The Shard

Now that its finished I thought I should get out and try a few shots of this new icon. Quite difficult to find a spot to get it all in. First I tried from the bridge










Not really close enough, so I got down in between the buildings










hmmm, needs to be more frame filling I think








but no, can't get it all in, so really need to take a few steps back ...










All except the last shot with K7 & 18-55WR. The last one I needed some reach so used the 'M' 75-150 plus 2x telecomverter, total focal length about 260mm. If you're ever down this way, the last one is from Epsom Downs, just across the road from the racecourse. You wouldn't think so eh??

I like this building stuff, so I need to get out into London and start capturing more of the architectural delights!

Thanks for looking.

That is an impressive structure, Nigel. I really like the shot framed by the other older-style buildings.

I have tried rotating it clockwise until it is vertical, getting rid of the top-left lamp, and giving it a bit more contrast - to me that looks even better, but what do you think?

Philip

#3 would be better in B&W IMO

#1 looks like a 300px wide image enlarged to 800px wide and then sharpened

These shots prove the rule. You don't need the latest or most equipment lenses to get quality results. Just a shimmer of nouse....lol Well done.. Now where's my K7 ?

Thanks for the comments guys! You're right stub, the K7 is still a very versatile camera.

MrB, I'm sure your re-framing and rotating is very effective - there's so many angles you can come at around here. Trouble is actually getting a clear shot at the whole building.

Smeggy, no doubt a B & W would work, although maybe you'd need a higher contrast scene for the best effect. B & W doesn't do much for me though

The 1st wide view from the bridge was prepared with large-scale printed output in mind, and at 100 x 70cm on the wall it looks good. I don't tend to make any specific adjustments for the Web versions of my shots, so that may be why it appears 'sharpened'. The micro-contrast is cranked up pretty high on the buildings I admit, that may be the effect you mean. It all comes from a full-size RAW though,at 300ppi. Web reduction was done in PS Elements 'Save for Web' dialogue, final size 2800x1842 at 96ppi.

Why couldn't #3 be processed with more contrast? I think it would suit a high contrast BW?


Maybe a little harsh, but I understand where Smeggy is coming from and it is a little overdone for my taste.

I like #4 the best, it would be even better with a longer lens and minus the TC.

Regards
David

Sorry to hijack the thread Nigel, but I've had a go at processing the third one in high contrast BW. Not easy, as the file is small and a bit pixellated, but hopefully the idea comes across:




Regards
David

Must say I like the B/W version. Also of course the originals. In particular the old buildings around The Shard. Nice contrast of old and new.

A few years ago I did something similar in Birmingham - Selfridge's and St Martin's Church.

Thanks David & Kenty. I suppose the B&W is OK I know the teleconverter has its negative effects - 2 stop light loss being one, but also some contrast and sharpness reduction.

Let me see now - what lens would be good - I used a 150 plus 2x TC - thats um ... 300, and I've got an 18 - 55. What would be the obvious choice do you think ?

Now, now, there's no need for sarcasm Nigel! I wasn't suggesting you had another lens, I was just pointing out that the TC does the shot no favours. It needn't cost much to buy a good 300mm lens - I have a mint Tamron 300mm F5.6 Adapt-a-matic which is very sharp if stopped down a little and cost me £20. I would guess that might be less than your TC cost on its own? I think a lens like this would take much better images than the 75-150 plus TC?

Regards
David

Just having a laugh! No sarcasm intended. The TC is always going to be a compromise, absolutely. Its a handy little item in the camera bag, versatile I guess. Now if I keep trying to get shots like this you just might have me convinced about the 55-300!

Thanks for your continued input and advice