Mt. Rainier sunrise from Mt. Ararat

No hdr. I was trying to get a higher shutter speed because these were hand held without IS. Not sure how well I could have shot 1/30, but maybe? No light-weight tripod yet and my pack was already ~50 lbs, so I sacrificed the tripod...

17 x 1.6=28 so 1/30 shutter speed is doable. No reason to use 2 stops higher ISO, degrading your IQ, because you don't understand shooting techniques. Image stabilization is meant for shutter speed that is likely to record camera shake. You had enough light to nor need IS and to be able to use ISO 100.

HappySnapper90 wrote in post #17152782
17 x 1.6=28 so 1/30 shutter speed is doable. No reason to use 2 stops higher ISO, degrading your IQ, because you don't understand shooting techniques. Image stabilization is meant for shutter speed that is likely to record camera shake. You had enough light to nor need IS and to be able to use ISO 100.

1/30 is doable for you, I'm not as comfortable with it and had no IS nor a tripod. So I went with higher ISO to counter that. I don't understand shooting techniques so I don't think I can notice a little more noise either. Thanks though.

freestylee30 wrote in post #17154274
1/30 is doable for you, I'm not as comfortable with it and had no IS nor a tripod. So I went with higher ISO to counter that. I don't understand shooting techniques so I don't think I can notice a little more noise either. Thanks though.

Then you might want to look into photography books before you buy even more lenses. Knowledge will improve your photos more than more lenses.

Huh? Who said anything about buying lenses? Did we make it into the WTB/WTS forum somehow? I'm not looking to buy anything!

I appreciate you giving me advice that I could have probably shot this at 100 iso and although I'm no pro, I know my level of confidence in my own skill and therefore I opted to shoot higher to be on the safe side. Sorry you don't like that, but thanks for your concern...

PS - WTB UL tripod

Kinda skimmed through this, and stumbled upon your last post here that you need a tripod. Well, duh! :P

Seriously though, if you want to do this type of photography, and you seem to have a natural knack for it, you're going to want, no NEED a good solid tripod. I understand hiking/backpacking and wanting to travel light, but if photography is also the goal of these endeavours, get a tripod.

Rant over. Nice shot mate.

HappySnapper90 wrote in post #17154611
Then you might want to look into photography books before you buy even more lenses. Knowledge will improve your photos more than more lenses.

Cmon dude. Once again you say the OP has no clue. Maybe he cant hold the camera quite enough to manage 1/30s. So how you dare to say he has no clue about techniques?

this thread is taking a turn for the weird. Remember that this is a critique sub forum and as such there is really no restriction on what aspect of photography is critiqued unless the OP specifically restricts it. Suggesting someone should seek more knowledge is not suggesting they have no clue. I first picked up a 35mm camera in 1980 and have been shooting in one form or another since then. I still seek new knowledge on the subject on an almost daily basis.

HappyShooter's suggestion of lower ISO and slower shutter speed is sound. And not just for noise reduction. Lower ISO will also yield a higher dynamic range that would give the shot more contrast straight out of camera.

freestyle, the formula for calculating minimum shutter speed with no IS is simple. With a full frame camera, it would be 1/focal length (focal length of 24mm = 1/24 shutter speed) for crop cameras it's 1/(focal length x 1.6). To keep it simple and build in a little buffer, just double your focal length and decide if you want a little more buffer or a little less.

I repeat that because it is so simple, and as a backpacker myself, i fully realize the need to cut weight. I have never carried a tripod on a true backpacking overnight trip, and I own a very light, compact one. Not only is the weight an issue, but tripods are generally too cumbersome for someone trying to cover X number of miles to get to the next campsite. Furthermore , in moments like this taking time to fiddle with setting one up might have made you miss the shot.

Great shot BTW. You have a good eye for composition which is something that often can't be learned. Keep putting yourself in the position to get a great shot, and keep learning and you'll get even more spectacular images.

freestylee30 wrote in post #17146743
cmh512 I don't remember it being particularly windy that morning, so I don't think so. Honestly I think it was just the fact that I was probably focusing on Mount Rainier and also, I recently did some AFMA on my camera/lens and it was off a little, so???
!

As you shoot more you will get a feel for DOF, but using a calculator always comes in handy. Also, there's an app for that, i use Photo Pils. The most important thing to remember for shots like this is "Hyperfocal Distance" This rule says that there is a point where focusing further away does not gain any additional sharpness in the items furthest from the camera. At the following link I plugged in the 7d (since they don't add new cameras anymore) and your other settings and here are the results:

http://www.dofmaster.c​om/dofjs.html

 Subject distance 	10 ft
 
Depth of field 
Near limit 	3.85 ft
Far limit 	Infinity
Total 	Infinite
 
In front of subject 	6.1 ft
Behind subject 	Infinite
 
Hyperfocal distance 	6.29 ft
Circle of confusion 	0.019 mm

hes gone wrote in post #17170558
=he's gone;17170558]this thread is taking a turn for the weird. Remember that this is a critique sub forum and as such there is really no restriction on what aspect of photography is critiqued unless the OP specifically restricts it. Suggesting someone should seek more knowledge is not suggesting they have no clue. I first picked up a 35mm camera in 1980 and have been shooting in one form or another since then. I still seek new knowledge on the subject on an almost daily basis.

HappyShooter's suggestion of lower ISO and slower shutter speed is sound. And not just for noise reduction. Lower ISO will also yield a higher dynamic range that would give the shot more contrast straight out of camera.

freestyle, the formula for calculating minimum shutter speed with no IS is simple. With a full frame camera, it would be 1/focal length (focal length of 24mm = 1/24 shutter speed) for crop cameras it's 1/(focal length x 1.6). To keep it simple and build in a little buffer, just double your focal length and decide if you want a little more buffer or a little less.

I repeat that because it is so simple, and as a backpacker myself, i fully realize the need to cut weight. I have never carried a tripod on a true backpacking overnight trip, and I own a very light, compact one. Not only is the weight an issue, but tripods are generally too cumbersome for someone trying to cover X number of miles to get to the next campsite. Furthermore , in moments like this taking time to fiddle with setting one up might have made you miss the shot.

Great shot BTW. You have a good eye for composition which is something that often can't be learned. Keep putting yourself in the position to get a great shot, and keep learning and you'll get even more spectacular images.

I fully agree. But the OP clearly stated that he cant handle 1/30s so whats the point of telling him 3 times that its much better. Maybe im wrong but to me the OP clearly stated that he knows that 1/30 and ISO 100 wouldve been better, but what does a picture do at ISO 100 without grain when you have motion blur... That was my point

I see that he said he isn't "comfortable" with it. I guess that's open to interpretation. Could be as you suggest and not phisiccly able to do it, or it could be that he does not have the experience to be comfortable with it. I am considering the latter to be the case.

Hi guys -

Sorry, I'm just now seeing these additional posts to my thread. Thank you for the replies with some good info and compliments!

hiketheplanet - I've got a pretty decent tripod, but it is like 8lbs... my pack was already ~50 lbs, so I sacrificed it! Good news though, I have a nice UL tripod on my Christmas list

he's gone - thanks for the additional info re: minimum shutter speed and focus distance/dof. Some good info here that will definitely help me in the future.

I should clarify my "not comfortable with 1/30" statement... Based on the shooting I've done and the results I've seen I personally feel more comfortable losing some DR and IQ for a hopefully sharper image (is that even the right technical term?). Being as I don't know how often I'll get the opportunity to re-shoot a location like this, I was aiming for a better-safe-than-sorry scenario. It doesn't always work out that way, but the way I see it is that I shoot for myself and anyone who wants to appreciate the areas I hike or the other subjects I shoot. I'm not trying to make any money off photography or make any clients happy. Hopefully that makes sense.

freestylee30 wrote in post #17186049
I should clarify my "not comfortable with 1/30" statement... Based on the shooting I've done and the results I've seen I personally feel more comfortable losing some DR and IQ for a hopefully sharper image (is that even the right technical term?). Being as I don't know how often I'll get the opportunity to re-shoot a location like this, I was aiming for a better-safe-than-sorry scenario. It doesn't always work out that way, but the way I see it is that I shoot for myself and anyone who wants to appreciate the areas I hike or the other subjects I shoot. I'm not trying to make any money off photography or make any clients happy. Hopefully that makes sense.

I was trying hard not to jump in on this, but personally I would not have shot it at 1/30s either. Probably would have opted for 1/60s in burst mode at ISO200. I find that at 1/fL I still stand a chance of getting a bad shot and the IQ difference between ISO100 and ISO200 isn't worth the risk.

Also even if not windy grass and stuff moves. 1/30s is taking an unnecessary risk IMHO just to get slightly better IQ.

So I vote you do the same thing again if in the same situation or maybe go 1/2*FL and let off a burst of 5-6 shots.

I think this is a pretty good shot and the sharpening of the mountain, if possible, would benefit it.

I may have also tried to get closer to the purple flowers and make them more prominent in the scene.

ejenner wrote in post #17189057
So I vote you do the same thing again if in the same situation or maybe go 1/2*FL and let off a burst of 5-6 shots.

I vote you buy a tripod, then use whatever shutter speed you want