A few wild flowers from Olympic Mtns

[Charles Krebs]

Spent a couple days in the Olympic Mountains (Olympic National Park, WA. Half hour ferry ride and then about an hour and a half drive from home). Here are a few wildflower shots.

Stonecrop (Sedum spathulifolium). Canon 50D with 300/4.


Stonecrop (Sedum spathulifolium). Canon 50D with 300/4.


Avalanche lily (Erythronium montanum). Canon 50D with 300/4.


Olympic onion (Allium crenulatum). Canon 5D with 28/2.8 "Olymincan"

[Craig Gerard]

Charlie,

All beautiful especially 1 and 4.

Image 3 is also special (check the levels.....just an observation).

Image 4, the 'Olymincan' image is especially gorgeous! Really enjoyed seeing that image.

Craig

[Charles Krebs]

Craig... thanks!

Not sure what you mean about the levels in #3. If you're talking about the whites petals the bright whites are about 205/205/205. And the very brightest small highlights about 220. Shouldn't look blown out unless the screen is too "bright.".

[rjlittlefield]

Ah, now these are a treat! I've not gotten into the mountains this year, so I really appreciate these visions of what it's like up there.

--Rik

[PaulFurman]

Excellent use of the OlyMinCan :-)

[DQE]

Delightful photos!

Photos like these are enough to make a person want to move out that way. I gather I'm not the first person to have thought of such a thing. (grins)

[Roy Patience]

Charles,

These are really great. The perspective of the first one is very interesting. At first glance the background rock reminds me of Half Dome. They are all beautiful.

Roy

[Craig Gerard]

Charlie wrote:

Not sure what you mean about the levels in #3

It was the contrast that caught my eye. Possibly due to the vibrant clarity of the other images in your post. I opened image #3 in PS and adjusted the contrast; to my eyes and monitor (Lacie) it looked a tad more vibrant with the 'bright whites' at about 235.

Craig

[Ken Ramos]

Breathtaking images, especially no. 4. No. 3 looks fine from where I am sitting and yes, those images do make one want to pack up and move out that away. The mountains here in Western North Carolina are getting to many houses growing on them.

[Charles Krebs]

Thanks all!

Craig,
OK, so you were actually going the other way. Yes, it does look a little better with the whites lifted up a bit. I see a fair number of monitors that are not calibrated where highlights look too bright to me, so I think I tend to keep things a bit darker than I should sometimes. "Psychologically" people can accept darker whites than reality, but if the highlights look gone it appears unnatural.

[pbertner]

Great shots Charles, amazing at the closeup detail that you can achieve with such a long lens and the isolation from the background is wonderful. Always reverential of these Olymincam shots!
Paul

[Cactusdave]

Beautifully composed images. I assume this was shot with the Canon 300mm F4L? Was it the IS or non-IS version?

[Charles Krebs]

I assume this was shot with the Canon 300mm F4L? Was it the IS or non-IS version?

300/4 L, IS version. Many think the older non-IS was "sharper" (never did a side-by-side myself) but the 4.9 foot close focus distance (versus 8.2 feet) is something I would hate to give up.

BTW, when on a tripod for "hands-off", non-wildlife type shots, this lens, and the 500/4 both look like even better lenses when the pictures are taken with the live-view "electronic first shutter curtain" mode. At certain shutter speeds these bigger lenses with tripod collars do show a slight degradation from shutter induced vibration, even with mirror locked up. The EFSC clears that up.

[LordV]

Beautiful series of shots !
Brian v.

[Tesselator]

Outstanding Charles! Seriously breath taking! The first two are contest winning material! Seriously gorgeous!

Thanks!