Flower - Having trouble with focus

[MariaMaria]

Hello All,

I took this image the other day at the park. I am posting the edited version (cropped). I used my D7100 and only had my 35mm lens at the time. The image needs to be sharper but I'm having difficulty determining what to focus on in nature images (like this flower, trees, leafy areas, etc.) to make sure they are sharp. I wanted the entire flower to be sharp but it seems like just that one petal at the top is. Tips regarding where to focus on in an image and which focus setting to use in camera are appreciated. Aside from the issues mentioned above, feedback regarding composition, exposure, etc., is also appreciated.

1/160th at f 2.8, handheld, iso 250 (maybe I should have used a faster shutter? or a smaller aperture?)

[FrankMi]

The image needs to be sharper but I'm having difficulty determining what to focus on in nature images (like this flower, trees, leafy areas, etc.) to make sure they are sharp. I wanted the entire flower to be sharp but it seems like just that one petal at the top is. Tips regarding where to focus on in an image and which focus setting to use in camera are appreciated. Aside from the issues mentioned above, feedback regarding composition, exposure, etc., is also appreciated.

1/160th at f 2.8, handheld, iso 250 (maybe I should have used a faster shutter? or a smaller aperture?)

Hi Maria, Aquilegia (Columbine or Granny's Bonnet as it is commonly called) is typically a very small flower and a slender stalk making it difficult to photograph sharply with even the slightest breeze. If there is no breeze at all, you can increase your depth of field by using a smaller aperture. To get both a smaller aperture and a higher shutter speed you should be able to increase the ISO. Given its small size, a tripod would also be useful as well.

Well done on the lighting, exposure, and composition!

[Manfred M]

Maria - I tend to not be someone who takes a lot of pictures of flowers, so someone who does may have other additional comments.

You are shooting with a relatively large aperture (f/2.8), so that is going to give you a fairly shallow depth of field, so stopping down a bit to f/4 or f/5.6 will give you a bit more., but that would also reduce the out of focus background, so the compositional tradeoff is really up to you.

I would probably be tempted to use a single focus point mode and focus on the stamen of the plant as they tend to be fairly rigid and sharp, whereas the petals tend to be a bit softer and a slight softening of these will tend to be a bit less obvious.

I would also be tempted to do this kind of a shot using a tripod as you can set the camera into a position that you want compositionally, without having to worry about camera movement (although the wind can still cause issues with a small, delicate shot).

Being digital, the approach I would use is to bracket the shot, exploring different focus points and DoF approaches to see which one you like best.

[Mike Buckley]

My method in similar situations:

1. Make the settings that would be ideal if indeed they accomplish what you hope to accomplish. One of the settings would be the use of Aperture Priority.
2. Use single-point focus and focus on the abosolute most important part of the flower, the part that you would want in focus if only that part can be in focus.
3. Take additional photos, using a slightly smaller or larger aperture each time, depending on your first aperture setting.
4. Review all of the photos on your monitor to determine which one best meets your goals.

[Geoff F]

I'm surprised you got as good as you did at F2.8, Maria. I would be at F11 to F16 for a shot like that.

Lenses are never totally sharp when at their extremities plus the lack of focus depth.

But the problem is that having a better aperture means either a long shutter speed or a higher Iso and both have drawbacks.

Which means I always shoot scenes like this on a tripod.

Flash is an option but if you aren't careful you can get unnatural looking results. Full sun is another option which also has potential problems so I prefer light shade.

[Mike Buckley]

Another thought, Maria: When using a relatively large aperture setting, it's not a good idea to use the method of auto focusing placing a single point on part of the flower and then recomposing. That's because the part that you initially focused on may not be in focus once you have recomposed.

[MariaMaria]

I would probably be tempted to use a single focus point mode and focus on the stamen of the plant as they tend to be fairly rigid and sharp, whereas the petals tend to be a bit softer and a slight softening of these will tend to be a bit less obvious.

I would also be tempted to do this kind of a shot using a tripod as you can set the camera into a position that you want compositionally, without having to worry about camera movement (although the wind can still cause issues with a small, delicate shot).

Being digital, the approach I would use is to bracket the shot, exploring different focus points and DoF approaches to see which one you like best.

Thanks Manfred, I used a single focus point and Aperture Priority. I do not believe that my tripod is capable of getting low enough to the ground to take a shot like this, I will be sure to double check though. I like your suggestion about focusing on the stamen, I will try that in future and see how it turns out!

[MariaMaria]

Another thought, Maria: When using a relatively large aperture setting, it's not a good idea to use the method of auto focusing placing a single point on part of the flower and then recomposing. That's because the part that you initially focused on may not be in focus once you have recomposed.

Thanks Mike, that makes sense! I think that is the issue I was running into when trying to capture this flower. So if that is the case, should I use manual focus?

[MariaMaria]

I'm surprised you got as good as you did at F2.8, Maria. I would be at F11 to F16 for a shot like that.

Lenses are never totally sharp when at their extremities plus the lack of focus depth.

But the problem is that having a better aperture means either a long shutter speed or a higher Iso and both have drawbacks.

Which means I always shoot scenes like this on a tripod.

Flash is an option but if you aren't careful you can get unnatural looking results. Full sun is another option which also has potential problems so I prefer light shade.

I will have to invest in a mini-tripod or something that can get fairly low to the ground. My aim was for a creamy background with a sharp flower, I will try bracketing to see which combo works best.

[Mike Buckley]

Thanks Mike, that makes sense! I think that is the issue I was running into when trying to capture this flower. So if that is the case, should I use manual focus?

That is one solution. The other solution is to use whatever focus point allows you to focus without recomposing. The issue with a subject such as this one is that there may be no focus point so ideally positioned.

The ideal solution probably is to use a tripod and manually focus using Live View highly magnified, perhaps at the largest magnification.

[Mike Buckley]

I just now put your comments from two posts together in my mind and will discuss them with the idea that you have a complete understanding. The two comments are that you wanted the entire flower in focus and that you think recomposing caused a problem.

If the entire flower had been in initially in focus, it's likely though not necessarily so that it would have remained in focus when you recomposed. I think the likelihood is that you used an aperture that was probably too large to keep the entire flower in focus regardless of the placement of your focus point.

So, let's "talk" the entire thought process through:

You used a shutter speed of 160th second. You might have been able to use a slower shutter speed (resulting from a smaller aperture), but probably no slower than 100th, which is only a difference of about 1/3 stop. That's not enough gain to risk not stopping the action of the flower blowing in a gentle breeze.

You used an aperture of f/2.8. You could have stopped down just enough to make sure that all of the flower was in focus. Even if that rendered a background that was not ideally blurred, the subject is always more important than the background, especially because it's easy to blur the background during post processing but you have few options when trying to sharpen an unsharp subject.

Personally, I would have used Auto ISO and used the ideal aperture setting, letting the camera change the ISO to whatever is needed to achieve your exposure compensation setting. Your D7100 has really great high-ISO quality, so noise should not become an issue in that light until at least ISO 3200. Even if you disagree with me about that value, set your Auto ISO's maximum ISO value to whatever you are comfortable using and go for it.

[MariaMaria]

You used an aperture of f/2.8. You could have stopped down just enough to make sure that all of the flower was in focus. Even if that rendered a background that was not ideally blurred, the subject is always more important than the background, especially because it's easy to blur the background during post processing but you have few options when trying to sharpen an unsharp subject.

Thanks Mike. I think I will try using a smaller aperture in the future and the auto ISO setting and see how that works. I was wondering if there was a way to blur the background in PP but have not figured out how to do that yet. I will "google" that But that is something I will definitely keep in mind, that the subject is always more important. It's easy for me to get flustered when an image is not working out how I want it to so I have to remember that .

[Mike Buckley]

Blurring can be done using Gaussian Blur or Noise Reduction. Even so, you'll usually be able to get enough blur in the capture.

[chauncey]

Maria, DOF knowledge while in the field can be computed by using one of these http://www.amazon.com/ExpoImaging-Ex...eld+calculator or by getting an app for an android device.

[MariaMaria]

Maria, DOF knowledge while in the field can be computed by using one of these http://www.amazon.com/ExpoImaging-Ex...eld+calculator or by getting an app for an android device.

Thanks! I'm going to look for an app!

[bnnrcn]

Hi Maria, If you have Google Play Store on your mobile phone, there are DOF calculators which you can download to your device.
They are free. I have 'DOF Calculator by Aimen RG'

Thanks! I'm going to look for an app!

[MariaMaria]

Hi Maria, If you have Google Play Store on your mobile phone, there are DOF calculators which you can download to your device.
They are free. I have 'DOF Calculator by Aimen RG'

Thanks, just downloaded and will check it out!

Photo Shoot Checklist: Bring a ruler

[DanK]

In general, it is very hard to get an entire flower in focus without stacking multiple images. How hard it is depends on how deep the flower is. Even with a shallow flower, however, f/2.8 is not going to be close. You will need to close the aperture down.

Re what to focus on: if the entire flower is not in crisp focus, the essential thing is that the detail that you want to highlight, or that will draw the eye, has to be in focus. In a shot like this, it is usually the anthers. Focusing and recomposing is difficult because even if the flower stays put, you are likely to move forward or backward when you move the camera to recompose. If you are using AF, I would often use the center point and then crop to recompose. An alternative is to get an approximate focus with AF and then move the camera slightly yourself to obtain focus. This may sound odd, but it is standard practice for many macro photographers. If you want to try this, you obviously can't use a tripod. I often use a monopod for this reason.

The photo below is nothing special, but I had it handy, and it illustrates these points. I took this at f/14 to get most of the crocus in focus, because it is a fairly deep flower. I used a monopod to steady the camera. Because I used f/14, the background was more in focus than I wanted, so I blurred it a bit (not enough) in postprocessing.