Nature How out of focus can a good photo be?

utak · 05-08-2013, 12:14 AM

Hi,

There's a lot of talk about how sharp lenses and cameras are - or aren't - and sometimes it comes down to focus.

So I'd welcome your views on the two photos below. In the first photo, nothing in the original was in focus. I sharpened it as much as I could on PSE and the birds are better defined now but so is the background. In the second photo the focus is spot-on; good on the K20D+FA50mm!

I wonder which you prefer? The first shows speed but is it too out of focus with over-processed background? The second is sharp but does the swan look too static? (It was skating around a bit). Plus, any advice on settings for this kind of nature photography...most of what I do is buildings, still lives.

Many thanks

K85mm 1.8

FA50mm 1.4

Last edited by utak; 06-06-2013 at 12:51 PM. Reason: Re-posted swan with changes recommended by Alliecat below

EJMzagsfan · 05-08-2013, 03:23 AM

I like the second pic better, but more for the light than the focus.

utak · 05-08-2013, 03:43 AM

Yes, by trying to sharpen and lighten the birds in the first photo, globally across the photo, I've washed out the colors.

Maybe I should leave the orginal as it was, and somehow isolate the birds and just try to sharpen, lighten them. Beyond my photo-shopping skills today, but I'll have a look at that!

magkelly · 05-08-2013, 02:07 PM

I like the first photo better. The second is good too. The light is nice, but I think slight blur or not you captured something really special with the first one. The mood of the photo is a bit dreamy but it's perfectly okay with those birds in motion and I don't think it needs sharpening much really. Totally spot on sharp isn't always that great, IMHO. Sometimes it's better not so sharp. Sacrificing a little sharp for mood, it works for me here.

Alliecat · 05-08-2013, 08:56 PM

I think the gulls are terrific. But there's too much depth of field for my liking; even though the background is a little out of focus, the birds are a bit lost against it. My eye is drawn to the rest of the scene, but the fact that it's not quite in focus, gives me a bit of a headache.
There is nothing wrong with a "static" swan. He can be posing majestically, doesn't have to be moving. I think I'd have liked to see him a little farther up the frame -- maybe shoot from a lower angle? Also there is a very bright white spot in the middle of the background & the shoreline is crooked.
I see that you have a pretty wide aperture in both cases. One thing you might try if you want to photograph more birds or critters, is using a longer lens. A telephoto focused on your bird might separate it better from the background, giving you less DOF -- if I remember correctly -- thus emphasizing the bird more.

utak · 05-09-2013, 12:08 AM

Magkelly,

Thank you, you made my day!

Alliecat,

Thanks also for the comments, very helpful. That white spot in the background is rather irritating now you mention it - I can get rid of easily and also straighten the horizon and I'll do that.

05-08-2013, 12:14 AM	#1
utak Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2012 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 928	How out of focus can a good photo be? Lens: K85mm 1.8, FA50mm 1.4 Camera: K20D Photo Location: London Hi, There's a lot of talk about how sharp lenses and cameras are - or aren't - and sometimes it comes down to focus. So I'd welcome your views on the two photos below. In the first photo, nothing in the original was in focus. I sharpened it as much as I could on PSE and the birds are better defined now but so is the background. In the second photo the focus is spot-on; good on the K20D+FA50mm! I wonder which you prefer? The first shows speed but is it too out of focus with over-processed background? The second is sharp but does the swan look too static? (It was skating around a bit). Plus, any advice on settings for this kind of nature photography...most of what I do is buildings, still lives. Many thanks K85mm 1.8 FA50mm 1.4 Last edited by utak; 06-06-2013 at 12:51 PM. Reason: Re-posted swan with changes recommended by Alliecat below

05-08-2013, 03:43 AM	#3
utak Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2012 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 928 Original Poster	Yes, by trying to sharpen and lighten the birds in the first photo, globally across the photo, I've washed out the colors. Maybe I should leave the orginal as it was, and somehow isolate the birds and just try to sharpen, lighten them. Beyond my photo-shopping skills today, but I'll have a look at that! Last edited by utak; 05-08-2013 at 03:48 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
In the name of all that is good & holy, how hard can it be!!!	MD Optofonik	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	04-06-2013 07:50 PM
What kind of soft focus lens can be put on a 645?	slackercruster	Pentax Medium Format	18	02-13-2013 12:48 AM
I'm surprised how little of a deal it was when I pulled out my K-01 (in a good way)	Codazzle	Pentax K-01	10	01-03-2013 07:18 PM
How long until "out of focus blur" / DoF will be a non argument for any equipment?	beholder3	Photographic Industry and Professionals	12	03-10-2012 01:32 PM

05-08-2013, 03:23 AM	#2
EJMzagsfan Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Idaho Photos: Albums Posts: 241	I like the second pic better, but more for the light than the focus.

05-08-2013, 02:07 PM	#4
magkelly Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,901	I like the first photo better. The second is good too. The light is nice, but I think slight blur or not you captured something really special with the first one. The mood of the photo is a bit dreamy but it's perfectly okay with those birds in motion and I don't think it needs sharpening much really. Totally spot on sharp isn't always that great, IMHO. Sometimes it's better not so sharp. Sacrificing a little sharp for mood, it works for me here.

05-08-2013, 08:56 PM	#5
Alliecat Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: East of Everywhere, Canada Posts: 740	I think the gulls are terrific. But there's too much depth of field for my liking; even though the background is a little out of focus, the birds are a bit lost against it. My eye is drawn to the rest of the scene, but the fact that it's not quite in focus, gives me a bit of a headache. There is nothing wrong with a "static" swan. He can be posing majestically, doesn't have to be moving. I think I'd have liked to see him a little farther up the frame -- maybe shoot from a lower angle? Also there is a very bright white spot in the middle of the background & the shoreline is crooked. I see that you have a pretty wide aperture in both cases. One thing you might try if you want to photograph more birds or critters, is using a longer lens. A telephoto focused on your bird might separate it better from the background, giving you less DOF -- if I remember correctly -- thus emphasizing the bird more.

05-09-2013, 12:08 AM	#6
utak Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2012 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 928 Original Poster	Magkelly, Thank you, you made my day! Alliecat, Thanks also for the comments, very helpful. That white spot in the background is rather irritating now you mention it - I can get rid of easily and also straighten the horizon and I'll do that.