Capn Jack Loc: Virginia Beach, Va

This photo was taken hand held on my SX40 trying to catch the Harvest Moon as it rose through the Pines. Nothing has been done to the photo and it is right out of the camera but it brings up a question in my mind. It appears to me that the focus is on the pine branch so what could I have done to have both the moon and the Pine ( which was about 100 yards away) in focus ? I am sure there is a simple solution but I don't have it. Would appreciate someone helping me here.

Growler Loc: The Great South Land

Hi Capn Jack I'm glad you raised this issue, cause it's been bugging me also. I've tried stopping down the aperture but can't get it right. PS is one solution but I'm sure there must be another.

OddJobber Loc: Portland, OR

Suggestions. Get off full auto (shooting and focus). Learn to use ISO, depth of field, hyperfocal distance and aperture. Then get a tripod and try again.

Bill Houghton Loc: New York area

Yeapers, can see every pine needle on that dare three as if it were right here in front of me. Listen to OddJobber.

DaDiCarr Loc: Margate, FL

:thumbup: I agree with you Oddjobber, I had the same problem and had to start using manual focusing to avoid such condition. My photos are starting to look much better, I mean I hope so,lol. I steel mess up once in a while but that's because of my vision.

MyPharo Loc: New Jersey

I have to agree with oddjobber . This photo needed to be shot with manual focus .. I made a slight adj and you can see the focus is very much on the pine tree.

hb3 Loc: Texas

I would suggest that it is going to be quite difficult to shoot a photo where an object 100 yards away and another 230,000 miles away will both be in focus...

MyPharo Loc: New Jersey

Well if the camera is on a tripod . He can shoot 2 photos . focused on one point each . then merge the photos into one..

Erv Loc: Medina Ohio

Good morning. You are trying some thing that is going to be almost impossible to do. There is way to much distance between the two to get it done. And at night when it is dark. I have gotten a few landscape shots that have come out pretty good. But they were when it was just rising. Joining 2 shots is your best bet.:):)
Erv

Phreedom Loc: Kitchener, Ontario, Canada

Any similar shots I've seen with all in focus (DOF) have been taken via telephoto at a great distance (think a mile or more) from the foreground subjects. I'm reminded of the rising moon with silhouetted observers on a hill top video posted recently. But even in it the foreground was in sharper focus than the moon.

http://vimeo.com/58385453

If you had focused on the moon (using AF-L), moved over to include the pine boughs, it could have been an effective shot.

Bmac Loc: Long Island, NY

Yep. 8-)

karelowe Loc: Boise, Idaho, & Mesa, AZ

AWESOME video.........

photog601 Loc: New York, NY

Hi, I find when this happens it's helpful using manual focus. It is the only one to let the camera know you want the moon in focus not the foliage. Hope that helps?

Peter Boyd Loc: Blyth nr. Newcastle U.K.

You have received some sound advice and logical answers to your question, but I would like to offer a different opinion, which by the way is just that, my opinion. You state that the pine tree was about 100 yards away from the camera, and I agree that it is in focus, but as far as your lens is concerned that distance is infinity, and once your depth of field has stretched to infinity then anything beyond that, no matter how far away, should also be in focus. So perhaps it is the over exposure of the moon that is causing the edges to look slightly fuzzy and not the fact that it is out of focus? Just a thought.

OddJobber Loc: Portland, OR

Followup to my previous post. I didn't intend to be so terse and my post was not a put down of either the OP or the Canon SX's. I prefer to offer more information, but there are some things that are hard to find. All the manufacturers like to brag about their widest f number for speed and low light. But even at the canonusa web site you won't find info on the smallest aperture.

First you do need to reduce the ISO. At 500 you're getting some noise around the edges of the moon. Reduced ISO means you need slower shutter, and therefore the need for a tripod.

I initially assumed the quick fix would be to reduce your aperture for more depth of field. I finally had to download your user's manual to learn your smallest aperture is f8. :shock:

Sidebar: I'm not really doing all this for your benefit. I've been considering an SX20 as a backup and a walkaround and need to learn all this Canon stuff. :D But the limited aperture range may be a deal breaker for me.

At an actual focal lenth of 155mm zoomed out, which is what the SX40 has, an aperture of f22 or higher would yield a depth of field from 300 feet to infinity. Alas, you can't do that.

The other way is to zoom out. Shorter focal length = more depth of field. At 86mm actual focal length and f8, your depth of field (focused at 600 ft) would again be 300 feet to infinity. Big problem here too. To get an image like what you did would require really tight cropping, and with your 12 megapixels, you would be cropping down to about 1/10th megapixel and a good printed image about 1 inch square. :( Example, try cropping your avatar to show just the sun.

I must therefore regrettably join the "mission impossible" group.

More side notes:

Please do learn manual operations. You've paid twice as much for you camera as some less capable P&S for those extra features. Don't waste them.

Excellent reference for sorting out this kind of stuff, an online depth of field calculator:
http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

Enjoy! :thumbup: