The world went all fuzzy on me.

[MoonGypsy]

I took a few photo's last week of a local creek, and noticed that the trees were fuzzy when I uploaded the pictures to my computer.
The water was crisp, and clear. The details on the sides were clear, but not the trees. I didn't notice a wind. Could it have been a distance focusing problem?
I will post a few of them later today, and ask for a possible solution.

[bcoultry]

Could it have been a distance focusing problem?

It depends on the size of your aperture.

One thing I've noticed is that it takes only the tiniest of breezes to blur vegetation. Because of this, I favor faster shutter speeds outdoors, which naturally means the aperture has to be wider, which in turn can lead to shallow depths of field where they might not be wanted.

[MoonGypsy]

Here are three of the photo's that I shot on Thursday. The tops of the photo's look much fuzzier than they should, or maybe I need to clean my glasses more often.




http://www.hpphoto.com/servlet/LinkP...5315f0c7&size=

http://www.hpphoto.com/servlet/LinkP...1a1653d0&size=

http://www.hpphoto.com/servlet/LinkP...58535374&size=

[Barry]

There's too much contrast. The sky is too bright for the rest of the pic and blew out the trees.

[bcoultry]

I would have had to be there to know for sure, but it's possible there was a slight breeze moving the tops of the trees. Very often, that's the only part of the tree moving when the breeze is gentle. Also, the air can be still at ground level but not at treetop level.

Another thing to be aware of is that motion going from side to side requires a faster shutter speed than motion that comes toward or goes away from the camera. Thus, it was easier to capture the water clearly than it was the slightly swaying trees.