landscape question from newbie ;-)

[Rephargotohp]

The reason I shot at f/22 was just because while reading understanding exposure it was said that when shooting landscape just use f/22. Like I said I'm new and learning! So f/22 no Bueno when shooting a subject landscape that far away. Got it. Also, with crop camera why not shoot past f/11?

To answer without getting ridiculously complicated because I am a better photographer than engineer or scientist...

There is something in optics called an Airy Disc. when the size of this Airy Disc is larger than the pixel size of the camera, loss of actual resolution occurs.

The size of the airy disc is Aperture related, the size of the pixel is sensor related.

So what this means is once you get beyond a certain aperture, your image starts to loose sharpness.

Generally for Crop Camera (APS-C) this starts to happen at f/8 to f/11

For full frame camera's this starts to come in at f/11 to f/16

So for maximum absolute resolution we try to use apertures below that limit.

However, photography is full of compromises and there may be times we need to exceed that, either because we need a deeper DOF or like DESI mention when we are trying to slow shutter speed and we don't have Neutral Density filters at our disposal

In the case of your photo, everything in your image was at infinity so there would be no need to try to maximize your DOF f/8 would have been fine

 

[480sparky]

You're a supporting member and you want me banned because you and the other offender were wrong?
Is that it?

What are you talking about?

lol
Try again.
Aint gonna work sparkles.

You.


Just

Ain't


Worth


It.

 

[VegasPhotoNut]

thank you all for the relevant replies!

 

[LightSpeed]

What are you talking about?

lol
Try again.
Aint gonna work sparkles.

You.


Just

Ain't


Worth


It.

Dismissed.

 

[LightSpeed]

The reason I shot at f/22 was just because while reading understanding exposure it was said that when shooting landscape just use f/22. Like I said I'm new and learning! So f/22 no Bueno when shooting a subject landscape that far away. Got it. Also, with crop camera why not shoot past f/11?

To answer without getting ridiculously complicated because I am a better photographer than engineer or scientist...

There is something in optics called an Airy Disc. when the size of this Airy Disc is larger than the pixel size of the camera, loss of actual resolution occurs.

The size of the airy disc is Aperture related, the size of the pixel is sensor related.

So what this means is once you get beyond a certain aperture, your image starts to loose sharpness.

Generally for Crop Camera (APS-C) this starts to happen at f/8 to f/11

For full frame camera's this starts to come in at f/11 to f/16

So for maximum absolute resolution we try to use apertures below that limit.

However, photography is full of compromises and there may be times we need to exceed that, either because we need a deeper DOF or like DESI mention when we are trying to slow shutter speed and we don't have Neutral Density filters at our disposal

In the case of your photo, everything in your image was at infinity so there would be no need to try to maximize your DOF f/8 would have been fine

Hey, what do you know sparky?
I think I may have mentioned something along these lines.
You might wanna read back up.

 

[HJW]

I might be a little confused here. I've been following the concept that images shot with a smaller aperture than f16 will cause loss in resolution/sharpness of images due to diffraction. This, I understand. However, now its said that it should be around f8 or f11 with crop sensors? Is this true?

I also have another question. When photographing landscapes, I usually set my focus as according to hyper focal distance provided by the depth of field calculator, rather than focussing at infinity. Does focussing at infinity result in loss of resolution (while focussing at the hyper focal distance provides larger DoF, will it also affect resolution)?

 

[enzodm]

I read that too and used f22 a lot. I think he used that to get more extreme depth of field. A lot of the shots he uses f22 on are demonstrating very near in focus foreground and then very distant in focus background. In your care, everything is very distant, so there is no need for f22.

Understanding exposure has been written in film times. Avoiding diffraction due to small aperture is mostly a sensor issue (less with full frame, more with crop sensors). So in principle the suggestion is good, but in digital practice is better not to close so much. And
Anyway, unless the manual for your lens specifies that stabilization is able to recognize the tripod, switch it off when on tripod (I would switch off even if recognizing).

 

[Ron Evers]

Looks to like the focus is on the houses in front of the city. Are you sure you nailed the focus? Those houses are sharp.

Agree, but they would still be @ infinity. Atmospheric haze is going to soften the images as they get farther from the camera.

 

[Helen B]

I read that too and used f22 a lot. I think he used that to get more extreme depth of field. A lot of the shots he uses f22 on are demonstrating very near in focus foreground and then very distant in focus background. In your care, everything is very distant, so there is no need for f22.

Understanding exposure has been written in film times. Avoiding diffraction due to small aperture is mostly a sensor issue (less with full frame, more with crop sensors). So in principle the suggestion is good, but in digital practice is better not to close so much. And
Anyway, unless the manual for your lens specifies that stabilization is able to recognize the tripod, switch it off when on tripod (I would switch off even if recognizing).

Diffraction is/was a problem with film as well as digital. The issue with Understanding Exposure is not so much that it is about film, but that it is a very basic book intended for raw beginners. It misses out anything that might risk confusing a poor beginner's brain and it gets some things downright wrong. It's not a reference book on exposure by any means.

Although it depends on the film or sensor resolution, viewing conditions and the lens quality, diffraction softening can often become apparent at f/11 on a full-frame camera. It can be apparent at lower f-numbers with crop sensors, so f/22 on a crop sensor is pushing it a bit. It's not a difficult thing to test in practice. As already mentioned, it's probably only one of a number of factors causing softening.

 

[Sonoma]

I'm just curious, but what are you using for focus points. Are you using just one focus point and then recomposing the shot? I ask because someone mentioned that the houses in the foreground look sharp.

I would shoot at a slightly higher ISO and a wider aperture to reduce your shutter speed and see how it comes out. And defiantly turn off IS/OS.

Good luck.

 

[thereyougo!]

I'm just curious, but what are you using for focus points. Are you using just one focus point and then recomposing the shot? I ask because someone mentioned that the houses in the foreground look sharp.

I would shoot at a slightly higher ISO and a wider aperture to reduce your shutter speed and see how it comes out. And defiantly turn off IS/OS.

Good luck.

Am I being stupid or do you mean higher ISO wider aperture which will increase your shutter speed or reduce the exposure time?

 

[Rephargotohp]

I might be a little confused here. I've been following the concept that images shot with a smaller aperture than f16 will cause loss in resolution/sharpness of images due to diffraction. This, I understand. However, now its said that it should be around f8 or f11 with crop sensors? Is this true?

I also have another question. When photographing landscapes, I usually set my focus as according to hyper focal distance provided by the depth of field calculator, rather than focussing at infinity. Does focussing at infinity result in loss of resolution (while focussing at the hyper focal distance provides larger DoF, will it also affect resolution)?

Yep, didn't make up the numbers. You can check out my buddy Sean's post about it too. Diffraction Limited Photography: Pixel Size, Aperture and Airy Disks
As far as your second question, When focuing at infinity, you are putting in the filed of focus everything from Infinity to your hyperfocal distance. If you set for the HFD, you are putting everything half the distance to the HFD to infinity into the field of focus (maximum DOF) But if nothing in frame is at HFD or closer, you're wasting your time and there are some rare times that setting to HFD can render your background less sharp.


In this case it appears that everything in frame was past HFD and the camera was focused at infinity
and tehre are and and .hi and

 

[Sonoma]

I'm just curious, but what are you using for focus points. Are you using just one focus point and then recomposing the shot? I ask because someone mentioned that the houses in the foreground look sharp.

I would shoot at a slightly higher ISO and a wider aperture to reduce your shutter speed and see how it comes out. And defiantly turn off IS/OS.

Good luck.

Am I being stupid or do you mean higher ISO wider aperture which will increase your shutter speed or reduce the exposure time?

Yea, that didn't come out quite right. I meant reduce the time the shutter is open in "Bulb", or, yes, increase the shutter speed.

 

[KmH]

There is a lot of roiling atmosphere between you and downtown in that shot that will soften focus.

F/22 didn't help, like willis_927 was mentioning.

At night the ground, parking lots, streets, buildings, etc all give up a lot of the heat they gained during the day, and all that warm air is rising.

If it's overcast the heat dissipation effect is not a pronounced.

It's one of the reasons major astronomical telescopes are sited well away from cities.

Astronomical telescopes are sited well away from cities to avoid " light pollution" more than anything else.
Doesn't have anything to do with the atmosphere. It has to do with light.
The are quite a few Astronomical telescopes that are NOT sited in the Nevada deserts. Millions.

It's one of the reasons major astronomical telescopes are sited well away from cities.

FYI.

Not all mountain tops qualify to get a major astronomical telescope.

Potential sites usually go through of couple of years of testing the seeing conditions before one site is chosen.