No, can't be, but what is it? You've got me tossed, Bruce! If this is a photo taken in a mirror with you behind the viewfinder, then it can't be. Your eye is blocked by the mirror during the shot for a start.
And it doesn't seem your "pupil" is the iris diaphragm, unless you've doctored your EXIF, as that indicates you took the image at f/4.5 i.e. barely stopped-down in a f/2.8 lens. If that were an iris diaphragm, I reckon it would be one stopped down to f/16 or f/22.
Glad my post has created some interest. No ps work . I was wondering if the eye could some how reflect back off the camera mirror. Looked like a pupil to me.. You blokes are probably a lot better with the technical side of things as I am still basically a learner. Also my ps work is not really great.
You're half-right, Bruce. During exposure, in an SLR like yours, the viewfinder is looking into the mirror, which is horizontal, facing up into it. So you could see your own eye in the viewfinder but there's little light. Just tried it - blackness.
However, the sensor is then facing the subject with only the taking lens in between, and the eye/pentaprism/mirror are removed from that light path, so your eye couldn't appear in the shot via the viewfinder. Hence the "blackout" during exposure with almost all SLRs.
Some Canons have had a half-silvered mirror which doesn't move, but that's another story.
Reflections off multiple lens surfaces. The centre is dark because the "subject" (the mirror) is darker than the environment that is reflected off the curves to the side of each lens.
This will be testable if you have a few small bright coloured lights at various angles from close to the centre to the edge of the camera image. They should be visible as discrete dots.
No, can't be, but what is it? You've got me tossed, Bruce! If this is a photo taken in a mirror with you behind the viewfinder, then it can't be. Your eye is blocked by the mirror during the shot for a start.
And it doesn't seem your "pupil" is the iris diaphragm, unless you've doctored your EXIF, as that indicates you took the image at f/4.5 i.e. barely stopped-down in a f/2.8 lens. If that were an iris diaphragm, I reckon it would be one stopped down to f/16 or f/22.
Let's see who else hazards an opinion!
Glad my post has created some interest. No ps work . I was wondering if the eye could some how reflect back off the camera mirror. Looked like a pupil to me.. You blokes are probably a lot better with the technical side of things as I am still basically a learner. Also my ps work is not really great.
You're half-right, Bruce. During exposure, in an SLR like yours, the viewfinder is looking into the mirror, which is horizontal, facing up into it. So you could see your own eye in the viewfinder but there's little light. Just tried it - blackness.
However, the sensor is then facing the subject with only the taking lens in between, and the eye/pentaprism/mirror are removed from that light path, so your eye couldn't appear in the shot via the viewfinder. Hence the "blackout" during exposure with almost all SLRs.
Some Canons have had a half-silvered mirror which doesn't move, but that's another story.
BTW we're all learners, Bruce. Or if not, that's even worse!
Reflections off multiple lens surfaces. The centre is dark because the "subject" (the mirror) is darker than the environment that is reflected off the curves to the side of each lens.
This will be testable if you have a few small bright coloured lights at various angles from close to the centre to the edge of the camera image. They should be visible as discrete dots.
Thanks for taking the time to reply. I am learning something from this shot.