioned technique. Many of them also include the other big "feature", which is the ability to double the resolution of the sensor that took the original burst. I didn't include that step in my earlier description, as I was focused on the noise reduction benefits for a scenario such as Antelope Canyon.
Some of the examples are posted at full resolution, and can be viewed large. One example (Honolulu Skyline) also has a single frame without the NR, for direct comparison. Those two images had exactly the same develop settings, to make the comparison as valid as possible.
Some of the examples are from a Panasonic m43 camera with a 20mp sensor, however the final result is 10513px x 7699px @300ppi, and posted at full resolution.
https://www.flickr.com/gp/blueshound/Zx322w5207
Hope this is of interest, Can someone let me know if the link works?
Brian
--
Photos: www.flickr.com/photos/blueshound
Last edited:
Works, great samplesThanks for letting me know. Below is a link for the entire Flickr album, called "Shaky Human Pixel Shift".
Hopefully the link will allow anyone here to view the contents of the album. There are several examples of the afore-mentioned technique. Many of them also include the other big "feature", which is the ability to double the resolution of the sensor that took the original burst. I didn't include that step in my earlier description, as I was focused on the noise reduction benefits for a scenario such as Antelope Canyon.
Some of the examples are posted at full resolution, and can be viewed large. One example (Honolulu Skyline) also has a single frame without the NR, for direct comparison. Those two images had exactly the same develop settings, to make the comparison as valid as possible.
Some of the examples are from a Panasonic m43 camera with a 20mp sensor, however the final result is 10513px x 7699px @300ppi, and posted at full resolution.
https://www.flickr.com/gp/blueshound/Zx322w5207
Hope this is of interest, Can someone let me know if the link works?
Brian
LarryRC
Senior Member
thanks! Nice photos thanks for the examples also. Enjoy LarryWorks, great samplesThanks for letting me know. Below is a link for the entire Flickr album, called "Shaky Human Pixel Shift".
Hopefully the link will allow anyone here to view the contents of the album. There are several examples of the afore-mentioned technique. Many of them also include the other big "feature", which is the ability to double the resolution of the sensor that took the original burst. I didn't include that step in my earlier description, as I was focused on the noise reduction benefits for a scenario such as Antelope Canyon.
Some of the examples are posted at full resolution, and can be viewed large. One example (Honolulu Skyline) also has a single frame without the NR, for direct comparison. Those two images had exactly the same develop settings, to make the comparison as valid as possible.
Some of the examples are from a Panasonic m43 camera with a 20mp sensor, however the final result is 10513px x 7699px @300ppi, and posted at full resolution.
https://www.flickr.com/gp/blueshound/Zx322w5207
Hope this is of interest, Can someone let me know if the link works?
Brian
Craig Gillette
Forum Pro
I used Multi frame noise reduction on a couple of earlier cameras, that would end in a jpg. This method keeps the original files available, too.
A bit of an aside, would there be a difference in results if using electronic vs mechanical shutter? Some places seem better suited to a silent burst vs a rapid fire mech shutter burst.
A bit of an aside, would there be a difference in results if using electronic vs mechanical shutter? Some places seem better suited to a silent burst vs a rapid fire mech shutter burst.
Blueshound
Well-known member
I use silent (electronic) shutter as a default, only switching to mechanical shutter in the presence of light sources that may cause banding, or in the case of using a flash (which I rarely ever do). I agree that, personal preference for silent shutter aside, there are many situations where silent shutter is absolutely better. It doesn't attract the attention of people around you, and there is no chance of shutter shock negatively affecting sharpness. With modern shutters and camera features, vibration from shutter movement may not be much of an issue with single exposures, but may have a small impact on a rapid burst (I have no experience on this, only speculating.)
Most if not all of the images that I have in the Shaky Human Pixel Shift album were from bursts shot using silent shutter. As long as the light isn't extremely low, the bursts go quickly.
Another point that isn't obvious unless you have experience with trying the approach as I described it, is that the files are very resilient for further post processing. The resulting single file isn't necessarily less sharp than the original RAWs, and the resulting output file takes tonal adjustments and sharpening very well.
Anyway, with the conversation on tripods no longer allowed in Antelope Canyon, I see this as a viable alternative if one wants to come away with the potential for high quality results. Best to get used to the shooting part in advance, though. It's important to remember to put all camera settings to manual, including exposure, ISO, white balance etc. Also turn IBIS or lens stabilization off, your selected shutter speed should be high enough to provide a sharp image.
Brian
--
Photos: www.flickr.com/photos/blueshound
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Question
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum