Project 52 by Letrow

[Letrow]

Ok, for this week:

The challenge was that I am on the water, in a boat of course, bobbing up and down and I see this beautiful scenery in front of me. Now, do I zoom in or out for the nicest shot?

I took both shots and think the zoomed-in photo works best. The island with trees dominates the scene, which I like in this case. In the zoomed-out photo I get more landscape, but it doesn't appeal to me in the same way.





But, that is my opinion, so...curious to hear any comments on this.

[Geoff F]

Without the boat, I think the second shot would work fine.

For me, if you are including something which isn't part of the natural landscape, like a boat, then it needs to clearly be an intentional part of the shot. As the first one.

[Letrow]

When I visited this lake (Medicine lake, named for its magical quality of disappearing and coming back - the original habitants didn't trust this lake apparently) I noticed the nice reflections. Pity the water wasn't perfectly still.






I tried a few angles, but personally liked the top one best.

[Letrow]

Bit of a challenge in this photo. The top photo shows at what distance I was. I used a 200mm (18-200mm zoom actually) for this, but this is one of those occasions where a longer lens would have been better.
The colibris weren't shy, but getting closer than this wasn't acceptable for them. And my lighting wasn't great really.



and this is the crop I made



I am not happy with the detail, but it is what it is...

[dje]

When I visited this lake (Medicine lake, named for its magical quality of disappearing and coming back - the original habitants didn't trust this lake apparently) I noticed the nice reflections. Pity the water wasn't perfectly still.




I tried a few angles, but personally liked the top one best.

Peter I've only just come across this post. Lovely image, great sense of depth in the composition. Nice subtle colours too. The only suggestion I'd have is to apply a Levels adjustment with the mid-tone slide moved to the left somewhat to give more contrast.

My wife and I visited the Canadian Rockies recently and there are certainly some great photo opportunities there. Getting perfectly still water was a bit "hit and miss" in my experience (mostly "miss") however the reflections in your image are still very good. We didn't get to this particular area but you can only fit so much in in a small time frame.

Dave

[FrankMi]

When I visited this lake (Medicine lake, named for its magical quality of disappearing and coming back - the original habitants didn't trust this lake apparently) I noticed the nice reflections. Pity the water wasn't perfectly still.

Beautiful leading lines with lots of detail to explore. A pleasing peaceful scene!

I think you would have a 'different' image if the water was perfectly placid but I really like how the ripples have patterned the reflection and yet have preserved the reflected details.

[Teton Chuck]

Peter, I am enjoying your landscape photos. Living in the Rocky Mountains I understand the issues with strong light during most of each day. I really like your compositions and would love to see the same scenes in early morning or late evening light. Also enjoying the hummingbird shots. I have not tried anything just like that. Hope when I get around to trying it I can come close to what you have done. Thanks for sharing.

chuck;

[Geoff F]

With your recent bird shots, Peter, you were obviously shooting into the light and with a fairly fast shutter speed so you have done all that was possible.

The only other option would have been to use high speed flash, if you had a suitable unit with you. But that can cause as many problems as it solves at longer distances.

[Letrow]

Peter, I am enjoying your landscape photos. Living in the Rocky Mountains I understand the issues with strong light during most of each day. I really like your compositions and would love to see the same scenes in early morning or late evening light. Also enjoying the hummingbird shots. I have not tried anything just like that. Hope when I get around to trying it I can come close to what you have done. Thanks for sharing.

chuck;

Thanks Chuck. You are right: it would have been nice to if I could have shot these scenes at different times of the day. That is one of the holiday problems though (especially when you travel with a family). Sometimes I would like to wait or stop somewhere, but you know that after a number of these stops the family is going to object, so you just continue on your way...sighing inwardly.

[Letrow]

With your recent bird shots, Peter, you were obviously shooting into the light and with a fairly fast shutter speed so you have done all that was possible.

The only other option would have been to use high speed flash, if you had a suitable unit with you. But that can cause as many problems as it solves at longer distances.

Which brings me to the second holiday problem, the packing puzzle. How much equipment can I take along with me, when I travel by plane and car...?
The flash was left at home in this case, but it is a pity if you look at the lighting in the hummingbird photo. It would have made a difference I think.

[Letrow]

Now, this weeks subject is about comparing my Nikon's macro to my Ricoh's macro.

So, basically I am putting the Nikon D7000 + Nikkor 105mm Micro VR against the Ricoh GX200.
Not a fair battle I hear you say... Well, it all depends on what you expect. And remember (quoting someone, but don't know who) that it's not so much about the camera as it is about making the right photograph.

Let me give you two examples for each camera and if you feel up to it (without looking at the EXIF data), let me know if you can guess which photo comes from which camera.









I am actually confused right now

[Geoff F]

Well Peter, without checking on the Properties. The first and third appear sharper, but with a rather limited depth of focus.

The other two are acceptably sharp but carry the sharpness over a much greater depth.

[Letrow]

Well Peter, without checking on the Properties. The first and third appear sharper, but with a rather limited depth of focus.

The other two are acceptably sharp but carry the sharpness over a much greater depth.

The comparison is not entirely fair of course, I may do a better one with the same subject photographed by both cameras. But then I shouldn't fo for moving insects, right?
These were macros I had ready, so I used them and I did try to take some average shots.

But, I could also argue that the quality of the Ricoh in macro setting is actually quite acceptable. It fooled you I can tell you. The advantage of the Ricoh is that it gets really, really close and as long as the light is good, you are fine.
Without light the Ricoh photos go downhill pretty fast.

I'll see if someone else can guess, but I won't keep up the suspension for too long. Promise.

[Letrow]

This week two rainbow shots in landscape and portrait. I like them both in their own way.





We were 'lucky', because instead of a sunny day on the water, we had clouds and a bit of rain. This was a bonus though.

[Geoff F]

Yes, Peter, which way up for rainbows confuses me as well. I usually take a few shots in both landscape and portrait; then can't decide which is best.

[FrankMi]

Nice capture Peter. If there is something that is more difficult to get than a fleeting rainbow, it is a strong rainbow with a lovely foreground. Congratulations on both!

[Letrow]

Thanks. I have to be honest, the rainbow lasted for quite a while. In the beginning it was hardly visible, but when it grew dark and it was still there it felt like the right moment to take a shot.

[Letrow]

This week some water action:



Moving with wind



and moving with the motor

[Geoff F]

Typically Dutch design there, Peter. Although that grey sky could be English!

Sharp photos with plenty of detail.

[Letrow]

More Dutch flatlands as seen from the water



I liked the colours of the cows in this photo

and then we came upon this old gentleman



ready to hang up some wet clothes