Thank you angler; I think that Michigan's Upper Peninsula has some exceptional beauty and a lot of wild area with little population, which is a bonus. The changing seasons means it never gets boring.

Thank you merrytexan; that is one of the things that I like best about being near Lake Superior. It has obviously been a while since I have been on here; thank you for taking the time to comment even though it was an old post.

It is a hawk, and looks like either a Cooper's Hawk (about the size of a crow) or a Sharp-Shinned Hawk (about the size of a jay). A Cooper's Hawk also has a more rounded tail, which can't be seen in this picture, whereas the Sharp-Shinned Hawk has a square tail.

Thank you.

Thank you. There are some benefits of being here that offset 300 inches of snow a year. You are welcome; I'm glad you enjoyed them.

Thank you. The workshop was timed to catch the peak color, and the leader took us to some places with incredible color, as well as variety of color. That is one of my wife's favorites as well.

Earlier this month I attended an Autumn color photography workshop here in Michigan's Upper Peninsula. A friend here at UH who misses Michigan asked me to post some of my images from the workshop, so here are a few of them.

Lake Superior at Sunset - 40D, Canon 10-22, 10mm, f/8, 0.4 sec, ISO 100


Sunset Over Au Sable Point - 40D, Canon 10-22, 13mm, f/22, 4.0 sec, ISO 100


Autumn Maples - 5D MkII, 100-400L, 400mm, f/22, 1.6 sec, ISO 100


Birch and Maple - 5D MkII, 100-400L, 400mm, f/16, 13 sec, ISO 100


Autumn Morning on the Lake - 5D MkII, 100-400L, 170mm, f/11, 20 sec, ISO 100


Morning on the Lake - 5D MkII, 100-400L, 150mm, f/16, 13 sec, ISO 100


Autumn Color - 5D MkII, 100-400L, 180mm, f/10, 1/13 sec, ISO 400

Yes. The further you are from the subject, the greater the depth of field for any given focal length and aperture, which is why there is such a limited depth of field when taking macro images. I would also like to note that approximately 1/3 of the depth of field is in front of the focus plane (or point of focus, if you prefer) and the rest is behind the focus plane.

That can be difficult to do as it is difficult to judge where that third point would be, and wouldn't work very well if you want to place something in the immediate foreground. They are probably making that recommendation based on the relationship between the location of the point of focus and the limits of the depth of field; approximately 1/3 of the depth of field is in front of the focus plane and the rest is behind it.

You are welcome. In case you, or anyone else, is interested, I have a Word document that has hyperfocal charts and instructions for their use. I have printed it out and scanned it as a jpeg image and attached it. The correct chart to use is based on the sensor size. I have not included one for 4/3rds or Micro 4/3rds cameras, but if someone has one of those cameras they can generate their own chart by taking the focusing distances from the Full-Size Sensor/35mm chart and multiplying them by the crop/magnification factor of 2. I hope this helps.

Hyperfocal Charts and Instructions

Thank you. As an engineer, I like charts and formulas, and settings I can use to get the results I want, and using the Hyper-Focal Distance gives me that.

I regularly use hyper-focal distance for my landscape images, and carry a hyper-focal distance chart with me at all times. There are a number of sources on the Internet where you can download a chart, which is specific for your sensor size. I am an engineer, and was not happy with the typos in the charts I could find, so I found an equation for hyper-focal distance on the Internet and generated my own chart. The chart lists aperture and focal length, and by looking those up in the table, it will list what distance to manually set the lens focus at. The distance would be double what the distance to the nearest object would be, so you could also look up the hyper-focal distance that would match your composition and see if you there is an aperture that will work with you focal length you want to use.

I've attached several images that were handy that I've captured using my hyper-focal distance chart.

Miner's Falls - 5D MkII, 24-105L, 28mm, f/22, 2 sec, ISO 100, HFD 4.8'


Alger Falls, 5D MkII, 24-105L, 24mm, f/22, 8 sec, ISO 100, HFD 3.5'


Beach Ball - 5D MkII, 24-105L, 24mm, f/22, 1/8 sec, ISO 100, HFD 3.5'


Superior Shores - 5D MkII, 24-105L, 24mm, f/22, 0.6 sec, ISO 100, HFD 3.5'

I believe it is actually a Nuthatch.

Comparing the two lenses, I don't see why the Sigma lens would be better for what you plan to do with it than the Canon, except that it is about $700 cheaper (at least at B&H). According to the specs at B&H, the Sigma is about 3/4 lb. heavier, and about 1/2 inch longer, but other than that they have basically the same features. I have the 100-400L, and don't know anything about the Sigma, but Sigma makes good lenses from everything I've heard, so I suspect that it will serve you well. If you have a grace period where you could take it back and trade up, then you would need to decide whether the Canon is worth the extra money, which is a significant difference. Unless you find a review or other information that the Sigma is significantly inferior (which I strongly doubt), or more prone to breakage, etc., I would take the money you saved and apply it to another lens or better tripod, etc., and enjoy the Sigma. It does confuse me about why the salesman thought the Sigma would be better for you, however.

Here are three of mine. They are my favorites not because they are necessarily great shots, but because of what it took to get them. I did these for an assignment for an on-line photography class I took, where you were supposed to get images from an unusual viewpoint. I intentionally made it harder for myself by deciding they all had to be captured using my 40D with my Canon 10-22mm lens at 10mm because I had never successfully captured images I was happy with at that short a focal length. I used a custom designed arm that attached to my tripod and moved my camera about 18" off center, which allowed me to hang my camera about 7" over the side of the cliff for the waterfall image (and that I designed and fabricated specifically for that image). I also shot the waterfall tethered to a laptop computer using live view remotely with EOS Utilities software because I couldn't see either the eyepiece or the LCD screen on the camera. I used the same arm to get the other two shots. For the stream shot, the arm allowed me to get my camera within a few inches of the surface just downstream from a small rapids. For the crab apple blossoms, I was on top of the roof on my Jeep Cherokee and the arm let me get my camera a few inches from the blossoms.

Scott Falls - 10 sec, f/22, ISO 100


Whetstone Brook - 0.8 sec, f/22, ISO 100


Crab Apple Blossoms - 1/4000 sec, f/3.5, ISO 200