This is a very peaceful place to go. Sometimes I get a decent shot. I know this is dark, but, it was that way. I wanted to capture the mood of an early morning trip down the river. There is some diffraction due to the f-stop I think. I know better now. (D200, 0.3s f29, iso400)
f29 is a bit harsh. Most lenses will be at their best in the f8-f11 range. Sometimes you can stretch it up to f16 if you really need the depth of field. This was always the case with film too - we just could not ever see the detail that was getting soft since the images were so small. And, of course, Ansel used to shoot at f64 and even beyond, but that was completely different since he was using large format and the lenses and film react differently. You will also get more detail and better color at a lower ISO, especially with Nikon. I think the D200's optimal ISO is 100, and you should always shoot there unless you just have to move, like with wildlife or sports. I bet this location really lights up with beautiful light early/late in the day, especially if you can get it reflecting off of the water...
Thanks for the comments. I shot this a month ago. I have come to realize that optimum for this lens is f-10 or f-11. I understand that there is loss of detail from iso 100 to iso 400 in film. I just didn't know how much it would be in digital. I think I'll go there again and experiment with several RAW image exposures and just to try to see the effects I make comparison exposures at different f-stops. From some of the things I learned this CSNP weekend, I should be able to get a decent image of this place once and for all. I know it's better to shoot before the sun gets up, but I sure like the long early morning shadows. I'll try to get both and see what the difference is. I plan to use the "Merge to HDR".
You can get some lovely light when the sun first comes up, it is just that the sunshine gets quite harsh in a hurry. If you include the sky in your photo you just about have to have the sun shining on your subject otherwise the contrast range would be too great. I've never seen an image from anyone (including the experts) that was processed via HDR that I liked - there are shadows in the world and a photo just looks kind of weird without them. But I'm sure it is fun to play with and that is the name of the game!
Hey Glenn, boy I sure like this setting, a very pretty place. It does look like this shot has some effects from the f/29 & sharpening possibly. But it sounds like you have a good plan in place to work through some camera settings and find the right combinations. Have fun!
Hey Glenn - nice area. If it's close by, I'd be there every weekend bright and early. It's looks like a great place to experiment. HDR is fun to play around with - I've made a few respectable images with it, but none with nature as the subject (it can look unnatural!).
Discussion
5 repliesComments welcome.
f29 is a bit harsh. Most lenses will be at their best in the f8-f11 range. Sometimes you can stretch it up to f16 if you really need the depth of field. This was always the case with film too - we just could not ever see the detail that was getting soft since the images were so small. And, of course, Ansel used to shoot at f64 and even beyond, but that was completely different since he was using large format and the lenses and film react differently. You will also get more detail and better color at a lower ISO, especially with Nikon. I think the D200's optimal ISO is 100, and you should always shoot there unless you just have to move, like with wildlife or sports. I bet this location really lights up with beautiful light early/late in the day, especially if you can get it reflecting off of the water...