Ernicus
TPF Noob!
- Joined
- May 18, 2012
- Messages
- 2,689
- Reaction score
- 337
- Location
- Old Town, ME
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos OK to edit
Ok, so if you saw my other post, the duck, I was bitching about soft images and focus. Here is my beaver. It seems to me that the rocks above him are in focus yet he is not.
How can that be? Please don't just say "you missed focus". I took many shots. Some with focal point on beavers head, some with points in front of beaver, etc. This one is with the focal point right on beavers face. I had the camera laying on a rock, quite stable, so no movement from me. He was eating his apple, but was pretty still for the most part.
I am wondering why the rocks above him are in focus and he's not.
If I had to guess, I'd say he was at least 100 feet away across the river.
1/80 f/2.8 iso 1600
I tried many settings, from 1/600 f/8 iso 640 (which looked like utter chit) and other various settings. The light was fading....however I though for sure with this lens I could have gotten him.
Using the online dof calculator, I see that at 200mm about 100ft at 2.8 would give me 8.5 feet focal range, 4 ish in front and 4 ish behind, so...I'd like to think that the focal dot on his face would have put him in focus.
anyway, I dunno. I really suck with this lens, only having issue on the 80-200 2.8 lens. Usually in low light, but really even in nice light. Really sucky at 2.8 to 4 range, and even at f/8 to f/11 not getting great shots.
so...any advice is appreciated.
thanks.
How can that be? Please don't just say "you missed focus". I took many shots. Some with focal point on beavers head, some with points in front of beaver, etc. This one is with the focal point right on beavers face. I had the camera laying on a rock, quite stable, so no movement from me. He was eating his apple, but was pretty still for the most part.
I am wondering why the rocks above him are in focus and he's not.
If I had to guess, I'd say he was at least 100 feet away across the river.
1/80 f/2.8 iso 1600
I tried many settings, from 1/600 f/8 iso 640 (which looked like utter chit) and other various settings. The light was fading....however I though for sure with this lens I could have gotten him.
Using the online dof calculator, I see that at 200mm about 100ft at 2.8 would give me 8.5 feet focal range, 4 ish in front and 4 ish behind, so...I'd like to think that the focal dot on his face would have put him in focus.
anyway, I dunno. I really suck with this lens, only having issue on the 80-200 2.8 lens. Usually in low light, but really even in nice light. Really sucky at 2.8 to 4 range, and even at f/8 to f/11 not getting great shots.
so...any advice is appreciated.
thanks.