Blimey...

[peter mccue]

Certainly lifted my spirits Chippy, 3 & 4 for me as well in particular no 4. I love fishing & investigating small streams (never really grew up) & that pic has oodles of character. Superb Colour, perspective & clarity all round.

 

Marvellous...I can only dream of taking shots like that.

[Chippy]

I might be missing something Chippy as I have not kept up with digital but your depth of field in the last picture is awesome and reminiscent of a moveable film plane camera. Is that something that digital has an advantage on as the focus seems to be consistent throughout. (and YES, I have put my glasses on )

 

Nice Picture

 

a wideangle lens and a smallish aperture pretty much gives front to back sharpness on a shot like that (on a 1.3 crop camera). Had I got really close to the foreground rocks, say a foot or so, I probably would have needed to have stopped down to say F16, or maybe even smaller, to get it all sharp. The trouble with stopping down too far - F11 is about perfect on the 17-40mm lens i used, is that quality starts to drop away.

[Huge_Vitae]

a wideangle lens and a smallish aperture pretty much gives front to back sharpness on a shot like that (on a 1.3 crop camera). Had I got really close to the foreground rocks, say a foot or so, I probably would have needed to have stopped down to say F16, or maybe even smaller, to get it all sharp. The trouble with stopping down too far - F11 is about perfect on the 17-40mm lens i used, is that quality starts to drop away.

I had discounted a wide~angle lens due to lack of proportional distortion at the edges, the 1.3 crop camera might answer that if you would take the time to explain bearing in mind my experiance is now so outdated I might as well explain to you how to get your subjects tio sit still for 25 mins

 

I would hasten to add that my old cameras of the 35mm stock Nikon F3, F4, F4S and lastly my beautiful and cherished F5 complete with Nikkor lenses would not compete with that on depth of field. I wonder if there is a relationship between the way it is viewed on screen rather than on paper!

 

Have you ever had some pictures printed up and made a comparison, something that interests me.

 

cheers

[Chippy]

I wonder if there is a relationship between the way it is viewed on screen rather than on paper!

 

Have you ever had some pictures printed up and made a comparison, something that interests me.

 

cheers

 

 

I dont think so. I've got an A3+ photo printer at home - they look even sharper and more impressive in the flesh!

 

I guess that fullframe - either digital or film - will use the full width of the lens and will therefore accentuate the distortion more.

[Steve Burke]

Excellent pics Chippy! I especially like the last one, whilst the viewpoint on the field really makes it work. I wish I had such an eye.

[Westie]

As someone wanting to get into photography in a more meaningful way than the poor point and shoot camera I have got, those pictures quite simply blew me away.

 

Totally stunning.

 

If I can ever take shots remotely close to those, I'll be chuffed.

 

I'm still hankering after the Sony Alpha 100 - when I manage it, I'll be in here like a rat up a drainpipe for advice.

 

Once again - simply stunning. Quite made my day.

Edited September 1, 2006 by Westie