Matt BlazePescadero, CA, 2014.
All the pixels, but none of the sand in your shoes, at https://www.flickr.com/photos/mattblaze/14832380095
Captured with a small full-frame camera and 21mm lens. A three second exposure smoothed waves and surf.
This was an exercise in tone, perspective, and convergence. The four major boundaries of the scene converge (approximately) near the center of the frame, forming a flattened X.
I moved around and composed this both with and without the driftwood in foreground, which interrupts the composition but, I decided, is helpful to anchor the frame.
The metadata for this image claims it was shot at f/16. That's wrong; it was more like f/2.5 or so. This was an artifact of the too-clever-by-half way Leica M cameras estimate the f stop. There's no mechanical link between the aperture ring and the camera body, so instead they estimate the f-stop with a separate light sensor that's compared with the brightness of the recorded image. This works reasonably well, except when you use an ND filter (as here), which confuses it to no end.
anyMouse@mattblaze I assume that it's probably already a thing that exists to have a little adjustable ND filter to go on top of the ambient sensor, which you can dial until the reported value matches the set aperture?
Also, technically, shouldn't it report t-stop rather than f-stop value?