Exposure question..

[MARINERMAGNUM]

to save time, i was wondering if any of you could let me know which of these is the more correct exposure. maybe they are both wrong? i just chopped both out of the center of the image in paint. no pp. i was just trying diff. exposure techniques today but could use advise. both are 5.6 full zoom @300mm iso 100 1st one is 800shutter next is 640.

i needed an image,and this dove happened to be around. thanks for any help.

[Dbl]

The second looks a bit better to me. What will help you the most is use your histogram. It is separated into five "zones" with the left being black and the right being white. If you try to expose so that you get your peak slightly to the right of center you will find that you will be in the ballpark of correct exposure. This is just a general description, not a detailed one by any means, to give you an idea of what to look for.

Do a search for reading histograms, there are a number of good tutorials out there. Learn to read the histogram and you will find that exposure is an easy thing to get or adjust to get a well exposed shot. Good luck.

[Steve Foss]

I agree with everything Dan said.

No. 2 is better. Any image that's exposed longer that dosn't blow out your highlights is generally better than a shorter exposure. The shadows will be brighter and hold a lot less digital noise the longer the exposure is. Especially if you're shooting RAW, it's very easy to adjust the image exposure in PP.

[MARINERMAGNUM]

i guess thats where experience pays.i thought #1 was better,i guess because it was sharper. thanks.

[Steve Foss]

MM, number one is sharper, but you framed your question around which was the best for exposure, not sharpness. Because of that difference in sharpness, No. 1 is the more usable image, and at iso100 and that truly fine quality sensor, it's not underexposed enough in the wing shadows for you to worry at all about digital noise. If you'd shot it at iso800, you'd have more noise issues to worry about. Bumping the iso to 200 would have given you an exposure like No. 2, but at 1/800, not the 1/640 that produced this slightly softer image.

[MARINERMAGNUM]

it has been said that this lens [70-300 is] is soft at the long end. does #1 look about average for sharpness for 300mm? straight from the camera. i was handholding. you guys have seen soooo many more photos than i,that is why i ask this. may seem like a dumb question,but i have nothing else to compare it to. you know what i mean? thanks.

[Steve Foss]

MM:

All telephoto zooms are inherently a bit soft when shot with a wide open aperture at full extension. It's just the mechanical nature of that particular beast. When stopped down one stop, from f5.6 to f8, that softness disappears. In fact, even primes tend to be a tad sharper when stopped down. Your image is about the sharpness I'd expect from the lens, so I don't see any problems there.