Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Photo Analysis
Need tips on getting sharp landscapes
Page 1 of 4 next> last>>
Aug 1, 2017 14:38:06   #
SirMontgomery Loc: Seattle
 
I'm not sure if this is a lens limitation or operator error. Taken with a Takumar 135mm f/2.5 lens. Any advice is much appreciated.


(Download)

Reply
Aug 1, 2017 14:47:12   #
Just Fred Loc: Darwin's Waiting Room
 
I can't see any EXIF information. Did you remove it, or is there none? Was this shot as a JPEG?

Not knowing much about the shot (aperture setting, shutter speed, ISO), etc., I can only suggest that a tripod would help. An aperture of f/11 or smaller should be used, and the shutter speed commensurate with the ISO.

Reply
Aug 1, 2017 14:49:43   #
Redeye34
 
I like it

Reply
 
 
Aug 1, 2017 14:50:10   #
SirMontgomery Loc: Seattle
 
Just Fred wrote:
I can't see any EXIF information. Did you remove it, or is there none? Was this shot as a JPEG?

Not knowing much about the shot (aperture setting, shutter speed, ISO), etc., I can only suggest that a tripod would help. An aperture of f/11 or better should be used, and the shutter speed commensurate with the ISO.


Sorry I forgot to add with the post, it was shot as a DNG, ISO 100, 1/10 second, f/8, on a tripod with remote shutter release.

Reply
Aug 1, 2017 15:19:46   #
Bigmike1 Loc: I am from Gaffney, S.C. but live in Utah.
 
1/10 of a second is rather slow for a shot like this, wouldn't you say?

Reply
Aug 1, 2017 15:21:54   #
rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona
 
Looks ok to me. Why do you think it isn't sharp?
--Bob
SirMontgomery wrote:
I'm not sure if this is a lens limitation or operator error. Taken with a Takumar 135mm f/2.5 lens. Any advice is much appreciated.

Reply
Aug 1, 2017 15:22:19   #
SirMontgomery Loc: Seattle
 
Bigmike1 wrote:
1/10 of a second is rather slow for a shot like this, wouldn't you say?

In retrospect yes, I guess it is operator error.

Reply
 
 
Aug 1, 2017 15:26:31   #
twowindsbear
 
I'll blame atmospheric haze due to the distance

Or possibly smoke IF there's a forest fire somewhere near enough for the wind to send some your way

Reply
Aug 1, 2017 15:27:47   #
Just Fred Loc: Darwin's Waiting Room
 
Thanks for the info. I'm sure more qualified folks will chime in and provide the accurate technical detail (and corrections), but I suspect there's a depth of field and the hyperfocal distance involved here. I don't know how far you were from the subject, but the trees in the foreground are less focused than the peaks of the mountains. Those peaks aren't as crisp as I think they could be, so either your f/stop wasn't capable of capturing enough detail in your focal range, or your lens has, as you put it, "limitations."

Still, when I take photos of this sort, I try to use the smallest aperture possible, and keep my shutter adjusted. This also looks like you shot it at dusk, so I might even bump my ISO a bit. These days, I find almost no image degradation up to 3200 ISO. Since you have a tripod and a remote shutter release, you could keep your ISO at 100, stop down to f/22 and shoot 1 to 1.5 second exposures. You could play with several exposures with that setup.

Last year, I took a trip into some caverns, and got some spectacular shots using 30-second (and more) exposures and only the lighting provided by the caverns, at a 400 ISO and a variety of aperture settings. Nothing moves and the light doesn't change. After I found the right settings, I came home a happy spelunker!

Reply
Aug 1, 2017 15:27:50   #
rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona
 
I'm not sure why you would think that. Most of my recent landscapes have been 1/4 and 1/8. In this case, no clouds moving, slow shutter speeds are quite ok.
--Bob
Bigmike1 wrote:
1/10 of a second is rather slow for a shot like this, wouldn't you say?

Reply
Aug 1, 2017 15:30:41   #
Just Fred Loc: Darwin's Waiting Room
 
rmalarz wrote:
I'm not sure why you would think that. Most of my recent landscapes have been 1/4 and 1/8. In this case, no clouds moving, slow shutter speeds are quite ok.
--Bob


I agree. I get the best results (mostly) with very small apertures and very long shutter speeds. Landscapes don't move, unless as you say, you have clouds and/or water. And then, sometimes the results with those are impressive, too.

Reply
 
 
Aug 1, 2017 15:31:37   #
Mi630
 
The mountains are obviously quite far away. Atmospheric haze can enter into play. I see the mountains way in the background are hazy so the air doesn't appear to be crystal clear. 1/10 sec. is quite slow so if there is any wind the shot can be affected even on a tripod. Just some thoughts.

Reply
Aug 1, 2017 15:40:21   #
big-guy Loc: Peterborough Ontario Canada
 
Watchoo talkin bout Willis... Lots of EXIF is given:

EXIF IFD0
Camera Make {0x010F} RICOH IMAGING COMPANY, LTD.
Camera Model {0x0110} PENTAX K-1
Picture Orientation {0x0112} normal (1)
X-Resolution {0x011A} 3000000/10000 ===> 300
Y-Resolution {0x011B} 3000000/10000 ===> 300
X/Y-Resolution Unit {0x0128} inch (2)
Software / Firmware Version {0x0131} Adobe Photoshop CC (Windows)
Last Modified Date/Time {0x0132} 2017:07:29 19:13:53
Artist {0x013B} AUGUST M NORMAN
EXIF Sub IFD
Exposure Time (1 / Shutter Speed) {0x829A} 1/10 second ===> 0.1 second
Exposure Program {0x8822} manual control (1)
ISO Speed Ratings {0x8827} 100
Sensitivity Type {0x8830} standard output sensitivity (SOS) (1)
Standard Output Sensitivity {0x8831} 100
EXIF Version {0x9000} 0221
Original Date/Time {0x9003} 2017:07:29 04:46:35
Digitization Date/Time {0x9004} 2017:07:29 04:46:35
Shutter Speed Value (APEX) {0x9201} 3321928/1000000
Shutter Speed (Exposure Time) 1/10 second
Exposure Bias (EV) {0x9204} 0/10 ===> 0
Metering Mode {0x9207} spot (3)
Flash {0x9209} Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode
Focal Length {0x920A} 2800/100 mm ===> 28 mm
Colour Space {0xA001} uncalibrated (65535)
Image Width {0xA002} 7017 pixels
Image Height {0xA003} 4683 pixels
Image Sensing Method {0xA217} one-chip color area sensor (2)
Custom Rendered {0xA401} normal process (0)
Exposure Mode {0xA402} auto bracket (2)
White Balance {0xA403} auto (0)
Focal Length in 35mm Film {0xA405} 28
Scene Capture Type {0xA406} standard (0)
Contrast {0xA408} hard (2)
Saturation {0xA409} normal (0)
Sharpness {0xA40A} hard (2)
Subject Distance Range {0xA40C} distant view (3)
Lens Model {0xA434} K or M Lens

Just Fred wrote:
I can't see any EXIF information. Did you remove it, or is there none? Was this shot as a JPEG?

Not knowing much about the shot (aperture setting, shutter speed, ISO), etc., I can only suggest that a tripod would help. An aperture of f/11 or smaller should be used, and the shutter speed commensurate with the ISO.

Reply
Aug 2, 2017 05:33:19   #
Manglesphoto Loc: 70 miles south of St.Louis
 
Bigmike1 wrote:
1/10 of a second is rather slow for a shot like this, wouldn't you say?


Slow?
Its a static subject I have take image in like lighting at much slower speeds.

Reply
Aug 2, 2017 06:09:55   #
jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ
 
SirMontgomery wrote:
Sorry I forgot to add with the post, it was shot as a DNG, ISO 100, 1/10 second, f/8, on a tripod with remote shutter release.


The settings shouldn't be the problem here. But, and this is a big but, have you don't anything to this image in post? If not, all raw images are rather dull and don't have any "in camera" processing such as sharpening, contrast, or saturation added. Your image looks like it could use all of those things. You might have also benefited from a CP filter. Don't know the quality of your lens or if this camera is a DSLR. If it's not processed, then give us permission to alter your image and see what it "could" look like if processed.

Reply
Page 1 of 4 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Photo Analysis
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.