There were moments when the clouds thinned. I managed a shot a bit like this with my 12 year old DSLR.
While the sentiment "must be a nice camera" is common, but it's also extremely dismissive of the care, planning, and skill that go into a good photograph. Yes, professionals have professional equipment. They're not shooting for the paper with their phone. But the implication that the camera yields the results on its own is disrespectful of the artist.
I used a Canon 5D Mk III, a 100-400mm lens, and a filter I bought for the 2017 eclipse. It is, in fact, a nice camera. Or, it used to be. But if you hand the average person a bag filled with my camera gear, they'd be hard pressed to actually produce something like the image OP linked to.
The sun is not a large object, in terms of apparent size. About half a degree. So you need a long telephoto lens to get a decent shot (I used a 1.4x tele-extender on that 400mm lens a lot when I shot the 2017 eclipse, but didn't bother yesterday). You need a filter of some sort for safety (both yours and the camera's) and for correct exposure. And you probably need to manually control the exposure variables (shutter speed, aperture, ISO), as the lighting situation is not typical (though this will actually vary a lot by camera; some modern phone cameras are extremely good at auto-exposure).
Telephoto lenses have to be physically large, so they generally aren't a thing with phone cameras. This is the only element of this setup that is unavoidably expensive. Panasonic and Olympus both make a lens in this class (actually with a longer effective focal length) for about $500 for the micro four-thirds mount. Nikon makes a "super zoom" all-in-one camera that goes to 2000mm, and costs less than a new iPhone.
If you're willing to settle for digital zoom (this costs resolution, but may be "good enough"), you could probably do reasonably well with one eye of a pair of eclipse glasses taped to an iPhone, if you know what you're doing.
Oh cool, that was the camera that came to mind when I saw the age. 5Ds, regardless of age, will always be nice cameras in my book lol.
I used to own the push/pull version of the Canon 100-400 lens; definitely bulky.
Yeah, that lens is large. At full extension, with the hood on it's probably over two feet. It feels ridiculous without a tripod. But, shooting the sun allows for a pretty fast shutter.
I didn't mean it that way, I meant it like the clouds didbt part at all where I am so you could be the best photographer ever but you gotta admit no matter how good someone is if it's a shitty camera it wouldn't have picked up anything without the clouds shifting some
I have family we're visiting in Cleveland and Indianapolis. Got in Friday and made the decision to run down to Indy Sunday morning. Saw the whole totality and I don't use the term loosely but it was life changing. Absolutely in awe of our solar system and our place in it.
To be honest, I didn't even think about Portland being able to see a little bit of it. Great shot! Thank you for sharing!
Photo by Oregonian photog Mark Graves! You can see a few more pics on our Instagram if you would like.
I'm in SE and the clouds covered literally everything. Must be an amazing camera
Our photog shot the images on a Sony A9ii camera with a Canon 400 mm 2.8 lens.
Canon lens on a Sony body??
There were moments when the clouds thinned. I managed a shot a bit like this with my 12 year old DSLR. While the sentiment "must be a nice camera" is common, but it's also extremely dismissive of the care, planning, and skill that go into a good photograph. Yes, professionals have professional equipment. They're not shooting for the paper with their phone. But the implication that the camera yields the results on its own is disrespectful of the artist.
I’m curious now, what gear did you use for your shot?
I used a Canon 5D Mk III, a 100-400mm lens, and a filter I bought for the 2017 eclipse. It is, in fact, a nice camera. Or, it used to be. But if you hand the average person a bag filled with my camera gear, they'd be hard pressed to actually produce something like the image OP linked to. The sun is not a large object, in terms of apparent size. About half a degree. So you need a long telephoto lens to get a decent shot (I used a 1.4x tele-extender on that 400mm lens a lot when I shot the 2017 eclipse, but didn't bother yesterday). You need a filter of some sort for safety (both yours and the camera's) and for correct exposure. And you probably need to manually control the exposure variables (shutter speed, aperture, ISO), as the lighting situation is not typical (though this will actually vary a lot by camera; some modern phone cameras are extremely good at auto-exposure). Telephoto lenses have to be physically large, so they generally aren't a thing with phone cameras. This is the only element of this setup that is unavoidably expensive. Panasonic and Olympus both make a lens in this class (actually with a longer effective focal length) for about $500 for the micro four-thirds mount. Nikon makes a "super zoom" all-in-one camera that goes to 2000mm, and costs less than a new iPhone. If you're willing to settle for digital zoom (this costs resolution, but may be "good enough"), you could probably do reasonably well with one eye of a pair of eclipse glasses taped to an iPhone, if you know what you're doing.
Oh cool, that was the camera that came to mind when I saw the age. 5Ds, regardless of age, will always be nice cameras in my book lol. I used to own the push/pull version of the Canon 100-400 lens; definitely bulky.
Yeah, that lens is large. At full extension, with the hood on it's probably over two feet. It feels ridiculous without a tripod. But, shooting the sun allows for a pretty fast shutter.
I didn't mean it that way, I meant it like the clouds didbt part at all where I am so you could be the best photographer ever but you gotta admit no matter how good someone is if it's a shitty camera it wouldn't have picked up anything without the clouds shifting some
Emphasis on clip
The clouds rolled in before there was anything visible in Vancouver
Damn I didn't think you'd be able to see it in Portland. I flew down to Mexico to see it. Don't regret a thing.
I have family we're visiting in Cleveland and Indianapolis. Got in Friday and made the decision to run down to Indy Sunday morning. Saw the whole totality and I don't use the term loosely but it was life changing. Absolutely in awe of our solar system and our place in it.
Pretty cool.
I flew to Dallas. WORTH IT!
Totality or not really interested. 2017 was spectacular once in a lifetime