Re: Day 31 - October 2010 PAD
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ScoutR
I don't know Dave, the teasle looks pretty sharp. I see what you mean about the background, but even that looks pretty good. Seeing as I am working on DOF right now, I have to ask what this shot would have been like if you had snuck up on the teasle with your 105mm and shot wide open. I'm thinking the tealse would be just as sharp or sharper, and bokeh would be lovely? Note the question mark. It's a serious question. What differences would the other lens have made?
Love the castle tower, Congratulations on making it through October. Maybe I will try in January. :eek:
Wendy
Thanks, Wendy,
Yes, the teasle is OK, I took at f/8 and f/11, on a big screen, the f/8 shot looked better.
It is the background, which I should have paid more attention to at shooting time, that was the problem. In terms of cloning issues, it is the border between fake green and natural biege below and to right is the problem area.
I'll try a comparison as you suggest next time - I just hope I don't get a taste for the wider apertures though, that glass is expensive and heavier than what I'm used to ;)
Thanks for the encouragement, although I didn't do as much as I should - I see my PAD gallery has just 29 pics in, and a few of those were 'two a day' jobs like this! but at least I haven't overdone it like last time.
Cheers,
Re: Day 31 - October 2010 PAD
Great series, Kay. And a wonderful final shot. You've managed to capture the relaxed eye, even while focused on the muzzle, and providing a nice reflection. Beautiful.
Cheers,
Rick
Re: Day 31 - October 2010 PAD
Quote:
Originally Posted by
rick55
Great series, Kay. And a wonderful final shot. You've managed to capture the relaxed eye, even while focused on the muzzle, and providing a nice reflection. Beautiful.
Cheers,
Rick
Thanks Rick :) - I think that's 1 piece of (reflecting) black cardboard that made the ultimate sacrifice...can't seem to get the doggy drool off...eew
Re: Day 31 - October 2010 PAD
I couldn't leave anyone out or I'd be an in trouble mommy; so, you get four, for one, today!
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4027/...e9cee0aa_z.jpg
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1354/...7f90d8a8_z.jpg
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1353/...9e689a70_z.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4068/...f35ebeb0_z.jpg
It was a pleasure, a treat and, really, an honor to take this little intense journey with you all. I could see everyone improving and it got to a point that it would be ridiculous if I oooohed and aaaaahed over EVERYONE's efforts every time. Thanks for all of your encouragement, too. It's meant a lot!
Re: Day 31 - October 2010 PAD
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dave Humphries
Thanks, Wendy,
Yes, the teasle is OK, I took at f/8 and f/11, on a big screen, the f/8 shot looked better.
It is the background, which I should have paid more attention to at shooting time, that was the problem. In terms of cloning issues, it is the border between fake green and natural biege below and to right is the problem area.
Yes, I see what you mean about the problem areas. If you had shot this wide open with the same lens from the same spot,do you think that would have solved the problem. I am only asking to try to muddle out this DOF and what difference the lenses might make. I'm still thinking of getting the 105 macro, but I'm not sure that it will do any better than the other lenses if used under the right conditions and proper settings.
Quote:
I'll try a comparison as you suggest next time - I just hope I don't get a taste for the wider apertures though, that glass is expensive and heavier than what I'm used to ;)
Is the 105mm heavier than the 70-300 or 18-200?
Wendy
Re: Day 31 - October 2010 PAD
Congratulations to everyone - I really enjoyed viewing the PAD albums and think you all did a great job with a lot of really stand out shots.
Wendy
Re: Day 31 - October 2010 PAD
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Katy Noelle
For some reason I really like this one. It seems to sum up my attitude to life at the moment - "what the heck!":)
Re: Day 31 - October 2010 PAD
Quote:
Originally Posted by
carregwen
For some reason I really like this one. It seems to sum up my attitude to life at the moment - "what the heck!":)
:rolleyes: :)
Re: Day 31 - October 2010 PAD
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ScoutR
If you had shot this wide open with the same lens from the same spot,do you think that would have solved the problem. I am only asking to try to muddle out this DOF and what difference the lenses might make. I'm still thinking of getting the 105 macro, but I'm not sure that it will do any better than the other lenses if used under the right conditions and proper settings.
Is the 105mm heavier than the 70-300 or 18-200?
Wendy
Hi Wendy,
Yeah, I know you have a hankering for it, that's why I promised to do some comparisons, more worthwhile if you benefit as well as me :)
I may have some time Thursday (day off work for an early morning trip with daughter somewhere), so I should get a chance later on in day.
Looked it up;
18-200 = 565g
70-300 = 745g
105mm= 790g
but better than > 1kg of the f2.8 zooms.
One problem I find, keeping them in their cases, is telling them apart in the rucksack :o
Cheers,