Mary sent me this image with a question. I like to include what fellow photographers have to say so that others that might have a similar question or photo can benefit. Here’s what Mary had to say:
“Hi,
My name is Mary Robinson and I came across your site via Lightstalking.com. I have enjoyed reading your blog and am interested in having a photo critiqued. My question is, I have always been told and read numerous times that the most important thing would be to make sure in portraits that the eyes are in focus. In this particular image I have done that, but the beak itself is not, given the settings I was using and that my angle of view was slightly above the bird how would I have avoided getting parts of the bird out of focus while others are in focus and does it matter in this particular instance as the eyes are what drew me to take the shot in the first place?”
Mary,
I looked at you camera settings and it said you were using a 70-200 zoom, and you were just about all the way out at 190mm. It also says that you were at F/7.1 at 1/160th of a second. This could be the problem.
I realize that the distance from the end of the beak to the eyes is not very far, but it might be too great a distance to get it all sharp at F/7.1 with a 200mm lens. At 200mm, the plane of focus is not very much, which is why it’s used to separate the Figure from the Ground. In my new class with the PPSOP, and in my “Stretching Your Frame of Mind” workshops we work on the six principles of Gestalt. One of them is called Figure-Ground”, and it deals with ways to separate the figure (the subject) from the ground (background). The best way is to use a long lens and shoot with a minimum aperture. This is sort of what’s happening with your photo of the hawk.
Here’s what I suggest: First of all I assume you were using a tripod, because if you were hand holding it you already started out with a sharpness problem. Ok, assuming you were on a tripod, I believe it would have taken more DOF to get him sharp from the beak to the eyes…if you were at 190mm.
It also appears that you were over to the right side of the beak, so the distance from the feathers and eye on the left was further away from the features and eye on the righton the right. That would have been enough to not get all of it sharp. Remember that you’re dealing with a long lens so you have to remember that it’s going to take more DOF to get everything you want in focus.
It’s also possible that 1/160th of a second was not fast enough to maintain sharpness. That’s not really all that fast when shooting wildlife.
I hope this helped.
Visit my website at: www.joeBaraban.com and check out my 2013 workshop schedule at the top of this blog. Come shoot with me sometime.
Keep sending me photos and questions to: AskJoeB@gmail.com. If can obtain directions at the top of this blog as well.
I happen to really like this shot and did not realize the beak was out of focus at first! I thought the hawk was winking at me! I personally do not use my telephoto lens very much. I have an older manual focus 80-200 f4.5 nikkor push pull zoom. Hey it may have been built in the 70’s but man does it take nice pictures on my d300. I usually only stop it down one or two stops when I shoot it because your are using it to knock out that background. I also like the blue behind the bird because usually that’s where they always are, up in the sky!
Gary,
when I pull out my long lens, I never shoot it at anything except completely wide open at F/2.8
When I looked at the eye, I though it had been put out in a fight or something like that….either way, not the best look!!!!
JoeB
How come completely wide open Joe? Wouldn’t a little extra depth of field on the face be beneficial? Plus doesn’t the lens perform a little better stopped down one or two stops? Maybe not on your top level L glass Joe! Personally I never really liked the look where the eye was in focus but by the time you got to the eyelashes every thing becomes soft. I like the whole face in focus but knock out that background!
Gary,
when I was shooting film, I was using Nikons. I had a 300mm F/2.8 that was extremely sharp wide open. it was the look I was after so I never needed to stop down even a stop. Now, my Canon gives me the same effect. I’ve never had any problem getting what I wanted in focus. You just have to pay attention.
Btw, I’ve just been contacted to teach again in LA next October or November with Julia Dean.
JoeB
Hey that is absolutely fantastic news! Since my birthday is in October what a nice present! 🙂 2014 Joe?
It will be October 14th to the 18th. It usually fills so don’t wait too long to register. I just posted it on my blog, so as of now, you’re the only one that knows.
JoeB
Thank you, Joe, yes that was very helpful. I will have another opportunity to shoot the birds soon and will certainly use your advice.
You’re welcome.
JoeB
Hi Joe,
I read with interest on the discussion regarding the DOF while using a longer lens. Is this because the distance from the camera to the bird is quite close? What if the distance between the lens and the bird is further away, would f7 or f8 suffice to get the end of the beak and the eyes sharp all the way?
Thanks.
Regards,
Lemena Halim
Lemena,
Yes, you’re right. It really depends on what lens you’re using. I can tell you that the farther you are away from your subject, and the closer the lens is focused at infinity, the more will be sharp at F/8.
Does this help?
JoeB
Joe,
Actually, I was comparing this photo to the one that you took of a bunch of horsemen with red coats/blazers. I know they are not the same type. But in my view, the latter’s DOF is relatively greater than the photo of the bird.
Regarding the horsemen with the red blazers, was that taken with a long lens too? If so, was that taken with the aperture wide open?
Thanks again.
Regards,
Lemena Halim
Lemena,
I’m not sure what photo you’re talking about. where did you see it? Can you tell me any more about it?
JoeB
Joe,
It was listed as one of your students’ work. Link is http://joebaraban.com/blog/students-work-psop-gestalt-class/.
Lemena,
I’m not sure since I didn’t shoot it, so I went back to that class and looked it up. She said she shot it with a 180mm lens, and her aperture was F/3.5.
That being said, at F/3.5 she was probably focused at or near infinity where everything is sharp. No other way she could get that much sharp at that aperture with that long a lens.
Does that help?
JoeB