1st sunset with 70-200mm 2.8 IS C&C please!

1 question I have right off the bat is how to get the trees in the backround to be clear as well.. they're oof!? I tried to correct this, but ran out of time!

Shooting this pic at f14 of higher would be a place to start. Great shot by the way!!!

spicolli1976 wrote in post #4488074
Shooting this pic at f14 of higher would be a place to start. Great shot by the way!!!

I tried this, but it was a bit windy.. The branches were a bit blurry if i went any higher.. I dont think I gave it a very good attempt though.. Keep the CC coming please!

You need to get the LWT version of the 70-200 f/2.8L IS. It's for Landscapes With Trees (thus LWT).

I lite this picture. The sky is so unreal.

You are focused on the close tree. Given the difference in distance between it and the background I dont think any f stop would provide focus for both. I try never to use anything higher than f8 for landscapes as it starts to hurt image quality. At f8 you could have everything from 53' to infinity in focus at 70mm. At f16 you could get everything from 26' on in focus.

Shots in low light like these pretty much have to be shot off a tripod, even then you are dealing with slow shutter speeds and if the wind is blowing, your background trees will still not be sharp. Its ok, the point of interest is the sky.

The sky looks very good, even being out of focus, but the sharp tree up close is very distracting for me.

epatt250 wrote in post #4490149
You are focused on the close tree. Given the difference in distance between it and the background I dont think any f stop would provide focus for both. I try never to use anything higher than f8 for landscapes as it starts to hurt image quality. At f8 you could have everything from 53' to infinity in focus at 70mm. At f16 you could get everything from 26' on in focus.

Shots in low light like these pretty much have to be shot off a tripod, even then you are dealing with slow shutter speeds and if the wind is blowing, your background trees will still not be sharp. Its ok, the point of interest is the sky.

The sky looks very good, even being out of focus, but the sharp tree up close is very distracting for me.

Thanks! I'll use this info for my landscapes!

You were using ISO 100, so you could have closed the aperture a bit, and boosted the iso. (but epatt has a point... it's very hard to get the background in focus, when you focus on something so close(relative to the background))

I think it is wicked. Awesome color...

Next time, if you want the trees in focus too, take two exposures. One with focus on the tree in the foreground and another for the background. Blend the two in Photoshop. I like it as-is though.

cdifoto wrote in post #4492912
Next time, if you want the trees in focus too, take two exposures. One with focus on the tree in the foreground and another for the background. Blend the two in Photoshop. I like it as-is though.

Good idea! thanks everyone!

I actually think it would also make an awesome crop if you cropped the bottom up higher just into the orange to remove the darker background land then crop just to the edge of the tree on the right and throw away all the bare sky. I think you would end up with a neat pic having the dark very sharp tree branches contrasting against the rich orange out of focus sky. That is if you can live with a fairly square crop.

Marcus,

Some understanding of hyperfocal distance would help a lot here. Basically, by manually focusing at approximately twice the distance to the branches and choosing the appropriate aperature would allow acceptable focus on both the branches and the background.

Read this:
http://www.cambridgein​colour.com …s/hyperfocal-distance.htm

Potisdad wrote in post #4494488
Marcus,

Some understanding of hyperfocal distance would help a lot here. Basically, by manually focusing at approximately twice the distance to the branches and choosing the appropriate aperature would allow acceptable focus on both the branches and the background.

Read this:
http://www.cambridgein​colour.com …s/hyperfocal-distance.htm

Great! Thanks alot!