[Alberts]

I also have 15-55 mm standard lens (I have DA L). F4 is very open aperture. I presume that F4 was the widest aperture available for the focal length chosen by you (F3.5 is available for 18 mm, but for a longer length maximal aperture is lower (F number higher)). It is very interesting that you managed to take so sharp picture with maximal (or almost maximal) aperture. I have thought that wide apertures lead to too shallow DOF. So I usually try to use small apertures (large F numbers) although it sometimes leads to quite long shutter speed or high ISO. May be, I should revise my habit to prefer smaller apertures in almost all cases that are not portraits .

[firefly]

Alberts, the depth of field is very deep at the distances this was shot at.

Having said that, the photo could have had that extra something if taken on a tripod at f8-f16.
That would all you the get that nice starlight effect on streetlights and smooth mirror-like water.

[spike62002]

Thanks Schraubstock i do like the crop, i have a thing for wide panoramas

[Schraubstock]

Thanks Schraubstock i do like the crop, i have a thing for wide panoramas

I am happy to have been of service

Greetings and all the best

[Alberts]

Dear firefly,

I am quite new in photography and my knowledge about DOF is quite weak. I am still learning. So I was too much inclined towards very small apertures. Yesterday I read some information about DOF and examined some simple DOF calculators (on their basis I constructed my own in Excel) and discovered that it not necessary to use very low apertures to reach large DOF .
According to my amateur calculations, the hyperfocal distance for the focal length 18 mm (assuming that K-r has the same crop factor as K-x) and for F4 is about 4.07 m. As the object in picture was quite further then 4.07 m (I assume that it was at least 500m) it fell in DOF zone completely. It is interesting. Before I had read about DOF calculations I thought that F4 was too wide aperture and I would have tried some larger F-number (smaller aperture), for example, F11 or so. This forum encourages me to learn new things .

[firefly]

Alberts,

I have a gift for understanding technical things, from engines to photography, but please don't overestimate my skills! I enjoy helping others by clarifying some misunderstood points... however, despite this knowledge there are many, many amateurs that take much better photos than I, even after about 3 years of practice. Understanding the technical sides of photography will help an artistically gifted amateur become an excellent pro-quality photog, while it seems it only elevates my mediocre images to become sharp, well exposed mediocre images!

A good artist can break all the rules and make something beautiful and intriguing. When I break the rules I make a mess... that's why I have to understand all the technicals... just to keep my photos passable. My hope is with further time and experimentation I'll grow my mind and start seeing things I didn't before.

The funny thing is, I'm an excellent pencil and paper artist... but the transition is not what I had hoped it would be.