Alley in Pisa, Italy

by Lars Kotthoff

submit your photo

Hall of Fame
View past winners from this year

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

Tag Info

New answers tagged


check out the tokina 11 - 16mm 2.8f


The photographer chose a slightly higher ISO to compensate for using f/22 aperture (small opening = less light). You may ask, so why not make the shutter speed longer? The shutter speed was set to 1/6th of a second, rather than say 10 seconds, so that the image is nice and sharp, it may have been windy and might have shaken the tripod even just a little bit. ...


One (remote) possibility, based on a different camera... My Fujifilm X-Pro1 has a "dynamic range" setting that lets me choose between 100%, 200%, and 400%. Higher settings are supposed to extract more shadow and highlight detail (almost like a simulated HDR) in the out of camera JPEgs. BUT the 200 and 400 settings are only available at higher than minimum ...


I can't buy the clouds moving being an issue here. However, I can think of one reason that would be invisible: There are mobile objects near the photographer that sometimes get in the frame. He shot quickly to avoid them. He might have shot several, this is just the one that actually worked. I do think it's more likely an oops, though.


Disclaimer: this answer is highly dependent on equipment, firmware, etc. and may actually be conjecture. Another possibility is that the digital camera is not optimized for the lowest ISO values. If you look at the internals of a camera some sensors do not support "50 ISO" and instead the camera firmware shoots at about 160 - 200 and pulls the exposure ...


It could have been very windy. =0)


The only technical reason I can see in this particular case is that there might be some traffic on that road that you don't want in your shot. Thus the faster shutter speed was required to catch it between vehicles. Not that I think this was actually the reason, since the timeframe for ISO 100 is still pretty short.


I can't think of any technical reason for this to be the case. Everything in the image is far enough away that a lower aperture could have been used without impacting the image and thus a faster shutter speed or lower ISO could have easily been achieved. That said, my best guess is that the photographer may have been shooting in aperture priority mode and ...


The mountain and the valley obviously are static -- even more from that distance. The clouds, however, move. If you chose a low ISO value, e.g., in the range of 50 to 100, the exposure time might be enough to get washy/faded/blurred clouds. If I calculated it correctly, an ISO value of 100 with the other settings (exluding shutter speed) staying the same ...


Note also that the old rule of thumb that a shutter speed of 1/30 second is fast enough for a sharp picture is not good enough in the digital age. In the analogue era you would not typically zoom a picture to see very small details, so a picture would look sharp and that was it. Today, we take one picture and zoom in expecting to see small details clearly ...


Use a tripod. Shutter shake is a very frustrating aspect of modern cameras. When I had my old Fujica 801 I could shoot at 1/60th of a second and take a sharp photo. I would not trust myself below 1/250th on my Fujifilm Finepic. Try shooting on a clear day - you will have more light and less problems to solve


You say "I have one small focus point, but if I am shooting the entire skyline, wouldn't it throw the rest out of focus? Or should I change to Manual Focus?" This suggests to me that you have a basic misconception about how focus works, and that understanding that better will help with the whole problem. No matter how it's done, a camera lens can only ...


In a landscape or a shot of a city skyline, most of the scene will be at "infinity" for the purpose of focusing your lens. With a 50 mm lens, for example, it doesn't matter whether a rooftop is 30 meters, 300 meters, or 3 km away, the focus is all the same. The same applies to a tree 30 meters away or a ridgeline 3 miles away. It's all optically at ...


In general, if you have foreground elements, the best point to focus is about 1/3 of the way between the closest thing that you need to be sharp and the furthest thing you need to be sharp (or the hyperfocal distance). I.e. the drop off in sharpness due to depth of field is asymmetrical and tends to drop off faster on the near side of the point of ...


I'll tell you right away that there is no chance for me to answer without being very technical. Since you're looking for an open source solution it cuts away all of the commonly used programs and leaves us with a bunch of programs that require more from the user. The advanced part has nothing to do with photography though. The technicalities lies in ...

Top 50 recent answers are included