Need tips on landscape photographyThis is a discussion on Need tips on landscape photography within the Photo Tips forums, part of the Photography Information category; I've not done much of this kind of shooting.
I'm going to the Big Bend area in a week. I'll ...
(#1)
| | Senior Member
Posts: 344 Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Dallas, Texas Real First Name: Arthur Camera: Canon 20D Can Others Edit My Photos: Yes iTrader Rating: 0 LIKES Received: 0 LIKES Given: 0 | Need tips on landscape photography -
01-05-2007, 09:42 PM
I've not done much of this kind of shooting.
I'm going to the Big Bend area in a week. I'll be taking my 17-40 4.0L.
In general, when you are trying to capture a wide expanse, do you go with as small an aperature as possible (while still aiming for a sharp shot)? Or maybe after 9.0 it won't look much different?
Any thoughts as to camera settings in general? I know time of day will play big role. | | | | | Sponsored Links | Premium Members do not see Google advertisements. SIGN UP today and help support our community.
|
(#2)
| | Account Banned
Posts: 5,487 Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Dallas, Texas, Real First Name: Paul Camera: Kodak SLRN Can Others Edit My Photos: No iTrader Rating: 0 LIKES Received: 0 LIKES Given: 0 |
01-05-2007, 09:56 PM
Large format shooters regularly go for f-64 or higher, now the thing is what part of your lenses F range is the tack sharpest and try to shoot in that range. See some lenses are poor at f 2.8 then get super sharp around f-11 and then get soft again at f-22 so you need to find out what the charecteristics of your lenses are and shoot in there prime ranges. | | | |
(#3)
| | tone-bending bas%@rd
Posts: 6,648 Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Houston, Texas Real First Name: Jeff Camera: Nikon Can Others Edit My Photos: No iTrader Rating: 4 LIKES Received: 32 LIKES Given: 22 |
01-05-2007, 10:05 PM
Quote: |
In general, when you are trying to capture a wide expanse, do you go with as small an aperature as possible (while still aiming for a sharp shot)? Or maybe after 9.0 it won't look much different?
| For most 35mm lenses, somewhere around f/8 will be the sweet spot and unless you have specific depth of field requirements sticking with f/8 is a pretty good approach. If you're shooting really wide and want to get as much of the scene in focus as possible from foreground to background, then you may need to stop down more.
Your best bet is to print some DOF charts and brush up on the concept of 'hyperfocal distance'. Here's a website that has some articles describing the concepts as well as some free utilities: http://www.dofmaster.com/. If you happen to have a Windows Mobile SmartPhone, I've written a DOF calculator that comes in pretty handy for me: http://www.texasphotoforum.com/forum...ad.php?t=22674
--------------------------- Jeff Kohn | The Majestic Landscape | Blog | More Images "The capacity to compose images is really the capacity to give coherence to sensed experience" - Robert Motherwell
| | | |
(#4)
| | Premium Member
Posts: 1,259 Join Date: May 2005 Location: Houston, Texas Real First Name: TJ Camera: Canon Can Others Edit My Photos: Yes iTrader Rating: 7 LIKES Received: 1 LIKES Given: 3 |
01-05-2007, 11:11 PM
I messed around quite a bit with my 20D + 17mm combo trying to get the optimum focus (with small apertures) for sharpness from foreground to infinity. What I finally stumbled upon was certain "focus postions" (see below) for different apertures that yielded the best focusing.
This focus setting works best for f/8 at 17mm (note the position of the focus in the little plastic window):
And this works best for f/11 at 17mm:
At f/16 and more so at f/22, the image degrades noticeably (diffraction). I notice little difference between f/8 and f/11, but they both yield the best results when you want the greatest depth of field and the best sharpness.
You can use DOF calculators and determine hyperfocal distances, but it's never worked well for me. Why? Well, try to determine where 5 or 6 feet is in the focus distance window when you're out in the field! (you can't- you have 3 feet marked and then infinity marked and the scale is logrithmic in between; and then infinity can be anywhere along the sideways "L" depending on the ambient temperature)
You can always AF on an object a known distance from the camera (e.g. 5 or 6 feet away), BUT the AF system only locks on when it thinks that "adequate" focus is attained (Canon AF systems stop AF'ing when they determine that the spot in focus will lie within the DOF based on the focal length and circle of confusion pre-determined by Canon and ebedded in the AF processor - e.g. you can focus on an object 5 feet away, but actual focus distance may end up being 10 feet; this might get your immediate object in adequate focus, but will screw up your hyperfocal shot if you need a focus distance of exactly 5 feet). | | | |
(#5)
| | Member
Posts: 249 Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Austin, TX, Real First Name: Joseph Can Others Edit My Photos: Yes iTrader Rating: 1 LIKES Received: 0 LIKES Given: 0 |
01-05-2007, 11:30 PM
Re: landscape photography in general, best advice is pay attention to the light! That is, the color and contrast and other qualities of the light and how it changes from the early morning, sunrise, late morning, evening, dusk, sunset, etc.
Other advice -- take the Lost Mine Trail hike!!! Fairly easy and super, super worth it. Best bang for the buck in the park, in my opinion. Great photo ops all along the way. | | | |
(#6)
| | Premium Member
Posts: 7,190 Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Houston, Texas Real First Name: Leon Camera: Nikon & Canon Can Others Edit My Photos: Yes iTrader Rating: 33 LIKES Received: 66 LIKES Given: 68 |
01-05-2007, 11:33 PM
You will have so many landscape opps your head will hurt!-Great place to let the camera run wild- if you are going up into the high Chisox I would definately take the 70-200 also-even with your 1.6 crop you will have many opps for really beautiful shots-some times the haze gets pretty bad so if you have an ND filter or even a polarizer I would take them also. Good Luck, wish I was going myself.
Ditto the Lost Mine recommendation!
---------------------------
lhdvries
| | | |
(#7)
| | Forum Regular
Posts: 798 Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Garland, TX, Real First Name: Stephen iTrader Rating: 0 LIKES Received: 0 LIKES Given: 0 |
01-06-2007, 12:56 AM
One kind of shot I like is a landscape with flowers or cactus in the foreground. For that, you do need to watch your depth of field to some extent. If you don't have anything real close up, then f/8 or so ought to work as good as anything.
Way back when, I got my first wide angle lens, a 24mm (on film). My theory was: The scenery is pretty, so the more of it I get in the camera, the prettier the picture is. Well, that theory didn't work. So look for points of interest, not just a vast field of "pretty".
I've been to Big Bend one time. What I liked best about it was the cactuses. Get off the road a bit and pay attention to them, and you'll start noticing kinds you didn't see before- very interesting for me. I was there around Christmas, and still saw several varieties of wild flowers as well.
Big Bend is not close to any major cities, and that makes it an excellent place for star trail pictures- try some out while you're there.
---------------------------
I shall be telling this with a sigh Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I— I took the one less traveled by,
and then it petered out and I had to retrace my steps and wasted half a day.
| | | |
(#8)
| | Premium Member
Posts: 1,259 Join Date: May 2005 Location: Houston, Texas Real First Name: TJ Camera: Canon Can Others Edit My Photos: Yes iTrader Rating: 7 LIKES Received: 1 LIKES Given: 3 |
01-06-2007, 08:14 AM
Quote: |
Originally Posted by josphy Other advice -- take the Lost Mine Trail hike!!! Fairly easy and super, super worth it. Best bang for the buck in the park, in my opinion. Great photo ops all along the way. | I'll second that advice! | | | |
(#9)
| | Senior Member
Posts: 344 Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Dallas, Texas Real First Name: Arthur Camera: Canon 20D Can Others Edit My Photos: Yes iTrader Rating: 0 LIKES Received: 0 LIKES Given: 0 |
01-06-2007, 11:01 PM
thanks for all the suggestions. Unfortunately for my photography, we are backpacking. And I'm expecting my pack to weigh in at about 40lb. So I am a bit reluctant to take the 70-200 for example. But maybe I will take the 50mm. For close up foilage shots. But then I think, is it really realistic for me to be switching lenses. It's probably going to be hard enough to just get the camera out of the pack.
If you were going to go with just one lens, would you take the 17-40 or the 50 (1.4)? | | | |
(#10)
| | Senior Member
Posts: 347 Join Date: May 2006 Location: Leander, Real First Name: Mike Camera: Canon Rebel XSi iTrader Rating: 0 LIKES Received: 0 LIKES Given: 0 |
01-06-2007, 11:14 PM
Quote: |
Originally Posted by arthur If you were going to go with just one lens, would you take the 17-40 or the 50 (1.4)? | If I was going backpacking and my primary subject would be landscapes, the 'one' lens that I would take would be the 17-40L. It's the lens that 'lives' on my camera.
The 50mm will only lead to frustration when you run into a 'grand landscape' and can only compose a portion of what you really want to.
My 2 cents :)
---------------------------
Mike
“It is better to deserve honors and not have them than to have them and not to deserve them.” - Mark Twain
| | | |
(#11)
| | Premium Member
Posts: 7,190 Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Houston, Texas Real First Name: Leon Camera: Nikon & Canon Can Others Edit My Photos: Yes iTrader Rating: 33 LIKES Received: 66 LIKES Given: 68 |
01-07-2007, 12:25 AM
You definately need a zoom for all the possibilities that you will have. Besides the "foot zoom" doesn't work real well on some of those mountain trails. If only one then by all means the 17-40L. Ah go ahead and throw the 50 1.4 in an extra pocket, you will have some nice sunset opps & the 1.4 will help--no I will not help you carry your pack. HeHe--good luck and enjoy the experience!!
---------------------------
lhdvries
| | | |
(#12)
| | Forum Regular
Posts: 798 Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Garland, TX, Real First Name: Stephen iTrader Rating: 0 LIKES Received: 0 LIKES Given: 0 |
01-07-2007, 12:48 AM
I'd take the 17-40 if it was a choice of those two- I like wide angles and use them more.
---------------------------
I shall be telling this with a sigh Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I— I took the one less traveled by,
and then it petered out and I had to retrace my steps and wasted half a day.
| | | |
(#13)
| | Rest in peace John...
Posts: 10,238 Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Dublin, TX, Real First Name: Stovall Camera: Leica M8/Leica X1/Canon 1DsMkIII/Canon 5DMkII/Leica M7/Leicaflex SL2/Ricoh GR-DIII Can Others Edit My Photos: No iTrader Rating: 17 LIKES Received: 1 LIKES Given: 0 |
01-07-2007, 08:10 AM
Quote: |
Originally Posted by tjavery
<Snipped>
This focus setting works best for f/8 at 17mm (note the position of the focus in the little plastic window): Attachment 32840
And this works best for f/11 at 17mm: Attachment 32839
<Snipped>
A. | When did you get a Leica M8? Those shoots capture the M8 look of Magenta so well. 
--------------------------- "The market wants a Leica to be a Leica: the inheritor of tradition, the subject of lore, and indisputably a mark of status to own." Mike Johnston | | | |
(#14)
| | Premium Member
Posts: 1,259 Join Date: May 2005 Location: Houston, Texas Real First Name: TJ Camera: Canon Can Others Edit My Photos: Yes iTrader Rating: 7 LIKES Received: 1 LIKES Given: 3 |
01-07-2007, 09:38 AM
Quote: |
Originally Posted by johnastovall When did you get a Leica M8? Those shoots capture the M8 look of Magenta so well.  | Ha! Is the M8 really that bad?
No, these were with my little Fuji F30, supposedly well-praised for its spectacular indoor performance (for a PnS). I guess I must have had it on the "Leica M8" shooting mode
Seriously, the 17-40 is a great choice for having just one lens. When I go out on hikes, I take it and sometimes my 70-200 f/4L (you can get really nice and interesting close-up, "compressed" landscapes with it). That combo of lenses is just the right compromise in weight, focal length range, and image quality for Canon, IMO. | | | |
(#15)
| | You Can't Be Serious!!
Posts: 13,010 Join Date: May 2006 Location: Houston mostly, Texas Real First Name: Wayne Camera: 6x7 Pinhole. Good enough for me. Can Others Edit My Photos: Yes iTrader Rating: 1 LIKES Received: 71 LIKES Given: 6 |
01-08-2007, 07:20 PM
What TJ was trying to show was an old fashioned DOF scale. Zoom lenses don't do those well. Another DOF tip: The zone of focus is roughly 1/3 in front of and 2/3 behind where you focus. Use that to your advantage.
Things to do & use:
Shoot early. Shoot late. Shoot in between. Midday is brutal for distant vistas because of haze/water vapor (Big Bend might not have much water vapor)/dust, etc. So, shoot close up during that time.
Polarizer. Don't leave home without it. Use it.
Anything you can do to support the camera. Use a pack as a bean bag. Use a packed sleeping bag as a bean bag.
Bracket. Bracket. Bracket. Your shooting digital right? Bracketing is free.
Enjoy! Good luck!
---------------------------
Wayne
Deep in the darkest heart of the East Texas Rain forest. Fledging Apprentice Wannabe Analog Activist My Gallery | FlickrMyBookTwitSpaceFace
Last edited by venchka; 01-08-2007 at 07:23 PM..
| | | | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | | Google Sponsors | Premium Members do not see Google advertisements. SIGN UP today and help support our community.
| |
Copyright ©2004 - 2011, Abel Longoria - www.Pixtus.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Copyright ©2000 - 2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc. |