A little advice please?

S

stevebuk

Messages
920
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all,
I'm trying to get my head around landscape and have had a play with the things I've learnt from you guys on here. Tonight I shot this but it looks very soft to me. I'm thinking this is a mixture of hand holding and slow shutter speed. I thought 1/6th of a second with VR on might be okay. I guess not... How fast do I need with VR at 17mm? This was taken f/11, 1/6th, ISO100. In hindsight I probably should have bumped the ISO to increase shutter speed. Would I be correct that ideally I'd be looking for an aperture around f/22 for a sharpen result and obviously a faster shutter? Any advice on a better settings combo would be great. I tried to focus about a third into the scene, is it possible somehow to interrogate the exif to see how far into the scene the focus is?

Last question! Is 17mm too wide as it is my max wide angle? Would maybe 20mm be sharper? (17-50 Tamron VC lens)

4627839356_4c7a6a06d8.jpg


100% with Exif is available here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/stevebabb/4627839356/sizes/o/

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks
Steve
 
The focal point is very close on that shot (the pink flowers at the bottom). Those are fairly sharp, this might be the reason the rest looks soft. You should be looking at a smaller aperture if you want a constant sharpness throughout, it would be a good idea to use a tripod or a higher ISO (500 is a good value on most cameras).
 
Thanks for the reply. I've had a look at the flowers and indeed they are sharp. I'm not sure why though as I am sure I didn't focus that low in the scene, the focus point was much higher.

Regards,
Steve
 
Hi Steve, the Landscape boys might be able to provide more precise guidance but my opinion for what it is worth is - The general composition is good, a little too much sky perhaps as the horizon is a little low, my guess would be half the sky and bring the post into the objective foreground. The gate post and foreground flowers are fine (it is a TP pic so of fairly low definition). I would guess that no matter how deep the DOF is, a field of rape is always going to look soft unless it is a foreground subject. Maybe a crop to remove the curved gate top as it is not a part of the picture so a bit of a distraction.
 
stevebuk said:
Thanks for the reply. I've had a look at the flowers and indeed they are sharp. I'm not sure why though as I am sure I didn't focus that low in the scene, the focus point was much higher.

Regards,
Steve
Click to expand...

You might also find that the crops were swaying, maybe just slightly and not perceptibly to you, but are now visible on the camera. In which case you would need to increase your shutter speed to compensate for this.
 
i'm new at landscapes so advice is limited but....
the best thing I did was get a solid tripod. enables you to check, focus, compose, check and finally release with a self-timer or remote shutter release so cutting out camera shake
dont know the 50D lens but if you are at 17mm that's 24mm on 35 format and is ok for landscapes. I would buy.....

cokin or equivalent wide-angle filter holder [only holds 1 filter]
an adapter to suit your filter size
cokin soft grad ND 2-stop
this will help pull down the sky which looks over-exposed in your image
 
You're certainly pushing the shutter speed there, but it looks like you got away with that.

I think the problem there is focusing distance. It's very critical at close range but at f/11 and 17mm a hyperfocal distance setting of 1.36m (from the front of the lens) would get everything sharp from 0.68m which, guessing, might have been okay? The 'third in' rule is very rough, and what's a third of infinity anyway?

If not, then f/16 would do it, by bumping up the ISO. That's really the highest f/number to use on a crop camera before diffraction ruins sharpness.

It's a nice shot though. To get a perfect result, you should really use a tripod as you'll not get away with 1/6sec hand held every time, even with VC. That scene looks like a perfect candidate for a a grad, or a bit of HDR - it would have lifted the foregound and held more colour in the sky. HDR would push your shutter speed even further down though.

I guess you need to bone up on the whole depth of field thing. This is a good place to start, and the on-line DoF calculator is excellent www.dofmaster.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top