testing my new lens
Fri Mar 07, 2008 8:37 pm
hi all,
This morning I tested out my new Nikkor 70-300mm lens. I just had my camera set to auto. I think the pictures turn out ok. But the only thing I dont like is the branches in the background. Are they suppost to be blurry?
Any tips I would be greatful. 
enjoy,
Nathan
This shot was by chance. The Cardinal was sitting on the branch and just as i was about to take the shot the bird flew off. Lucky I got it!
This morning I tested out my new Nikkor 70-300mm lens. I just had my camera set to auto. I think the pictures turn out ok. But the only thing I dont like is the branches in the background. Are they suppost to be blurry?
Any tips I would be greatful.
enjoy,
Nathan
This shot was by chance. The Cardinal was sitting on the branch and just as i was about to take the shot the bird flew off. Lucky I got it!
Fri Mar 07, 2008 9:13 pm
The depth of field you have is perfect. The blurry branches help the eye to focus on the subject rather than the background. I think the shots are great!
Fri Mar 07, 2008 9:49 pm
Nice photos!
Sat Mar 08, 2008 1:05 am
bdk wrote:The depth of field you have is perfect. The blurry branches help the eye to focus on the subject rather than the background. I think the shots are great!
If Nathan is wondering about why the branches are soft, perhaps he wouldn't understand what depth of field is . . .
DoF is the amount of area in a photo ahead of and behind the plane of focus (the exact spot parallel to the film or image sensor plane you, or the camera focused on) usually 1/3 in front and 2/3 behind where you focused. The amount of DoF is a combination of aperture size and focal length. Shorter focal length = more DoF. Smaller aperture = more depth of field at the expense of sharpness. A pinhole camera has almost unlimited DOF, but is very soft. A zoom lens is almost always less sharp than it's fixed focal length equivalent.
Bret (www.bretwills.com)
Sat Mar 08, 2008 6:37 pm
Nice pics Nathan! The third one is my favorite. I look forward to seeing some of your airshow pics in the near future, too! Again, congratulations on getting the new lens.
-Pat
-Pat
Mon Apr 07, 2008 7:48 pm
Thanks everyone. Glad you liked them. Thanks again!
Tue Apr 08, 2008 9:23 am
The Depth of Field which was mentioned makes a difference, also the branches might have been moving in the wind and at a slow shutter speed in low light they would show up blurred if moving.
Both methods are often done on purpose for effects.
When using the depth of field, the lens instruction book should tell you what the dof is for a given Fstop. the more open the lens the shallower the dof.
In Photo journalism school, they had the rule of 10s, in reguards to dof, where you focused between the third and fourth zone of a grid of ten. Think of standing in the stands of a football field, and shooting up the field towards the other end, you would focus on the 35 yard line for best depth of field for the entire field.
Of course you should always focus on your primary subject, but the rule of 10s works for wide shot with no central subject.
Kurt
Both methods are often done on purpose for effects.
When using the depth of field, the lens instruction book should tell you what the dof is for a given Fstop. the more open the lens the shallower the dof.
In Photo journalism school, they had the rule of 10s, in reguards to dof, where you focused between the third and fourth zone of a grid of ten. Think of standing in the stands of a football field, and shooting up the field towards the other end, you would focus on the 35 yard line for best depth of field for the entire field.
Of course you should always focus on your primary subject, but the rule of 10s works for wide shot with no central subject.
Kurt
Tue Apr 08, 2008 2:36 pm
Nice photo's Nathan!
I'm learning by reading your posts; I hope to upgrade my camera something this year or next.
I'm learning by reading your posts; I hope to upgrade my camera something this year or next.