User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  0
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Night Vs Depth of Field

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    04 Jan 2009
    Location
    Dawes Point
    Posts
    7
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Night Vs Depth of Field

    Hi all,

    Here's a complex one..

    This is on the corner of Rundle Street and Pulteney Street Adelaide, just prior to Christmas. My wallet on top of the traffic signal box is my tripod, and I believe it was set to about f8 on a multi-second exposure..

    Am not sure whether its focus a problem or just colour spectrum reaction is the 'problem', as it look like its out of focus..

    Appreciate your comments and thoughts.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  2. #2
    Administrator ricktas's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    15,643
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    My thoughts are camera movement, you state your wallet on top of a signal box was your tripod, I think that during the exposure there was some slight camera movement.
    "It is one thing to make a picture of what a person looks like, it is another thing to make a portrait of who they are" - Paul Caponigro

    Constructive Critique of my photographs is always appreciated
    Nikon, etc!

    RICK
    My Photography

  3. #3
    A royal pain in the bum! arthurking83's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Jun 2006
    Location
    the worst house, in the best street
    Posts
    8,185
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    most likely!

    I'm guessing that you used timer and such like.

    Even using the timer function, you can still get movement from any breeze, or the most likely cause, mirror slap.
    Nikon D800E, D300, D70s
    {Nikon} -> 50/1.2 : 500/8(CPU'd) : 105/2.8VR Micro : 180/2.8ais : 105mm f/1.8ais : 24mm/2ais
    {Sigma}; ->10-20/4-5.6 : 50/1.4 : 12-24/4.5-5.6II : 150-600mm|S
    {Tamron}; -> 17-50/2.8 : 28-75/2.8 : 70-200/2.8 : 300/2.8 SP MF : 24-70/2.8VC


  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    25 Apr 2008
    Location
    Amersfoort, NL
    Posts
    658
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Yeah, definately camera movement. Probably due to the fact yoyu didn't really use a tripod but just put the camera down on something soft like a wallet - that's not a sturdy base in any book.

    Mirror slap is possible, especially with the 1/2.5 second exposure you used on this image. I do not expect it to generate this much unsharpness though.
    Ciao, Joost

    All feedback is highly appreciated!

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    22 Jul 2008
    Location
    Rosebud, Mornington Peninsula
    Posts
    2,838
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    did the lights on the building change at all? just wondering cause the bottom part appears to be reasonably sharp? if camera movement was the problem wouldn't the bottom where the cars are be oof more also?
    Last edited by Miaow; 12-04-2009 at 7:18pm.
    Cat (aka Cathy) - Another Canon user - 400D, 18-55,75-300mm Kit Lens,50mm f1.8, Tamron 90mm f2.8 Macro, Sigma 28-70 f2.8-4 DG, Tripod and a willingness to learn
    Software used: PhotoImpact, Irfanview and a lot of plugins
    We don't make a photograph just with a camera, we bring to the act of photography all the books we have read, the movies we have seen, the music we have heard, the people we have loved. - Ansel Adams


  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    25 Sep 2008
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    665
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think the lights have something to do with it -

    Although my photo is taken hand held, I also found the colours 'blown out' and had a OOF look to them.
    hoffy was also taking shots at the same time - not sure if he has any of the same tree though.

    Cheers
    Attached Images Attached Images

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    07 Oct 2006
    Location
    Sth Adelaide
    Posts
    492
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Bit of both....colour a minor problem, but certainly slight camera movement, most evident in the slight blurr to the buildings.....still, looks good

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    06 Mar 2008
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    338
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I would think that camera movement would cause more of the photo to blur...

    (in the original photo), take a look at the various edges at the bottom and the fixed street lamps, they're not showing signs of movement and if they are, it's very minor compared to the lights on the building...

  9. #9
    Member nexeh's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Mar 2009
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    13
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Of the photos that I have taken of the Rundle Lights, they all look OOF towards the ends, but the middle of the lighs at 100% is sharp. The buildings and signs look nice and sharp. I think that because of the angle of the shot taken it looks OOF and the size doesnt help too much.

    Dale
    Canon 5DMarkII | 17-40F4L | 24-70F2.8L | 70-200F2.8L IS | 100F2.8 Macro | 580EXII | Gitzo GT3541LS | Markins M20 | RRS B2 LRII
    ThinkTank StreetWalker Harddrive | Crumpler 7 MDH
    AdobeĀ® Photoshop Lightroom 2.3 | AdobeĀ® Photoshop CS5


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •