Thanks. I had bought the Tamron 20-40 about 6 months before the trip
but had hardly used it. It was in an ebay auction that didn't seem to be
gathering any attention and I bought it for (I think) USD 79. Then I
bought a Tamron 24-135 specifically for the trip to have a light weight,
wide zoom range walk-around lens. Much to my surprise it was the 20-40
that got the most usage and usually at the 20mm end. (actually at 21mm
since the EXIF data reports the lens as 21-39mm) I never previously
considered myself a wide angle sort of guy but quickly discovered that I
liked the ability to include the near foreground in a landscape. This
shot was probably taken in my early foreground discovery process since I
see that it was taken at f/22 and probably suffers unnecessarily from
diffraction. It was only later that I realized that, at 21mm, the
hyperfocal distance is only 4 feet even at f/11. The foreground is
close but I'm sure there's nothing closer than 2 feet and f/11 would
have gotten it all while allowing both ISO 100 instead of 200 and a
shutter speed of 1/200 instead of 1/100. This lens now automatically
goes to f/11 whenever it's mounted. But hyperfocal at 39mm moves out to
14 feet.
Chuck Norcutt
Chris Barker wrote:
> Nicely done, Chuck. That's a different composition from normal, with
> so much foreground in view.
>
> Chris
>
> On 11 Apr 2009, at 22:28, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
>
>> Another pano from the big trip. Along Rt 410 passing through the
>> Chinook Pass on the east side of Mt. Rainier. From two frames, with
>> Tamron 20-40 @21mm, 1/100 @ f/22 at ISO 200. There may be some
>> more to
>> come in this same area but the Tamron 20-40 was flaring a lot near the
>> sun. I'll have to see what's salvageable.
>>
>> <http://www.chucknorcutt.com/Mt%20Rainier/index.htm>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|