Dropped my T1 + Pictures

[Frank B]

Well today I dropped my T1 from shirt pocket height to a cement sidewalk. I have to give credit to Sony. The camera works fine and there are no dents. If you look very carefully at the corner where it hit you can see two little rough spots. I'm very impressed with the quality of its construction.


Here are two photos from Groton Long Point, CT on Long Island Sound, which I took after the drop.

[img]http://www.fototime.com/{771847A3-2B8B-4212-A53F-5683A9FBC653}/picture.JPG[/img]



[img]http://www.fototime.com/{F916183D-75E4-46D1-BE03-D79AD8D9275B}/picture.JPG[/img]

[SharpShooter10D]

Hi Frank,

I almost didn't want to read this post after reading the title I was afraid to find out what the outcome was from dropping your camera.
I'm glad I did though because I would have missed out on your awesome pics.


If I may be so bold what was your settings on the first photo the depth of field is awesome it's so clear.

I have been working on using smaller arpetures settings and longer shutter settings as well.

Judging by the shadows on the buildings in the back ground this must be arouns 3 Oclock but I could be way off.


Great shots and I'm happy your camera survived I know your heart must have ended up in your throat when it hit the ground.

Take Care

[Frank B]

Thanks for your comments SharpShooter. I was very fortunate the camera survived intact.

I used 1/200 at f5.6. The focal length was 6.7mm (38)mm equivalent). The Sony T1 is a small pocket camera with a very large multiple of 5.57. The result is tremendous depth of field. With a 35mm full frame I would need to use f32 to get the same depth of field as f5.6. With my 10D the equivalent would be about f22 (at 24mm).

By the way there are some DOF calculators which allow you to use the 35mm multiplier at:

http://www.outsight.com/hyperfocal.html

Your guess of the time is nor far off. it was 4:15.

[Ballen Photo]

Frank, I know I asked for a review of your thoughts
on the T1, but really, you didn't have to go this far to
test it's ruggedness. ;-)
Looks like it's still shooting well also. I wonder if you
took it apart for a look, if it might just say "Timex"
inside somewhere. I'm glad to hear it survived.
........Bruce

[SharpShooter10D]

Thankyou Frank for all the information. I have a 10D and I use the Canon ZOOM EF 24-70mm 1:2.8L for almost everything. I have had alot of success with Macro type shots since I started using smaller Aperturess and longer Shutter speeds.
Most of them are comming out clear like yout first photo.

When it comes to tack sharp photos and depth of filed like the first photo you have shot that's another matter all together.

I know it's not the equipment it's my lack of experience, my dream is to pull off a photo like your first one with my 10D and thelens mentioned.

I went out yesterday it was cl;oudy but very bright sunlight and tried to take a landscap shot of the trees off in the distance with the big billowy clouds behind them.

I used as many aperture and shutter speed combos as I could and just could not get a tack sharp image like your first photo.

The sky and clouds came out awesome but the trees when you viewd the photo at full size were blurred. This is using a tripod as well and setting the auto timer so I wouldn't touch the camera and maybe cause some shake.

The trees were about 30 yards away if not more and the time of day was about 2 oclock so the sun was shinning bright so light wasn't a factor.

I realize that the Digital SLR's have a tendency to shoot a tad soft but I have achived tack sharp images with subjects that are close, so I would think it would be possible at greater distances as well.

My mind says......Bright light conditions smaller aperture and faster shutter speeds but maybe I'm way off.

I know that some lenses seem to have what I have heard called a sweet spot or a focal length it shoots best at. I don't know this for fact just read it somewhere.

I tried shooting at 24mm and 70mm and in both cases the sky and clouds came out great but thetrees were fuzzy when the photo was viewed at full size.

Well I will just keep trying I'm sure I will figure it out eventually.

Again great phots you have taken I hope to achieve photos like this one day.

Oh I almost forgot.... When I went to the sight you posted for Depth Of Field settings I did a search and came across another sight that has two free software programs for creating and prininting out DOP Charts.

I don't know how good they are havent installed them yet but I thought if they were good prgrams maybe they might be useful.


DOP Depth Of Field Software....FREE
Have a great day.

[SharpShooter10D]

Hi Frank,

Since learning about HyperFocal length it has made me discover something I should have thought of long ago.


I forgot about the focus scale that is on most lenses I never really understood how to properly use them.


This isn't my lense it's just a picture I found to show what I'm talking about.





Tody I am going to give landscape shooting another try if weather permits me. I'll see about playing with the INIFINITY mark I knew what is was for but never really understood how to use it properly.

Maybe today I will achieve a photo like yours if I do I will post it.


Thanks again for your great insight and information.

[Frank B]

I am puzzled as to why you had trouble getting sufficient DOF for the shot you describe. At 24-mm you would not require that small of an aperture.

Have you looked carefully at the branches in the trees to see if they are sharp? The leaves (if there are any at this time of season where you are) often look a little soft even when the photo is tack sharp.

You might also want to try ADEP Mode. If you can get a focus point to light on the nearest object and on the furthest it will set the aperture needed (I believe using hyper-focal length for focus) to give you sufficient DOF. When it works right it is useful. but it does not always pick objects at the required distances.

I tried the link. I use an Apple so the software won't work on my computer. Thanks for the link though.

Good luck on your shooting today.

[SharpShooter10D]

Hi Frank I gave the depth of field shot a try yesterday and as long as I keep the image small it appears sharp but if viewed at 100% the trees come out blurry.

In all fairness I did have two things going against me.... 1. I was hand holding the camera and 2. I was shooting through the window of the diner at the golf course.


The phots have been enhanced a tad in photoshop because the trees were to dark but that was my fault because of improper settings.


I didn't shoot this shot for it to be a great shot I just wanted to see if I could get sharp picture throughout the depth of field.






The seetings were.

Shutter 1/90
Aperture F4
Focal 40mm
ISO 100

Canon 10D
Canon EF Zoom 24-70mm 1:2.8 L

Same settings except the Aperture was 5.6.



I may not have achieved as clear or colorful an image as yours but at least I'm trying.


Next time I will take my tripod and shoot the shot outdoors like I should
have. I think I am getting the idea of what to do now at least as far as settings go.


I thank you so much for your insight and that page to the HyperFocal info...invaluable!

[Frank B]

SharpShooter,

I like your shots. Hope those trees are not on the fairways!

I don't think the handholding should have been a problem (although with a tripod they might be a bit sharper), but I think it is hard to judge as they were taken through a window. At 1/90 64mm equivalent you should be able to handhold. At f4/5.6 the the DOF would be about 25/35 feet to infinity at the hyperfocal distance. I can't judge the DOF, but remember that although all will be sharp if within DOF all will not necessarily be equally sharp.

[SharpShooter10D]

Hi Frank,


I'm glad you liked my pictures with your advice I have managed to do alot better then I have in the passed.
I went onto the site called Luminus Land Scape and read the review on my lens the Canon EF Zoom 24-70mm 1:2.8L USM and got a little boost of confidence again.

I thought it was just my lack of experience causeing the fuzzyness in my photos but appaerntly it's not. The fellows doing the review used a Canon
1Ds mated with the lens and when the images were viewed at 100%
there photos where fuzzy too.

So I guess if you want to print out what appears to be tack sharp images you don't want to print anything at 100%.


Although with closeup subjects I have captured tach sharp images so I know it is possible. Maybe I am wrong but this lens seems to like all the light it can get to take sharp images.


In any case I'm having fun and that's what is importnat.
I have visited your Photo Album on PhotoNet and really enjoyed what I saw. I have a account there as well but I don't have anything as impressing as your shots.


Maybe in times.



Have a great day.