First time shooting using fully manual settings.

[Hikaribushi]

Hi folks

I spent yesterday late afternoon and early evening shooting the coastline, bluffs, and beach. Once the sun started to set I was drawn to the spot where a wooden fence started. I've done nothing to this photo, other than size it down for viewing here (no cropping or other editing). It was the first time I'd ventured out with the decision to shoot on manual mode only; some of the shots just didn't work out, and some turned out alright. Best of all, I learned a lot along the way. The image was taken with a Canon 5D Mark II, tripod, a 28-135mm Canon Ultrasonic lens at 135mm, f32, ISO 200, and 2 second exposure. It's entirely possible that I'm reading the exif data wrong here on my Mac. :blushing:

Here is the photo; please provide any and all insight and constructive criticism. Thanks in advance for your time.

 

[SCraig]

It was actually shot at f/3.5 and 2.0 seconds at ISO 100 according to the EXIF data.

It appears rather soft focus and soft contrast to me. The focus is much softer than I would have expected from a 135mm prime and a tripod. It looks like the bolt head in the horizontal rail is the closest to being in focus so I assume it was depth of field related. The lack of contrast is probably due to the 2 second exposure. I think it would have been better to raise the ISO to 400 and shot at 1/2 second instead of 2 seconds, or close the aperture down a stop and then fix the contrast in post processing.

 

[cgipson1]

It was actually shot at f/3.5 and 2.0 seconds at ISO 100 according to the EXIF data.

It appears rather soft focus and soft contrast to me. The focus is much softer than I would have expected from a 135mm prime and a tripod. It looks like the bolt head in the horizontal rail is the closest to being in focus so I assume it was depth of field related. The lack of contrast is probably due to the 2 second exposure. I think it would have been better to raise the ISO to 400 and shot at 1/2 second instead of 2 seconds, or close the aperture down a stop and then fix the contrast in post processing.

F3.5???

Exif shows F32

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v135/Ahlissandra/Photography/Fence-SmallSize.jpg[/url]
File type: JPEG
File size: 794.4 KB
Creation date: 9/7/2012 19:10
Last modification: 9/8/2012 20:22
Make: Canon
Camera: Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Software: Pixelmator 2.0.5
Dimension: 1023 x 682 px (0.7 MP, 3:2)
Focal length: 135 mm
Aperture: F32
Exposure time: 2"
ISO speed rating: 100/21°
Program: Manual
Metering Mode: Pattern
Flash: Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode

Some serious diffraction softening going on....

 

[SCraig]

F3.5???

Exif shows F32

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v135/Ahlissandra/Photography/Fence-SmallSize.jpg[/url]
File type: JPEG
File size: 794.4 KB
Creation date: 9/7/2012 19:10
Last modification: 9/8/2012 20:22
Make: Canon
Camera: Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Software: Pixelmator 2.0.5
Dimension: 1023 x 682 px (0.7 MP, 3:2)
Focal length: 135 mm
Aperture: F32
Exposure time: 2"
ISO speed rating: 100/21°
Program: Manual
Metering Mode: Pattern
Flash: Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode

Some serious diffraction softening going on....

Not on mine ...

Edit ... Odd ... Capture NX2 and FastStone Image Viewer show the aperture field empty. Photoshop and Paintshop Pro show f/32. The plugin on Firefox shows f/3.5. I don't know what it was.

 

[IgsEMT]

If you still have the original file, look on the LCD.

 

[Tee]

At late afternoon, with the sun, I'd have to think f/3.5 would give a faster shutter speed. My vote is for f/32.

 

[SCraig]

At late afternoon, with the sun, I'd have to think f/3.5 would give a faster shutter speed. My vote is for f/32.

You could well be right, however at f/32 I would have expected more depth of field.

 

[Hikaribushi]

I no longer have the original file on my camera, but I have it in RAW format on my Mac, but I'm struggling a bit with finding accurate exif data once I pull them off the camera. I like the color in this piece, and I like the way it is framed. Beyond that there is a world of improvements to be made; I thank you all for your insight and feedback. I'll continue to shoot in manual mode so I can continue to learn as much as possible. I have a huge fear or anxiety about losing photos that I wish I had, but I need to get over that and be grateful for what I get.

As far as depth of field, the photo was framed in such a manner that there was very little to see, beyond the fence that is the primary focus.

@SCraig: I ride too - a 2000 VFR 800. =)

 

[SCraig]

I no longer have the original file on my camera, but I have it in RAW format on my Mac, but I'm struggling a bit with finding accurate exif data once I pull them off the camera. I like the color in this piece, and I like the way it is framed. Beyond that there is a world of improvements to be made; I thank you all for your insight and feedback. I'll continue to shoot in manual mode so I can continue to learn as much as possible. I have a huge fear or anxiety about losing photos that I wish I had, but I need to get over that and be grateful for what I get.

As far as depth of field, the photo was framed in such a manner that there was very little to see, beyond the fence that is the primary focus.

@SCraig: I ride too - a 2000 VFR 800. =)

Small world The bike in my avatar is my 2007 VFR 800. You live in a gorgeous area for riding and photography. I have a friend in Phoenix, and in February 2009 I flew out there and rode one of his bikes to the Hearst Castle at San Simeon, CA. Coming back we rode down Highway 1 and the Pacific Coast Highway from San Simeon to Santa Monica before heading back east again. Some fantastic scenery for a guy from Tennessee in February!

I think we all struggle with that fear from time to time. I know that I do. It's far easier now than decades ago though since now we have the ability to immediately see what is on the images and make necessary changes. Years ago we had to hope for the best until we got the film processed and saw what was there (or frequently wasn't there).

I shoot wildlife and birds a lot. I usually take my first shot as soon as I see the subject based on the philosophy that anything is usually better than nothing. Then I try to work my way closer or to a better position to improve the shot. At some point the subject will usually run away or fly away. On a few occasions that first shot is all I got, and as you said I have to be grateful for what I got. Still, the goal is to never stop improving, whether it's one shot or a career. Take what you can get but at the same time never stop trying to improve.

 

[emoxley]

My Firefox plug-in shows f/32. But, at f/32, everything in the picture should be in focus, and it's clearly not. The grass under the rail, as well as behind it, is out of focus. The DOF looks more like f/3.5 to me.

 

[SCraig]

My Firefox plug-in shows f/32. But, at f/32, everything in the picture should be in focus, and it's clearly not. The grass under the rail, as well as behind it, is out of focus. The DOF looks more like f/3.5 to me.

Depends on how far he was from the point of focus. A 5DMkII with a 135mm lens and f/32 with a focus distance of 6' has a total depth of field of 0.82'. At 10' that goes up to 2.39', and at 20' it's 10.2'. Satisfy your self Here.

 

[yerlem]

mmm newbie question here, but wouldn't f/3.5, 2 second exposure, iso 100 (or 200..) at sunset over expose it?