Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Fri Apr 18, 2014 5:31 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 10:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:06 pm
Posts: 82
Location: Manchester
Went for a walk in the hills near Macclesfield at the weeekend. It was an unusually warm and sunny day for this time of year and the hills were lit up brilliantly. This was actually the first serious workout I'd given my 40D and I was very pleased with some of the results. I was mindful of the advice on here and elsewhere about shooting with a small aperture for an increased DOF on landscapes, and so I tried several shots taken first at f2.8 and then at a higher f number to compare. To be honest, I struggled to see the difference. Does this only come into effect when there is a subject in the foreground. Also, my smaller aperture shots were only taken between f8 and f13, perhaps I should have gone further?

Please can you let me know what you think and how these could have been approved? All comments and critique welcome.

Image
17mm f7.1 1/50sec

Image
17mm f9 1/125sec

Image
17mm f2.8 1/1000sec

Image
21mm f14 1/25sec cropped from larger image

Image
55mm f14 1/15sec exposure and brightness on the sheep adjusted in CS2 as I wanted to show her face. Do you think this makes her out of synch with the light in the rest of the picture, as if she's superimposed?

Image
17mm f5.6 1/100 sec cropped from a larger image. Exposure reduced and vibrancy increased in Lightroom. I really like this one.

Image
17mm f2.8 1/1000sec cropped from larger image, exposure reduced in Lightroom

Image
17mm f4.0 1/500sec

Sorry if this post is too big, is there a house rule on the number of pics in post?

_________________
Canon EOS 40D, Canon Battery Grip BG-E2N, Canon EF-S 17-55mm f2.8 IS USM, Canon EF-S 10-22mm f3.5-4.5 USM, Canon EF 50mm f1.8 II, Canon EF 70-200mm f4L IS USM, Canon EF 100mm f2.8 Macro USM
My Flickr
My website


Last edited by badlyoverdrawnboy on Thu Feb 14, 2008 8:19 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 10:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 1215
Location: London, UK
Hey, you've got some really great pics there!!!

badlyoverdrawnboy wrote:
Sorry if this post is too big, is there a house rule on the number of pics in post?


No set limit on the number of pics you post, but the forum guidelines are that the pics should be no more than 700 pixels on their longest dimension (so that those with smaller monitors don't have to use a horizontal scroll bar).

Once again - great shots!!! :D

Mark


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 11:20 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2005 3:32 pm
Posts: 9952
Location: Queenstown, New Zealand
Hi badlyoverdrawnboy, lovely photos!

The aperture trick is to keep stuff in focus that's close and far. But if most of your subject is far, then you won't need to close down too much. And also be aware that using bigger f-numbers than, say, f8 or f11 will begin to make your photos look slightly less sharp due to the optical effect of diffraction. So only use big f-numbers when you NEED lots in focus! BTW, there'll be a sweetspot for your lens where it's at its sharpest - usually between f5.6 and f8 on most zooms... but again you forget this when you want either lots or not a lot in sharp focus.

PS - as Mark says, could you possibly reduce the width of your biggest pics to 700 pixels or less? Cheers!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 12:42 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 580
Location: Pennsylvania, United States of America
I thought when you use a larger f Number like F18 or w/e that you get more in focus and it made the picture sharper and when you use a small f number like f/2.0 that you get a lot less in focus and nothing is sharp except for whats in focus.. but apparantly when you use a large F number for a large DOF it gets less sharp?

And also those are fantastic photos i love #1,3,5,6,7 pretty much all of them very nice!! :D (maybe a little bit too good :shock: ) :P

_________________
Nikon D80/MB-D80/ ML-L3
AF-S 18-55 f/3.5-5.6, AF 50mm f/1.8D
SB-600
Vivtar 2800
My flickr
~Dan Nelson~

Image
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 8:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:06 pm
Posts: 82
Location: Manchester
Thanks for the comments, I have edited the first post to reduce the size of the large pictures - shame that there seems to be such a difference between 'medium' and 'large' when linking to Flickr.

I'm definitely going to carry on experimenting with aperture and DOF. As you can see, some of the pics above were taken at 2.8 or similar high aperture, and I chose them ahead of similar versions taken at f8, as I was mindful of the sweetspot that Gordon mentioned. I suppose this is because there is nothing in the foreground to focus on. Hopefully with more experience I'll be able to see the difference more clearly.

_________________
Canon EOS 40D, Canon Battery Grip BG-E2N, Canon EF-S 17-55mm f2.8 IS USM, Canon EF-S 10-22mm f3.5-4.5 USM, Canon EF 50mm f1.8 II, Canon EF 70-200mm f4L IS USM, Canon EF 100mm f2.8 Macro USM
My Flickr
My website


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 8:46 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2005 3:32 pm
Posts: 9952
Location: Queenstown, New Zealand
Hi emp93, it's confusing isn't it?!

You're right, a bigger f-number means a bigger depth of field, which means more in focus from near to far.

But as that hole in the lens gets smaller, another optical effect comes into play called diffraction and this can cause a slight softening in your entire image. So you could shoot at, say, f22, and have everything in focus, but the entire image wouldn't be as crisp as the in-focus areas of, say, an f8 shot.

Diffraction only really bothers the demanding photographers, but it's worth knowing about. Try a test. Take two photos of the sme scene, one at f8 and one at f22 and look closely. The f22 one may have a bigger DOF, but the f8 one will almost certainly look punchier.

And that sweetspot varies with different lenses, so it's worth testing to find the optimum setting if you intend to make big prints.

And for non-DSLRs it's generally at one of their smallest f-numbers, often with the aperture wide open.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 11:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:24 pm
Posts: 646
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Very nice pictures.

I like the sheep-picture the best.

I guess a flash might help to luminate the sheep's face. But that might also scare her.

But in this particular case, i dont think it matter that the face is underexposed. The picture is interesting as it is.

_________________
Canon EOS 40D - Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM - Canon EF 50/1,8 II - Canon EF 70-200/4L IS USM - Speedlite 430 EX - Lowerpro Nova 4 AW
My Flickr


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 11:12 am 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 4:30 pm
Posts: 9784
Location: UK
Gordon Laing wrote:
...But as that hole in the lens gets smaller, another optical effect comes into play called diffraction and this can cause a slight softening in your entire image. So you could shoot at, say, f22, and have everything in focus, but the entire image wouldn't be as crisp as the in-focus areas of, say, an f8 shot...

To illustrate the point here are a couple of 100% crops taken within moments of each other.
    Image Image
The effect is subtle but the left hand image, taken at f/5.6, has slightly crisper detail and better contrast than the right hand image taken at f/16.

Bob.

_________________
OM-D E-M1 + ED 12-40mm f/2.8, H-F007014E, M.ZUIKO DIGITAL 45mm 1:1.8, M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 75mm 1:1.8, L-RS014150E.
OM-D E-M5, H-PS14042E, Gitzo GT1541T, Arca-Swiss Z1 DP ball-head.
Astrophotography: TEC 140 'scope, FLI ML16803 camera, ASA DDM60 Pro mount.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 10:08 pm
Posts: 41
Nice pics!!

Just a note to say I'm in Nottingham which is less than an Hour away form the Peak Park. Who needs jet plane's and exotic destinations.

I envy your work, brilliant.

Robinhood


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 20, 2008 3:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 7:03 am
Posts: 1898
Location: Southern California
Real nice, liked the sheep. She looks like she just answered the door in her house coat, and was surprised to see you sanding there...I like it when you post allot of photos together, like that, long as they are in the framework of Gordons rules. Pretty neat stuff, badlyoverdrawnboy.

You have paradise in your own back yard, it would seem..thanks for putting this series up, I enjoyed them.


patti

_________________
canon 7D, Mark iii 5D, ef 70-300 f/4-5.6, ef 28-135mm canon 100-400mm L IS 4.5, and a little 24-70 L f/2.8...
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 20, 2008 4:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 4:14 am
Posts: 421
Location: Idaho (US)
I like all the photos. I think you did very well. Glad to see that you putting the 40D to good work.
I love #1 #3 #4 #7 best of them all.

Nick

_________________
Canon Rebel XTI, Tamron 70-300mm w/180-300 macro AF, Canon 18-55mm,Canon 50mm F1.8, Sandisk ExtremeIII 2gig.
Nikon N2020.My Flickr


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 20, 2008 10:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 416
Location: Lyon, France
Hey, great shots

i like number 1, with the trees shooting their branches in the sky on a steep hill. must have been a nice walk!
What's that circle on picture six? looks like a giant ring...

Quentin

_________________
Quentin

Hey, I told you I was going to get my pro account someday!

My blog (in French!)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 20, 2008 7:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 8:14 pm
Posts: 217
Lovely and varied selection of shots there, the sheep one just made me chuckle as did Patti's comment.

I love to see different part of our beautiful country laid out like that. We may just be a tiny little island but we are huge in beauty. 8) 8) 8)

Cheers Ormina

_________________
Canon G9 , Canon 400D, Canon 40D


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2012 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.
/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs

Webdesign by Alphabase IT
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group