Author | Thread |
|
07/04/2006 04:58:36 PM · #1 |
I took this terrible image today along with about 50 other of Land Scapes that ALL stunk...
I was wondering how to take this shot and make it sharp all the way through or look good in some way. I tried f11 1/200 sec. ISO 320 (focal point:the statue in the fountain) but almost no other settings got me a good shot.
I know the lens can take a sharp shot but my trees and all other detail, taken every which way I could looked like total crapola. At 12mm complete garbage...better at 24mm but nothing I'd post with pride.
Other images taken with the lens (12-24mm f4 Nikon)

Message edited by author 2006-07-04 17:02:08. |
|
|
07/04/2006 05:00:34 PM · #2 |
|
|
07/04/2006 05:02:24 PM · #3 |
f 11 ...but it looked terrible from f4 - f22.
No distant greenery looked sharp unless it was close up
Message edited by author 2006-07-04 17:04:13. |
|
|
07/04/2006 05:04:48 PM · #4 |
|
|
07/04/2006 05:05:55 PM · #5 |
At that aperture on a wide angle focal length everything should be in focus unless...
You focused at infinity. Doing this will strip the foreground of sharpness.
Focusing about 1/3 of the way into the scene (this varies with aperture) and shooting at f16/f22 will get you everything in focus.
What I see in the first shot is tilted horizon and too much empty space in the foreground (grass). Zooming in slightly I think may help. |
|
|
07/05/2006 08:12:08 AM · #6 |
thanks for the advice...and if anyone else would like to chime in on how exactly to take that first shot of Bethesda Fountain with a 12-24mm or any wa lens please do...
The lens...or my skills have me a bit worried on the landscape, ability side....close up, things seem to be fine.
Message edited by author 2006-07-05 08:15:38. |
|
|
07/05/2006 08:31:43 AM · #7 |
Steve,
If you get no further responses you may want to PM Bear_Music and point him to your image. He has a current learning thread going for landscape photography.
Colette |
|
|
07/05/2006 08:38:36 AM · #8 |
Hi Steve! The focus comments are right on. I left you some other suggestions on the image.
|
|
|
07/05/2006 10:17:22 AM · #9 |
Neil-Got your comments. Thanks
Collette-I'm more of a loner when it comes to this stuff but I will without question read throught that thread for info.
f8 1/125 sec.
It seems like I do better when I focus up front than when I attempt to focus in the middle or back.
I need to hit a museum and see what this lens can deliver in a wide open indoor space.
one more 1/60 sec at f14
Message edited by author 2006-07-05 10:29:12. |
|
|
07/05/2006 10:28:06 AM · #10 |
Completely off topic here, but i've just had a look through your portfolio Pawdrix and i'd like to say your street shots are fantastic. Really inspiring to me. Great work.
|
|
|
07/05/2006 10:33:45 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by Kerm: Completely off topic here, but i've just had a look through your portfolio Pawdrix and i'd like to say your street shots are fantastic. Really inspiring to me. Great work. |
Ben that's always music to my ears. Cheers!
I'll be in London around the 19-23rd of July and I'm looking to set up a mini gtg. If you're around the area feel free to PM me. I hear that London has a lot of streets, let's give it a whirl ... ;P |
|
|
07/05/2006 12:42:04 PM · #12 |
A couple of general observations:
1. DOF is basically 1/3 in front of, and 2/3 behind, the point of focus. So when shooting a landscape, you basically need to focus on the mid-foreground area and stop down however much you need to to attain infinity focus. If you focus on infinity, you are seriously impairing your ability to have foreground sharpness.
2. With extreme wide-angle lenses, DOF should not be a problem; you can focus very close and still have infinity in focus. Once you get past a certain distance, that's effectively infinity. The longer the lens, the more critical this becomes.
Examples:
A. Canon 20D, 10mm lens, focused at 3 feet, f/8.0, DOF extends from 1.26 feet to infinity. INFINITY FOCUS IS NOT A PROBLEM AT 10MM
B. Canon 20D, 22mm lens, focused at 3 feet, f/8.0, DOF extends from 2.34 feet to 4.17 feet. INFINITY FOCUS IS MORE DIFFICULT AT 22MM
C. Canon 20D, 22mm lens, focused at 12 feet, f/8.0, DOF extends from 5.6 feet to infinity. INFINITY FOCUS ATTAINED BY MOVING FOCAL POINT 9 FEET FURTHER INTO IMAGE. 4 feet of near-subject sharpness, more or less, have been sacrificed
D. Canon 20D, 22mm lens, focused at 6 feet, f/16.0, DOF extends from 2.81 feet to infinity. NOTE THAT BY STOPPING DOWN WE CAN ATTAIN INFINITY FOCUS WITH GREATER DOF, BUT IT'S STILL LESS DOF THAN WE HAVE AT 10MM.
Canon's 10-22mm lens begins to have diffraction issues at f/16 at the 22mm end, so stopping down any further doesn't really help perceived DOF, as it gets softer looking. At the 10mm end, we can only stop down to f/11, and f/8 is better. These are very tiny apertures, diffraction becomes a real problem.
3. Working with extreme wide angle, you will NEVER be satisfied with how sharp the image looks on the computer screen. It will actually print sharper than you can view it by a significant amount. If you take a properly-sharpened, extreme WA image and zoom into it on the screen, it actually looks sharper the more you blow it up. Images shot with these extreme WA lenses of landscapes with significant detail NEVER look sharp at 640 pixels. You can emulate sharpness to some degree by oversharpening the 640-pixel image, but there's a harshness that comes with that and it isn't very pleasing.
The reason this is happening is that the details themselves are actually smaller than the screen can adequately resolve, whereas printers have much higher resolving power than computer screens.
*********
In any case, when I'm working with 10mm focal length and shooting "normal" landscapes, I don't ever use autofocus: I set the focus switch on manual and, choose Av mode or full manual mode, set the aperture at f/8 and the focus at 4 or 5 feet, and just fire away. I only will actually focus to subject if I am doing a WA closeup, where I am more concerned with excellent foreground detail and DOF than I am with infinity focus.
R.
|
|
|
07/05/2006 02:43:26 PM · #13 |
Robert-Thanks for the detailed info. I just looked at some images that I took last night and I think I'm a lot closer to what I need to do. Now I just have to hit Central Park and nail down some postcard type of compositions. I have an idea tonight getting a small lake at 59th street with The Plaza in the bg. That'll be the best testing ground for me technically...
I assume you focused on the bouey(sp?)in this one?
This one has a lot of detail that I can get my head around. What was your focal point here? |
|
|
07/05/2006 02:59:07 PM · #14 |
On the first one, I focused first on the buoy, then on the geese, then pulled focus back halfway between. It was shot at 75mm with the Tamron, and this is a fairly substantial crop out of the original.
The other shot was made with the Coolpix 5700 at about half zoom, I'm guessing maybe 150mm equivalent. I never used manual focusing on that camera, it was a pain in the butt, and anyway the DOF on that small-sensor camera was outrageously deep, so it's a poor comparison. PLus, the appearance of sharpness is very much enhanced by the extremely strong raking light, which lends a crispness to the foreground details.
In any case, both these examples are in the moderate telephoto range when you consider the crop on the orange one...
This one was shot with the 10-22mm at about 12mm or so. The focus was on the reflected clouds about 1/3 up from the bottom of the frame. The full-size image is completely sharp throughout.
This one was shot at 14mm, and is a better analogue to your shots perhaps. I stopped down to f/16 (as far as I care to stop down with that lens) and focused on the transom (back end) of the foreground boat. It also is sharp throughout.
This one is at 10mm, f/11, focus is on the bottom of the near right post, it is likewise sharp throughout.
Hope this helps,
Robt.
Message edited by author 2006-07-05 15:00:36.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/16/2025 07:31:56 AM EDT.