MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: best way to focus for a night/dusk cityscape  (Read 7829 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: April 25, 2018, 19:58 »
0
I took some good pictures of a cityscape from a distance (a river separates me from the city), in long exposure, just after the blue hour, some were rejected for the reason "not in focus" ... I have a pana g85 and I wonder if the best way to focus a cityscape is to use a focus to infinity ... panasonic does not talk about this function in the guide, I'm a little lost ... do you know the best method to this type of picture?

My method: I focus on a particular point and then I put the camera in manual mode + manual focus, then I take the pose ...

thank you.


« Reply #1 on: April 25, 2018, 22:21 »
0
mm, two things, without actually seeing the picture.

a) Maybe you really do have a good quality image, and the agency you submitted to rejected it. Don't take it personally, not everyone accepts everything. It doesn't necessary mean its a 'bad' image - just means they don't want it for their site.

b) if it is a large cityscape - I find focusing on a stronger lightsource tends to produce a better picture, because then the exposure/etc is set correctly for the surrounding elements. I'd also do a couple tests to see what produces the best results for you.

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #2 on: April 25, 2018, 22:48 »
+2
I took some good pictures of a cityscape from a distance (a river separates me from the city), in long exposure, just after the blue hour, some were rejected for the reason "not in focus" ... I have a pana g85 and I wonder if the best way to focus a cityscape is to use a focus to infinity ... panasonic does not talk about this function in the guide, I'm a little lost ... do you know the best method to this type of picture?

My method: I focus on a particular point and then I put the camera in manual mode + manual focus, then I take the pose ...

thank you.

When using manual are you magnifying to confirm you're getting sharp focus? If you look at the photo at 100% on your computer is it sharp? If it's sharp then you may be getting a generic rejection in that they don't think the photo is sellable but are just using out of focus as an excuse to reject it.

If at 100% it's not in focus/blurry it could be a lot of different reasons. A soft lens. Long exposure blur due to camera movement. Modern focusing systems are ultra reliable. I mainly use Sony and autofocus on night cityscapes is rock solid. Try focusing on a high contrast area such as the corner of the building where the there's light and also black. Use a wireless remote shutter release or the 2-5 second shutter delay. If it's windy put a weight under the  tripod or lower the legs on the tripod.

« Reply #3 on: April 26, 2018, 01:49 »
0
My method: I focus on a particular point and then I put the camera in manual mode + manual focus, then I take the pose ...

"Focus on a particular point" - do you mean point the camera there and then use manual focus to focus? Or do you mean use autofocus to focus, and then change to manual focus just so it doesn't change when you take the picture?

Panasonic mirrorless cameras are not necessarily reliable when it comes to night photography autofocus. You need to double-check and focus manually, with the biggest magnification possible on the screen.

Also make sure you focus with the aperture wide open! This is very important. If you're planning on taking the picture at f9 on an f4 lens for example, you may THINK you focused correctly at f9, but if changed to f4, you might see that the focus is actually quite off.

When you take the picture, make sure you're using the sweet spot aperture of your lens, which is usually around two-three stops down from wide open. Like Paulie said, also use a shutter delay of at least 2 seconds to eliminate any camera shake from your hand.

One last thing - if you stop down too much to get a really long shutter speed, say f22 or f16, your image will also become blurry. This is called diffraction and becomes very apparent on cityscapes with lots of small details. You may need an ND filter even at night if you want to use really long shutter speeds. If you use an ND filter, focus without it, and put it on after. Just make sure you don't touch the focus ring while putting it on.  :)

---

To sum up:

Focus manually, don't trust autofocus!
Focus with the aperture wide open, and a shutter speed fast enough (like 1/50) so you can see the changes in real time. You will have to raise the ISO temporarily to see anything.
Change back to the settings you want to use for the photo. Usually an aperture setting of 2-3 stops down from wide open, lowest possible ISO and a long shutter.
Don't use a really closed down aperture (high f number like f16/f22) - your photo will not be sharp.
Use a shutter delay, or remote trigger.

One last thing - most lenses will actually go "beyond" infinity focus, which means if you just set it to focus at the maximum distance, it will be very out of focus. Never do that. You could of course find out where true infinity focus is on your particular lens, and mark it. There would still be margin for error so I would double-check both one and two times.  ;)
« Last Edit: April 26, 2018, 02:23 by increasingdifficulty »

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #4 on: April 26, 2018, 08:08 »
0
I think it's covered, focus on a dot of light, in the distance, manually (read all of the above) wide open.

Mirror lock up if it's not already on the list. I don't know if I missed reading that?

I just want to repeat, you need a rock solid tripod, and if you aren't on firm ground, the floor, wooden deck, or anything that can vibrate, traffic, will cause movement. If these are long time exposures, you should have a brick, rock, old lifting weight or something heavy, attached to the center of your tripod, to prevent minor movement.

(borrowed from this site: http://www.instructables.com/id/Tripod-stabilizer-weight-hook/ )

I've set up on a balcony on a building, concrete, 10th floor and done some night shots. They had shakes, and I was inside. The building moved!



« Reply #5 on: April 26, 2018, 08:50 »
0
Mirror lock up if it's not already on the list. I don't know if I missed reading that?

It's a mirrorless camera.  ;)

« Reply #6 on: April 26, 2018, 09:04 »
0
I think it's covered, focus on a dot of light, in the distance, manually (read all of the above) wide open.

Mirror lock up if it's not already on the list. I don't know if I missed reading that?

I just want to repeat, you need a rock solid tripod, and if you aren't on firm ground, the floor, wooden deck, or anything that can vibrate, traffic, will cause movement. If these are long time exposures, you should have a brick, rock, old lifting weight or something heavy, attached to the center of your tripod, to prevent minor movement.

(borrowed from this site: http://www.instructables.com/id/Tripod-stabilizer-weight-hook/ )

I've set up on a balcony on a building, concrete, 10th floor and done some night shots. They had shakes, and I was inside. The building moved!


One more thing: even with a rock solid tripod, the wind can be a serious issue during long exposures, especially at long and very long focal lengths.
That weight you attached bellow the tripod, might actually act like a sail, shaking the whole system on windy nights.
In these situations, It works better to work without extending the tripod legs. One must be creative in finding a second point of stability, by resting the system against a tree, against a wall or something like that, to prevent vibrations induced by the wind.

« Reply #7 on: April 26, 2018, 10:11 »
0
mm, two things, without actually seeing the picture.

a) Maybe you really do have a good quality image, and the agency you submitted to rejected it. Don't take it personally, not everyone accepts everything. It doesn't necessary mean its a 'bad' image - just means they don't want it for their site.

b) if it is a large cityscape - I find focusing on a stronger lightsource tends to produce a better picture, because then the exposure/etc is set correctly for the surrounding elements. I'd also do a couple tests to see what produces the best results for you.

Hi to all, i have a lot to learn from you! here's one of the rejected picture downsized for web usage... i will read you all and come back





« Reply #8 on: April 26, 2018, 10:15 »
0
mm, two things, without actually seeing the picture.

a) Maybe you really do have a good quality image, and the agency you submitted to rejected it. Don't take it personally, not everyone accepts everything. It doesn't necessary mean its a 'bad' image - just means they don't want it for their site.

b) if it is a large cityscape - I find focusing on a stronger lightsource tends to produce a better picture, because then the exposure/etc is set correctly for the surrounding elements. I'd also do a couple tests to see what produces the best results for you.

Hi to all, i have a lot to learn from you! here's one of the rejected picture downsized for web usage... i will read you all and come back

Please post the full resolution. With a big fat watermark if you wish. We can't pixel peep the focus without full resolution.  :)

It does look soft now, possibly a diffraction issue (aperture at a high f number). But it could be due to downsizing - impossible to tell without the original resolution. Also, if you post the metadata if would be really helpful - aperture, shutter speed, ISO, focal length and which lens you used.
« Last Edit: April 26, 2018, 10:22 by increasingdifficulty »

« Reply #9 on: April 26, 2018, 10:46 »
0
mm, two things, without actually seeing the picture.

a) Maybe you really do have a good quality image, and the agency you submitted to rejected it. Don't take it personally, not everyone accepts everything. It doesn't necessary mean its a 'bad' image - just means they don't want it for their site.

b) if it is a large cityscape - I find focusing on a stronger lightsource tends to produce a better picture, because then the exposure/etc is set correctly for the surrounding elements. I'd also do a couple tests to see what produces the best results for you.

Hi to all, i have a lot to learn from you! here's one of the rejected picture downsized for web usage... i will read you all and come back

Please post the full resolution. With a big fat watermark if you wish. We can't pixel peep the focus without full resolution.  :)

It does look soft now, possibly a diffraction issue (aperture at a high f number). But it could be due to downsizing - impossible to tell without the original resolution. Also, if you post the metadata if would be really helpful - aperture, shutter speed, ISO, focal length and which lens you used.

Ok, i will do that, but i'm not home right now... i can confirm you that i took this pic with a small aperture, like f/22. i will come back with the full resolution pic later. thanks

« Reply #10 on: April 26, 2018, 10:50 »
0
Ok, i will do that, but i'm not home right now... i can confirm you that i took this pic with a small aperture, like f/22. i will come back with the full resolution pic later. thanks

Then it's most likely a diffraction issue. Could of course have other issues in addition to that, but never use f22 unless you absolutely HAVE to, if you're looking for maximum detail.  :)

I recommend everyone to do some tests to see how much f22 to around f18 or f16, depending on the lens, ruins the image quality, compared to f4-f11.
« Last Edit: April 26, 2018, 10:57 by increasingdifficulty »

steheap

  • Author of best selling "Get Started in Stock"

« Reply #11 on: April 26, 2018, 11:00 »
0
And I would add that with a city panorama like this with no objects close to the camera, then you never want to use anything much smaller (in aperture) than perhaps F5.6 or F8. It only results in a longer exposure time or higher ISO and that increases the chance that something moves during the exposure as well. Turning off image stabilization in the lens or camera also can help when you are using a tripod.

Steve

« Reply #12 on: April 26, 2018, 17:52 »
0
I tried to post my pics but that said my file is too large... i downsized it to 500 kb

Metadata :
f/18, iso 200, 45mm, 40 sec. long exposure with a tripod and remote for the click.
lens : olympus 40-150mm 4.0-5.6 ; panasonic g85

I just read that the sweet spot for this lens is f/8... i will try this next time!

I will test it with different aperture and put some weight on my tripod...

Thanks guys, i really appreciate your comments!
« Last Edit: April 26, 2018, 20:21 by christiano »

« Reply #13 on: April 27, 2018, 01:46 »
0
Thanks for posting the info christiano!

To me, it looks like you got the focus perfect, but that diffraction is the issue due to f18. I don't know the capabilities of that particular lens, however. Some lenses just cannot get tack sharp. See if you can find out the sweet spot focal length also. Do lots of tests near your home, with plenty of light, and you will see what kind of sharpness your lens is capable of.  :)

Also, I would say that 40 seconds is a bit too long here. The risk of a tiny movement during that time is very high, and that will of course cause a small smear of the entire image.

And in the future, for important shots, always take multiple pictures at different settings - f4, f5.6, f8, f11, and check the focus between each to make sure you get at least one keeper. You can always add motion blur in post, although it's not as much fun as making it for real, but you can't remove it.

Many so called "perfect" shots are composites. It could be focus stacking, or a long exposure for just the water and other moving parts, and a short exposure for the buildings. Maybe f8 for for the details, and f18-f22 just for the lights to get the nice stars.  ;)
« Last Edit: April 27, 2018, 03:35 by increasingdifficulty »

« Reply #14 on: April 27, 2018, 03:40 »
0
Also, one last thing I forgot to mention: atmospheric distortion/heat distortion!

You said you took the photo at 45 mm, which would be equivalent to 90 mm on a 35 mm.

That suggests you are quite far away from the skyline. Heat distortion, or atmospheric distortion, is yet another factor that can impact sharpness.

It would depend on the conditions on that particular day, but sometimes it will just be completely impossible to get a perfectly sharp image if you are too far away from your subject. The light gets distorted and it doesn't matter what equipment you have or how still your tripod stands.

---

I shot a 600 mm time lapse from a 10 km distance the other day and it was completely ruined by heat distortion. On a day without temperature fluctuations between the water/ground and the air it would have worked, but now it looked like I put a turbulent displacement effect on it.   ;D
« Last Edit: April 27, 2018, 03:45 by increasingdifficulty »

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #15 on: April 27, 2018, 08:29 »
0
Also, one last thing I forgot to mention: atmospheric distortion/heat distortion!

You said you took the photo at 45 mm, which would be equivalent to 90 mm on a 35 mm.

That suggests you are quite far away from the skyline. Heat distortion, or atmospheric distortion, is yet another factor that can impact sharpness.

It would depend on the conditions on that particular day, but sometimes it will just be completely impossible to get a perfectly sharp image if you are too far away from your subject. The light gets distorted and it doesn't matter what equipment you have or how still your tripod stands.

---

I shot a 600 mm time lapse from a 10 km distance the other day and it was completely ruined by heat distortion. On a day without temperature fluctuations between the water/ground and the air it would have worked, but now it looked like I put a turbulent displacement effect on it.   ;D

Good points, now that I looked there are not sharp edges on the lights and buildings. Could be the lens quality or haze or small aperture diffraction. Can't tell.

"You said you took the photo at 45 mm, which would be equivalent to 90 mm on a 35 mm." How does a lens become an equivalent? It's a 45mm no matter what camera it's on. The only difference is the 4/3rds sensor CROPS the image that the lens projects. The distance from the lens to the focal plane is identical. No it's not a 90mm lens, it's a 45mm and the field of view, is about the same as a 90mm lens would have taken on a full frame camera.

Haze, distortion, I climbed a mile up a wooded path for this crappy shot!  :(



This wasn't the lens it was the haze from the humidity in the air.

« Reply #16 on: April 27, 2018, 09:37 »
0
I tried to post my pics but that said my file is too large... i downsized it to 500 kb

Metadata :
f/18, iso 200, 45mm, 40 sec. long exposure with a tripod and remote for the click.
lens : olympus 40-150mm 4.0-5.6 ; panasonic g85

I just read that the sweet spot for this lens is f/8... i will try this next time!

I will test it with different aperture and put some weight on my tripod...

Thanks guys, i really appreciate your comments!

Something is very wrong with that image. At 100% it's smeared all over, like some extreme noise reduction leftover. Also I see a lot of posterization and pixelization in the sky and lots of artifacts all over.
I don't think the focus is a miss, it's just the general image quality is very poor, old mobile phone poor.
Please tell us if this was shot RAW or JPEG, what's done in post, how was it exported etc.

Also, that's 4/3 sensor you really don't need f18 to achieve deep DOF, f8 should be more than enough, you are just pushing long exposure heat noise for no reason, maybe that's what happened here, noise reduction working overtime to compensate for that.

   
 

« Reply #17 on: April 27, 2018, 11:32 »
0
Also, one last thing I forgot to mention: atmospheric distortion/heat distortion!

You said you took the photo at 45 mm, which would be equivalent to 90 mm on a 35 mm.

That suggests you are quite far away from the skyline. Heat distortion, or atmospheric distortion, is yet another factor that can impact sharpness.

It would depend on the conditions on that particular day, but sometimes it will just be completely impossible to get a perfectly sharp image if you are too far away from your subject. The light gets distorted and it doesn't matter what equipment you have or how still your tripod stands.

---

I shot a 600 mm time lapse from a 10 km distance the other day and it was completely ruined by heat distortion. On a day without temperature fluctuations between the water/ground and the air it would have worked, but now it looked like I put a turbulent displacement effect on it.   ;D

Thanks a lot for the info, it will be very useful for me... 600mm time lapse 10km! man...
I will put all this into practice at my next outing

« Reply #18 on: April 27, 2018, 11:39 »
0
I tried to post my pics but that said my file is too large... i downsized it to 500 kb

Metadata :
f/18, iso 200, 45mm, 40 sec. long exposure with a tripod and remote for the click.
lens : olympus 40-150mm 4.0-5.6 ; panasonic g85

I just read that the sweet spot for this lens is f/8... i will try this next time!

I will test it with different aperture and put some weight on my tripod...

Thanks guys, i really appreciate your comments!

Something is very wrong with that image. At 100% it's smeared all over, like some extreme noise reduction leftover. Also I see a lot of posterization and pixelization in the sky and lots of artifacts all over.
I don't think the focus is a miss, it's just the general image quality is very poor, old mobile phone poor.
Please tell us if this was shot RAW or JPEG, what's done in post, how was it exported etc.

Also, that's 4/3 sensor you really don't need f18 to achieve deep DOF, f8 should be more than enough, you are just pushing long exposure heat noise for no reason, maybe that's what happened here, noise reduction working overtime to compensate for that.

 

Hey, thanks for your comment.

"At 100% it's smeared all over, like some extreme noise reduction leftover. Also I see a lot of posterization and pixelization in the sky and lots of artifacts all over." good conclusions! I need to learn a lot again...

What i did :
- shoot in RAW (LE noise reduction ON)
-Exported from Lightroom (100% high quality)
- Develop. in Lightroom
- some basic calibration, and did something with a noise reduction things (i'm at work, dont have lgroom in my face right now).
- Clarity : increased
-more vibrance and saturation a litlle bit...
Maybe the noise reduction thing didn't help?
« Last Edit: April 27, 2018, 11:55 by christiano »

« Reply #19 on: April 27, 2018, 12:06 »
0
Maybe the noise reduction thing didn't help?

Noise reduction = blurring. It can also create banding in the sky, so be very careful! Noise is often ADDED to remove banding.

I would turn off the in-camera long exposure noise reduction and do everything in post, for full control.

Many times you would mask out things with lots of detail and apply less noise reduction there, or none at all, and more in areas like a sky where the noise will be more visible, and you don't need any details. But again, be careful so you don't create banding. Never go 100%! As you can understand, getting perfect images is a job for Photoshop, not Lightroom.  ;)

Ideally, when you shoot at ISO 200, you shouldn't need much noise reduction. On an m43 sensor, there might be lots of noise anyway, but it gets MUCH, MUCH better if you overexpose a bit and bring it down in post. Of course you still need to make sure the highlights are intact, except for lights.

For example, on the GH4/GH5, the big brothers of the G85, the image quality when filming can be 10 times better if you expose to the right, ETTR, and bring it down to a natural level in post. You will get much more noise and artifacts if it's a bit underexposed or in the middle.

Just like monsters, noise likes to live in the shadows.  8)
« Last Edit: April 27, 2018, 12:11 by increasingdifficulty »

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #20 on: April 27, 2018, 20:35 »
0
Maybe the noise reduction thing didn't help?

Noise reduction = blurring. It can also create banding in the sky, so be very careful! Noise is often ADDED to remove banding.

I would turn off the in-camera long exposure noise reduction and do everything in post, for full control.

Many times you would mask out things with lots of detail and apply less noise reduction there, or none at all, and more in areas like a sky where the noise will be more visible, and you don't need any details. But again, be careful so you don't create banding. Never go 100%! As you can understand, getting perfect images is a job for Photoshop, not Lightroom.  ;)

Ideally, when you shoot at ISO 200, you shouldn't need much noise reduction. On an m43 sensor, there might be lots of noise anyway, but it gets MUCH, MUCH better if you overexpose a bit and bring it down in post. Of course you still need to make sure the highlights are intact, except for lights.

For example, on the GH4/GH5, the big brothers of the G85, the image quality when filming can be 10 times better if you expose to the right, ETTR, and bring it down to a natural level in post. You will get much more noise and artifacts if it's a bit underexposed or in the middle.

Just like monsters, noise likes to live in the shadows.  8)

No doubt about any of that, and when someone tries to photograph lights in windows, street lighting, any of that, and also tries to get structures and shadow details at the same time, there's some impossible physics that's involved. This would be better with multiple exposures. Unless done at exactly the Sunrise or Sunset time, all the artificial light sources are going to have flare and possibly a variety of color balance.

It is a nice composition.

« Reply #21 on: April 28, 2018, 18:24 »
0
I tried to post my pics but that said my file is too large... i downsized it to 500 kb

Metadata :
f/18, iso 200, 45mm, 40 sec. long exposure with a tripod and remote for the click.
lens : olympus 40-150mm 4.0-5.6 ; panasonic g85

I just read that the sweet spot for this lens is f/8... i will try this next time!

I will test it with different aperture and put some weight on my tripod...

Thanks guys, i really appreciate your comments!

Something is very wrong with that image. At 100% it's smeared all over, like some extreme noise reduction leftover. Also I see a lot of posterization and pixelization in the sky and lots of artifacts all over.
I don't think the focus is a miss, it's just the general image quality is very poor, old mobile phone poor.
Please tell us if this was shot RAW or JPEG, what's done in post, how was it exported etc.

Also, that's 4/3 sensor you really don't need f18 to achieve deep DOF, f8 should be more than enough, you are just pushing long exposure heat noise for no reason, maybe that's what happened here, noise reduction working overtime to compensate for that.

 

Hey, thanks for your comment.

"At 100% it's smeared all over, like some extreme noise reduction leftover. Also I see a lot of posterization and pixelization in the sky and lots of artifacts all over." good conclusions! I need to learn a lot again...

What i did :
- shoot in RAW (LE noise reduction ON)
-Exported from Lightroom (100% high quality)
- Develop. in Lightroom
- some basic calibration, and did something with a noise reduction things (i'm at work, dont have lgroom in my face right now).
- Clarity : increased
-more vibrance and saturation a litlle bit...
Maybe the noise reduction thing didn't help?

Without seeing original RAW file my best guess is going to LE noise reduction in combination with 40s exposure, eating away all the details. Maybe even post noise reduction in LR, but I don't recognize it's abuse signature in this, this looks much more like usual small sensor in-camera noise reduction eating away all the details, LR noise reduction is pretty tame and has different resulting pattern .

« Reply #22 on: April 30, 2018, 07:59 »
0
I tried to post my pics but that said my file is too large... i downsized it to 500 kb

Metadata :
f/18, iso 200, 45mm, 40 sec. long exposure with a tripod and remote for the click.
lens : olympus 40-150mm 4.0-5.6 ; panasonic g85

I just read that the sweet spot for this lens is f/8... i will try this next time!

I will test it with different aperture and put some weight on my tripod...

Thanks guys, i really appreciate your comments!

Something is very wrong with that image. At 100% it's smeared all over, like some extreme noise reduction leftover. Also I see a lot of posterization and pixelization in the sky and lots of artifacts all over.
I don't think the focus is a miss, it's just the general image quality is very poor, old mobile phone poor.
Please tell us if this was shot RAW or JPEG, what's done in post, how was it exported etc.

Also, that's 4/3 sensor you really don't need f18 to achieve deep DOF, f8 should be more than enough, you are just pushing long exposure heat noise for no reason, maybe that's what happened here, noise reduction working overtime to compensate for that.

 

Hey, thanks for your comment.

"At 100% it's smeared all over, like some extreme noise reduction leftover. Also I see a lot of posterization and pixelization in the sky and lots of artifacts all over." good conclusions! I need to learn a lot again...

What i did :
- shoot in RAW (LE noise reduction ON)
-Exported from Lightroom (100% high quality)
- Develop. in Lightroom
- some basic calibration, and did something with a noise reduction things (i'm at work, dont have lgroom in my face right now).
- Clarity : increased
-more vibrance and saturation a litlle bit...
Maybe the noise reduction thing didn't help?

Without seeing original RAW file my best guess is going to LE noise reduction in combination with 40s exposure, eating away all the details. Maybe even post noise reduction in LR, but I don't recognize it's abuse signature in this, this looks much more like usual small sensor in-camera noise reduction eating away all the details, LR noise reduction is pretty tame and has different resulting pattern .

Thanks for the information. Next time, il will try different settings...
But for sure, i will put my LENR at off, and take shot with aperture wild open, f/8, f/11... and i will compare my pic. For sure, to shoot with a bigger aperture = decrease the long exposure time...

thanks again for your comments, they are really helpful.

BTW, i just bought a pana g vario 45-150mm to replace my old olympus I used ...

« Reply #23 on: June 02, 2018, 02:22 »
0
Also make sure you focus with the aperture wide open! This is very important.

Agreed. Always manually focus with the aperture wide open. However, it's my assumption with the M4/3 cameras is that the lenses are wide open anyway most of the time in normal viewing, even if you've selected say f8 or f11 in M mode. Just like an SLR, I assume that the aperture blades only close down when a photo is taken.

This is different when I use my manual lenses on my Panasonic M4/3 cameras. I have a manual focus Samyang 12mm f2 and the aperture blades certainly do not close down when I take a photo with that lens. As such, I always focus with the aperture set to f2 with the Samyang and then manually close down the aperture afterwards. Same kind of routine when I use my 1970s / 1980s Canon FD lenses on the M4/3 bodies with an adapter.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2018, 02:27 by dragonblade »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
2241 Views
Last post June 29, 2007, 13:28
by Istock News
9 Replies
5095 Views
Last post February 10, 2009, 04:25
by michealo
36 Replies
13294 Views
Last post September 29, 2010, 15:35
by sharpshot
6 Replies
2480 Views
Last post November 15, 2012, 22:09
by tab62
7 Replies
7651 Views
Last post February 02, 2016, 19:39
by Freedom

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle