24Peter

Hmmm.... seems like a lot of noise in the shadows @ISO 1600. Am I missing something?

I've said this before and will repeat it now: I really do appreciate all the engineers at all the camera, computer and electronics companies. Their hard work allows me to do incredible things in terms of my photography, computing and beyond. These guys are my unsung heros. Hopefully they get paid well for their efforts and the market for all this stuff will be robust for many years to come so we photogs in particular, and consumers in general, can continue to reap the benefits. That said, this video is a little overstated and perhaps even a little silly at times. If it's meant to celebrate engineering advances and the people who make those advances possible, then great. Beyond that, it might benefit from a little less hyperbole.

Thanks everyone for your kind words and other feedback. It means a lot to me! And thanks again Chris Williams and the other Editors for this great opportunity to share my work on DPReview. Nice to be able to give something back since you guys have helped me so much when I was starting out. Check out some of my latest moon shots on Instagram (@peteralessandria)

Thank you daddyo. I PM'd you earlier. Appreciate the acknowledgment. And I have mentioned to Chris Williams I would enjoy doing a feature for dpreview readers on how I do it! Stay tuned and happy new year :-)

Thanks Chris Williams - Jen Khordi and I are friends. We co-admin a NJ Photographers Facebook group. She and I (and about 1/2 dozen other people) were shooting together that night. We all have similar shots.

Skeptical. Sigma 150-600 on a 70D. Totally and completely as captured in my camera. Why not ask rather than assume? I know you don't know how to do it - but that doesn't mean it can't be done. Look me up next time you are in NYC. I'll show you how it's done. In the meantime, check out my website. Dozens of more "unbelievable" photos. www.peteralessandriaphotography.com

I guess, but for $899 the Sigma 20 1.4 has more to offer. My interest in these types of lens is nighttime (astro particularly Milky Way, and also NYC helicopter flights). The Sigma has acceptable sharpness wide open and is great @ 1.8. It's also AE/AF lens and while I don't use AF for Milky Way, it is vital for my helicopter flights. These are Sigma 20 1.4 examples of both:
Milky Way http://www.peteralessandriaphotography.com/milky_way_2016
Helicopter http://www.peteralessandriaphotography.com/helicopter_nyc_sept_2016 (some of these were done with my 70D+EF 35 F2; rest were 6D+Sigma 20 1.4)

Where can we post our Super Moon pics? Here's one of mine: http://www.peteralessandriaphotography.com/new_york_fall_2016/e2890bbb3

@techjedi - no you need the silly cable. AFAIK its a Sony issue, not a grip manufacturer issue. It is doable. I did this photo shoot with the battery grip on an a6000 plus a Canon 70-200 F4. Manually focused BTW which is much easier with the EVF on a mirrorless: http://www.superstarheadshots.com/blog/anna-new-york-new-york

There are (will be) third party battery grips. Had one for an a6000. Five hours battery life.

Honored to be chosen as one of the 64 Finalists. Amazing images from wonderfully talented photographers. Mine is #14 - https://weather.com/photos/places/news/2016-photo-contest-winners#/6

So here's a question I have been unable to find an answer to: do the Sony-sensored cameras (D810, etc.) lose the ISO-invariance/low-noise-in-pushed-shadows advantage WHEN DOING LONG EXPOSURES? My landscape photos almost always incorporate exposures of 30 seconds or more. I bought an a6000 last year to compare its performance to my Canons (5DII, 6D, 70D) in this regard. Even at the lowest ISO, when the exposure went more than a few seconds, the SONY was almost as noisy in the shadows as my other cameras. Thoughts?

I understand that but as I said I find it too hit or miss and I end up spending more time adjusting Photomerge's masks than if I just mask the layers myself. I stack my images in order (for instance, closest focus point at the top and so on) so it is easier to do it manually.

Thanks Erez for your article. I use this technique for product photography. I have clients that produce micro-precision adjusters and other parts. The entire product must be in sharp focus for their catalogs & other marketing materials. I don't like to use the auto-blend option in Photoshop however. I use the File>Scripts>Load files into stack with the auto align option but then manually mask my layers to find the sharpest points of focus. The Photomerg/auto-blend processing in CS5 is too hit or miss for me.

Marcio - thanks for your reply. Let me ask: would strobes placed under the water "bounce" off the underside of the surface of the water and create a similar but subtler effect? You probably have a lot more knowledge/experience with this but I can't help but wonder if the desired surreal effect could have been obtained without all the wave interference patterns/ highlights caused by placing the lights above the water line.

I don't shoot underwater scenes so am not sure of the answer, but I am wondering if he would have been better off placing all the strobes underwater to avoid the diffraction/ reflections from the surface on the backdrop and model. I find it distracting at best.

That said, I do like the concept and I'm sure the full rez images are breathtaking. And I certainly appreciate the effort to pull off a shoot like this.

Really amazing & inspiring :)

Hmmm... I guess I'm missing something since all this does is completely overexpose the skin. I've tried two different models with the same results. I have to dial down the opacity of the red channel layer to around 25% for it to be even moderately usable. Then it just looks like a Glamour Glow filter. But beyond that, the skin issues are still visible - just lighter. Anyone else notice this?