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.
17mm f7.1 1/50sec
17mm f9 1/125sec
17mm f2.8 1/1000sec
21mm f14 1/25sec cropped from larger 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?
17mm f5.6 1/100 sec cropped from a larger image. Exposure reduced and vibrancy increased in Lightroom. I really like this one.
17mm f2.8 1/1000sec cropped from larger image, exposure reduced in Lightroom
17mm f4.0 1/500sec
Sorry if this post is too big, is there a house rule on the number of pics in post?