NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Processing & Publication => Topic started by: Frank Fremerey on June 02, 2024, 20:49:33
-
Thoughts on that one
- My goal with this edit was to make the grass pop out from the background.
- I feel that image stabilisation seems to make the background appear a tad on the harsh and nervous side in this frame,
- so I do contemplate to switch off VR totally and rely more on handholding technique and faster shutter speeds
- I also got use to composing with super shallow DOF (1.2/50 1.4/104 2.0/200)
- the Z MC 2.8/105 already seems to offer far too much DOF in the infinity realm (it is perfect in the short distance / macro)
- Other that the Micro-Nikkor 2.8/60 AF-S which I also like in the distance and for portraits the MC does not appeal to me in the longer distance
-
I can identify the grass (Phragmites australis) so in that sense you have succeeded. Personally I'm not that big fan of the swirly kind of bokeh, in particular when it becomes finer-granular and thereby even harsher to the eye. That's just me, though.
-
It does pop out the grass, however the background is really harsh looking and with a swirly look that takes all the attention.
What lens did you shoot it with and why?
-
Thoughts on that one- My goal with this edit was to make the grass pop out from the background. ...
My thoughts:
I make many attempts at imaging plant life in its native environment and am constantly faced with inadequate separation of figure from background. Here, there is separation between the foreground grass and background objects, but perhaps just not enough.
3 possible solutions I can think of, in order of increasing logistical complexity:
1. Use the 200/2
2. Add artificial illumination to the foreground grass
3. Reduce natural illumination from the background.
[/list]
-
It does pop out the grass, however the background is really harsh looking and with a swirly look that takes all the attention.
What lens did you shoot it with and why?
This was a one camera one lens outing and the camera was the Zf , the lens the Z MC 2.8/105S which I am still gettin accustomed to.
So the why is that I found the grass fascinating and I wanted to see if I can achieve satisfactory background separation with this lens.
Result is that I do find the bokeh unappealing and that I want to try a series with VR switched off to see if VR influences Bokeh like I have seen it with other lenses eg the 300PF
-
- My thoughts:
I make many attempts at imaging plant life in its native environment and am constantly faced with inadequate separation of figure from background. Here, there is separation between the foreground grass and background objects, but perhaps just not enough.
3 possible solutions I can think of, in order of increasing logistical complexity:
1. Use the 200/2
2. Add artificial illumination to the foreground grass
3. Reduce natural illumination from the background.
good thoughts, Keith. Next time I will take the 2.0/200 mm to shoot a similar scene
-
Perhaps the 200mm f/4 macro AF-D is useable. The bokeh is at least very creamy.