[quote=Dik]Color goes away rapidly with distance in water, so by the time you reach 30', only the blue end of the spectrum is available from natural light. Best color is right up near the surface.[/quote

True and that is why most are taken with flash. Every one of these pics were taken well below 30 feet. (I am sorry but I am traveling and do not have access to the original files. The quality of this iPhone photo stinks but I think it still makes the point about color.)

(Download)

I am a diver. The TG-5 is a nice camera but a camera rated to 50 feet is really not suitable for a scuba diver. The recreational dive limit is 130’. Of course, he could choose to limit his dives to 50’ but that’s not as simple as it sounds.

First of all, many new divers have difficulty controlling their bouyancy and may end up going deeper than planned, even if for a brief time. I’m sure there is a fudge factor built into the camera specs and it would survive a deeper plunge for a brief period but....?

Secondly, most dives are done with a group on a commercial dive boat. The operator chooses the dive sites and the profile. Most boat trips comprise 2 dives. For technical reasons, the first is always deeper; the second is more shallow. So, for the first dive he’d either have to leave his camera on the boat or, while the rest of the group is on the reef, he would have to hover far above them where there is nothing to see or photograph. And in low visibility he risks getting separated.

Thirdly, many dive trips include wreck dives and shipwrecks are often very photogenic. Obviously they are always on the bottom of the ocean. Of course there are some shallow wrecks but most would be off limits to him with that camera.

For a relatively inexpensive camera for a casual dive photographer, I’d suggest the Nikon Coolpix W300 which has a depth rating of 100’. If he becomes really serious about dive photography he’ll still outgrow it but, in the meantime, he has a camera he can use for the vast majority of dives he’ll take.

As others have indicated, the issue you are addressing is called depth of field (DOF). Simply put, it means how much of your image from front to back will be in acceptable focus.

DOF increases as the lens aperture gets smaller. The higher the fstop number, the smaller the aperture. So, at f16 you will have far greater DOF than you will at f1.8.

To control DOF, shoot in “aperture priority” rather than “program” mode. In aperture priority, you set the fstop and the camera chooses the shutter speed needed for correct exposure.

Just keep in mind that as you set a smaller fstop (higher number) the camera will compensate by choosing a slower shutter speed. Too slow a shutter speed will result in a blurred image with a moving subject or from camera movement.

With a 55mm lens you should be able to shoot with a shutter speed as low as 1/30 of a second if you have a steady hand. If the subject is moving, you’d need a faster shutter speed to freeze it. If the subject is still, a tripod will allow you to use a much slower shutter speed successfully.

The only way to increase the shutter speed at a given aperture is to increase the ISO. The higher the ISO, the more light the sensor captures. So, if you are shooting a moving subject and you need significant DOF, increase the ISO until the shutter speed is fast enough to freeze action at a smaller fstop. However, keep in mind a higher ISO will produce more noise or “grain” in your image so try not to set any higher than you absolutely need.

The minute I saw the title of your post, this was the place that came to mind. I’ve passed there dozens of times and have yet to stop in.

Great shot.

Thanks, Bob. I’m happy with the shot and it’s framed the way I want. I just meant I wish I had the higher resolution of my camera which would enable me to make a large print. I ordered an 8x12 just to see how it holds up.

Thanks, John. I’m happy I had the opportunity to take the picture and that cell phone cameras are as good as they are. But, if I decide to print it, my options will be limited. I might see what an 8x12 looks like just for the heck of it.

Thanks, everyone. I just wish I had my real camera with me.

I was in New York for a one night business trip last week. While standing on the deck of the 41st floor of the Parker New York hotel, I noticed how the setting sun was illuminating the gold cross on top of the Fifth Avenue Presbyterian Church. Unfortunately, I only had my cell phone.

(Download)

Excellent, as usual!

I concur with most of the previous comments. Your exterior shots don’t work nearly as well as your interiors. Your interior shots are very well exposed and, in most cases, you’ve achieved the proper depth of field and field of view. My only criticism is that a handful of them, e.g. the tighter shots and those where the furniture dominates the foreground, are more about the furnishings and less about the room. As a perspective buyer that’s not what I want to see. But, really, except for those few minor criticisms, this is fine work.

Very nice!

It’s not GAS to want the proper equipment for that body. At least one of the lenses he has is a dx (not sure about the 50). Using a dx on an 810 means he is not using the full frame so why bother buying an 810 in the first place?

To the OP, I have the same body and mostly travel with a 16-35 f/4 Nikon zoom that I bought used for around $850 and a Tamron 70-200 f2.8 G-2 that’s about $1,300 new. I find they meet the vast majority of my needs. A 24-70 would be nice but I’ve rarely missed the range between 35 and 70. Usually I can remedy that with my feet.

One final point. All that gear is heavy. Consider a backpack rather than a shoulder bag.

We were there in February. Despite cold, rain, snow and clouds, we loved it. We did get to see the Northern Lights but it’s light 24 hours a day in the summer so you won’t have that opportunity.

There are too many amazing things to see to cover here. We booked a self driving tour through Guide to Iceland and, even if you’re not using them, you could look at the many driving itineraries on their site, guidetoiceland.is. They list pretty much everything you’d want to see.

You really won’t need cash. Credit and debit cards are commonly used for everything, even just a cup of coffee or candy bar at a gas station. And, as someone else said, at the unmanned gas stations in remote areas you must have a pin enabled credit or debit card. Tipping is customary but not to the same degree as in the states and, if you have no Icelandic cash, they’ll happily accept U.S. for a tip.

Food is expensive, about twice what you’d pay in the states. Our hotels included breakfast and we usually just picked up lunch on the road. Gas stations, especially Oli’s, have all kinds of good hot and cold sandwiches and are not horribly expensive. Expect to spend $40 to $50 per person for an average dinner without drinks.

We found the people to be very friendly and just about everyone speaks fluent English.

As far as photography goes, I travelled with a 16-35 and a 70-200 on a full frame camera. I shot mostly landscapes and rarely used the longer lens. You can look through my posts and see some of the shots I took.

Have a fantastic time.

Great shots. Thanks for posting. And I’m thanking you for somewhat selfish reasons. I just bought that lens a couple of weeks ago and have not really had a chance to use it. I took a few shots in less than ideal circumstances and wasn’t overwhelmed with its sharpness. Your pics show what the lens is capable of.

I also bought a monopod just to support the weight and avoid fatigue while waiting.

I have a D810 and use the Nikon 16-35 f4 for landscapes and am very happy with it. Of the lenses I own, I use that lens more than any other.