Olympus E-5
50-200mm @ 200FL
1/125 sec @ f10
tripod
-0.7ev
ISO 100
cropped to approx 80% of FF
Large view
All critique and comments appreciated
Comments
4 comments
Comment posted by John Clulow on June 10, 2013 at 11:10 AM
Not sure what the criteria among folks who routinely photograph dragon flys, but I like the strong diagonal in this image and the excellent sharpness thoughout most of it. Seems to me like an excellent compromise, although it might have been possible to go higher in ISO to allow an f/22 or even f/32.
The brightness of the specular highlights on the back wing that is soft make that area needlessly prominent, and I think you might try doing a burn to reduce brightness there that will make it much less of a distraction from the exquisite sharpness in the body and other wing and legs. And a little less of a burn on the specular highlights in the front wing too.
Registered on November 1, 2012, 155 Posts, 1079 Comments
Comment posted by Charlie Baugh on June 10, 2013 at 12:20 PM
John I did some burning and levels adjustments and could possibly get a bit more reduction with retaining naturalness. As to ISO I wish I had tried higher, especially, as you say, for higher numerical f stop. I'll take another look.
Registered on April 18, 2011, 329 Posts, 1985 Comments
Comment posted by scott lanz on June 10, 2013 at 9:20 PM
Looks good to me, Charlie. I have no problem with the f10; the skimmer's head/body has good detail, and the bg is excellent. I like the pose.
Registered on November 14, 2003, 840 Posts, 12902 Comments
Comment posted by Wayne Jones on July 2, 2013 at 11:25 PM
Hi Charlie,
Nice comp and excellent detail. (and even f/22 would not get that much more DOF at this magnification considering the "huge" (relatively speaking) wingspan of a DF)
ID NOTE: Just did a quick scan of the DF images since I posted one tonight, and I noticed your title does not match the critter. This is an eight spot skimmer. (for comparison, Roger Kirchen posted a four spot skimmer just about 24 hours prior to your post. But common names are often confusing, since local versions can vary from one area to another, and they can change over time. That's especially true with critters like this, where there are no "rules" about which spots to count.)
Registered on April 18, 2007, 953 Posts, 6435 Comments
Comments
4 commentsThe brightness of the specular highlights on the back wing that is soft make that area needlessly prominent, and I think you might try doing a burn to reduce brightness there that will make it much less of a distraction from the exquisite sharpness in the body and other wing and legs. And a little less of a burn on the specular highlights in the front wing too.
Nice comp and excellent detail. (and even f/22 would not get that much more DOF at this magnification considering the "huge" (relatively speaking) wingspan of a DF)
ID NOTE: Just did a quick scan of the DF images since I posted one tonight, and I noticed your title does not match the critter. This is an eight spot skimmer. (for comparison, Roger Kirchen posted a four spot skimmer just about 24 hours prior to your post. But common names are often confusing, since local versions can vary from one area to another, and they can change over time. That's especially true with critters like this, where there are no "rules" about which spots to count.)