New answers tagged landscape
F/22 suggests to me that the photographer first took some pictures with nearby objects in the foreground and then forgot (or didn't bother) to increase the aperture for this particular shot. The ISO setting of 640 is then quite appropriate, you can go lower with a longer exposue time, but as the other answerers point out that can cause problems if the clouds ...
1) Be simple. (s)he forgot to switch to the lower ISO. ). For example, (s)he wanted to catch a bird before. 2) But I heard one story from an older photographer (?) about the long exposure (sensor reheating during the long exposure): sometimes it's better using short high ISO shot vs. long exposure shot to avoid noise. The best solution to make two shorts ...
A very narrow aperture such as f22, which allows for an almost infinite Depth of Field, lets in very little light. ISO 640 may have been required to ensure the shutter speed stayed at a reasonable level, if the photographer didn't want to risk camera shake from wind or cloud blur.
Perhaps the photographer believes that ISO 640 can be LESS noisy than ISO 100. I'm not necessarily supporting that viewpoint, just stating that there is one.
check out the tokina 11 - 16mm 2.8f http://www.tokinalens.com/tokina/products/atxpro/atx116prodxii/
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. Even assuming that he used the lens at 105mm, if he was more than 387 ft from the closest object in the frame, he could have focused at 750 feet and had everything in focus even at f/5.6, so f/22 was completely unnecessary unless intending to get the shutter speed longer. A faster shutter speed ...
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