Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Sun Apr 20, 2014 7:46 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Jan 10, 2011 11:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 12:33 pm
Posts: 442
Location: St. John's, NL, Canada
Hey all,

I'm considering putting this up on my wall, but the closer I look at it, the less I like it. For some reason, the photo doesn't look sharp to me, especially around the trees. I'm not sure if you can see it in the sizes of images the flickr allows, but we'll try.

I'm not convinced my autofocus was off. The landscape was at least 300 m away. I'm not convinced off motion blur either.

Specs:
ISO100
SS: 1/100
Aperture: 2.8
18 mm
VC ON

Gear:
Nikon D200
Tamron 2.8, 17-55

Links to photos:
Edit:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/55453652@N04/5342715454/
Origional:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/55453652@N04/5342105689/


Photos:
Edit:
Image
Origional:
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 10, 2011 4:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 8:47 pm
Posts: 202
Location: Osijek
for what i see it does look kind of unsharp, perhapse you should have stopped down the aperture for more sharpnes

_________________
nikon d90 --->af-s dx 18-105mm; tamron 90mm macro

add me up on:

flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bakica/

deviant art:
http://tbensic.deviantart.com/

----:>bakice ce vladati svjetom<:----


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 10, 2011 4:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 10:21 pm
Posts: 1641
Yeah for maximum sharpness stop down a little to say f5.6 or f8. Also Ive seen vibration reduction or VC or whatever actually decrease sharpness in shots Ive taken when it wasnt needed like it wasnt here at 1/100 and 18mm.

To be honest though it looks fine to me.

_________________
Nikon D5000 and D300 with 12-24mm, 35mm f1.8, 50mm f1.4, 60mm f2.8 Macro, 18-200mm, 17-55mm f2.8 (all Nikon)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 10, 2011 4:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 10:21 pm
Posts: 1641
Also did you shoot RAW? Because if you shoot RAW you realise you have to add sharpening later?

_________________
Nikon D5000 and D300 with 12-24mm, 35mm f1.8, 50mm f1.4, 60mm f2.8 Macro, 18-200mm, 17-55mm f2.8 (all Nikon)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 10, 2011 6:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 8:38 am
Posts: 357
If you personally see a problem with it or do not like it for some reason, then I think your inner editor is working. If a photo doesn't meet your standard then shoot a new one.

With that said, you can print your photo on canvas and the "sharpness problem" will go away.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 10, 2011 6:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 6:29 am
Posts: 61
Location: Essex UK
Hi Trevor
I had a closer look at your image and it does look a bit unsharp I had the D200 for a few years and sometimes I found the AF could be confused not that it would hunt or anything like that but it would drift (sorry about the pun snowdrift ho ho) Did you use AF if you did as the snow line in the foreground has almost no detail even when you zoom in tight I wonder if it was flare that threw out the cameras AF a tad even though it is not visable within the image, If you were on manual focus I still think the brilliant snow field has had an effected on the whole image.
I like the composition so I can understand why you would want to make a large print of it.
Its only a suggestion but I think as the image is almost monochromatic in tones it would take the full mono treatment well and pull a lot more detail out while giving a boost to the apparent sharpness I took the liberty and had a quick go after downloading to my desktop (I deleted it straight afterwards I can assure as I have been plagerised twice before and it is not a very nice thing to see someone else taking credit for an image you took six months earlier).
Anyway there is not much you can do with the snow field in the foreground other than layer in snow from another image you may have with better detail, I tryed selective very heavy contrasting and all you end up with is bad vignetting in the lower left corner.
IMHO it looks a much better image in mono and I think the infrared treatment works well I added 15% on the red filter and increased the overall contrast a tad. as I say its only a suggestion but have a go at mono and turning it perhaps if you like the look of it into a high contrast IR image.

hope this has given you some food for thought
all the best Trevor

Lee


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 4:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 5:08 pm
Posts: 99
Location: Salisbury, MD
F2.8 is to blame, and it is possible you could have had camera shake at 1/100- though unlikely to be visible especially at 18mm.

_________________
Sony A850 | Sony Battery Grip | Carl Zeiss 24-70 Vario-Sonnar T f/2.8 | Sony 70-200G f/2.8 SSM | Lensbaby Composer Pro | Sony HVL-F58AM

Alienbees B800 (x3) | Alienbees Cyber Commander | CSR+ Receivers | Grids, Softbox, Gels, Manfrotto/Century/Avenger stands

www.flickr.com/frankiewithers
www.fkwstudio.blogspot.com
www.fkwstudio.com


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2012 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.
/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs

Webdesign by Alphabase IT
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group