Critique Sharpness

BillN_33

BillN_33

Messages
12,840
Name
Bill
Edit My Images
No
Since joining this forum 6 weeks ago I have become obsessed by sharpness and it is worrying …. almost leading me to a D4S

Have a look at the following guys and tell me what you think
(the 70mm 200mm f2.8VR is not a lens I have used for sometime - I usually use my 300mm f4 - but I wanted to try the x 2 TC lll with this lens as a question was asked elsewhere on the forum)
Taken with a D7100 in crop mode

Is the following sharp

ISO 1000 @f7.1 and 1/1000 - I can only use spot focus as the lens has a TC attached to it

not bad light, taken at 16:30 today

Full sized image taken with the Nikon 70mm 200mm f2.8 VR zoom + Nikon TC 20E lll
so 400mm x DX x 1.3 in camera crop = almost 800mm

No PP except a very small amount of sharpening in Photoshop Elements 10
tree.jpg


Crop

crop.jpg
 
Last edited:
the background blurs are showing pronounced fringing...is it normally like this or is it the effect of the TC?

actually it's not the background blur, but the foreground blur...it looks extremely odd. would love to see the difference with TC removed.
 
Last edited:
Hard to tell with the subject you have chosen I think for me at least LOL?

As far as I can tell though the image looks ok to me?
 
There was not a convenient bird around at the time so I chose the branch it would be on
 
Yes. It's sharp.

Also, a d4s itself will not help you take appreciably sharper pictures for most uses. If you are blaming your camera (a d7100 in this case) for perceived lack of sharpness on a computer monitor you don't need to change your camera, you need to change the way you think about photography.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: mex
Just my humble opinion Bill but don't get bogged down with sharrpness..

There are some super sharp pics on here (and elsewhere) that are 'pants' and I include myself in that opinion.

Subject, composition, behaviour (esp coming up to feeding fledglings time) is what we're all after (y)

Sounds like you'e getting bogged down when you should be enjoying your photography.
 
Last edited:
ghoti said:
Yes. It's sharp.

Also, a d4s itself will not help you take appreciably sharper pictures for most uses. If you are blaming your camera (a d7100 in this case) for perceived lack of sharpness on a computer monitor you don't need to change your camera, you need to change the way you think about photography.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. My sharpest camera is my panasonic LX7...go figure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mex
ghoti said:
Yes. It's sharp.

Also, a d4s itself will not help you take appreciably sharper pictures for most uses. If you are blaming your camera (a d7100 in this case) for perceived lack of sharpness on a computer monitor you don't need to change your camera, you need to change the way you think about photography.
Click to expand...

I was not blaming the camera …… a few reasons that I posted.
1). I am concerned about my technique in that I have noticed from EXIF info from others images that I tend to take most of mine at too low a shutter speed letting the Av and low ISO settings dominate ……….. so this image is a change ISO 1000 etc., I am also using the Manual setting far more than the Av setting.
2). As I pointed out there was a question on the Forum about using the Nikon TC20E lll with the 70 200mm f2.8VR …… I had not used this lens for sometime and just had it handy ……. so I thought that would be useful.
3). I am thinking about moving to FX and am looking at options, I am not too keen to have a 36 pixel sensor and would prefer the bigger pixels of the D4S or D3S sensor.

How do you feel that I should change the way I look at (bird) photography?
 
Phil Young said:
Absolutely. My sharpest camera is my panasonic LX7...go figure.
Click to expand...
I stupidly got sucked into the equipment Olympics a while back. To my great personal expense.

My images got better after that.......but only at the rate they were getting better beforehand.

Higher end cameras may have improved functionality and ergonomics and they may improve perceivable image quality at the extremes of photography but other than that, don't waste your money. Upgrading your lenses will have more impact, and even that is minimal or almost unperceivable for most uses.
 
dinners said:
Just my humble opinion Bill but don't get bogged down with sharrpness..

There are some super sharp pics on here (and elsewhere) that are 'pants' and I include myself in that opinion.

Subject, composition, behaviour (esp coming up to feeding fledglings time) is what we're all after (y)

Sounds like you'e getting bogged down when you should be enjoying your photography.
Click to expand...

I agree with your comments about super sharp images on here - lots of really good ones and I realise that many are taken from hides or "set up" situations - I do not want to do this as I enjoy bird watching and using my bins as much as my camera. Most of my images up to this year were taken hand held. I now wish to improve and obviously the first step is to use a good tripod and head, which I have. I am also concerned that the lens that I have are performing as they should and that is why I have started to look at the results they produce carefully along with the screen calibration on my MBP and iMac. Since I moved from my D300 to my D7100 my work flow has slowed down and I need to upgrade the RAW on both, something else that I am now looking at.
I would say that I am enjoying bird photography more than ever but I am now taking the opportunity to review all aspects of my hobby.
 
That all makes sense but just post your results up - asking for feedback :facepalm:
 
Last edited:
ghoti said:
I stupidly got sucked into the equipment Olympics a while back. To my great personal expense.

My images got better after that.......but only at the rate they were getting better beforehand.

Higher end cameras may have improved functionality and ergonomics and they may improve perceivable image quality at the extremes of photography but other than that, don't waste your money. Upgrading your lenses will have more impact, and even that is minimal or almost unperceivable for most uses.
Click to expand...

I have upgraded my lens - I started with the Nikon 70 300mm f4.5/5.6VR Zoom, then moved to the Nikon 300mm f4, then added a Nikon x 1.4TC and now a Nikon 300mm f2.8VR and Nikon TC20E lll.
I have bought the 300mm f2,8 VR as I want to use it hand held as much as possible. I am retired, live in a good part of the world for bird photography and general take a walk in the local countryside 3 or 4 times a week when I am at home in SW France.
I would have been quite happy with the 300mm f4 had it had a VR function.
 
Looks like I'm not the only one who stays up all night - I'll post a few

F_Flycatcher.jpg
 
Last edited:
BillN_33 said:
I was not blaming the camera …… a few reasons that I posted.
1). I am concerned about my technique in that I have noticed from EXIF info from others images that I tend to take most of mine at too low a shutter speed letting the Av and low ISO settings dominate ……….. so this image is a change ISO 1000 etc., I am also using the Manual setting far more than the Av setting.
2). As I pointed out there was a question on the Forum about using the Nikon TC20E lll with the 70 200mm f2.8VR …… I had not used this lens for sometime and just had it handy ……. so I thought that would be useful.
3). I am thinking about moving to FX and am looking at options, I am not too keen to have a 36 pixel sensor and would prefer the bigger pixels of the D4S or D3S sensor.

How do you feel that I should change the way I look at (bird) photography?
Click to expand...
Unless you're loaded I'd urge caution in moving up to FX. The (huge) increase in cost is not reflected in the small increase in creative latitude and IQ (for most purposes).

Just my opinion. It seems to be a bone of contention on this forum, though.
 
BillN_33 said:
I have and generally it has been indicated that my images are "soft"
Click to expand...
I'll risk crucifixion and say that an FX camera will not necessarily make images posted to a forum any sharper.
You will see absolutely, unimprovably sharp pictures from APSC format cameras online. Unless you want to print and print large, don't worry about your d7100's capacity for sharpness.
 
ghoti said:
Unless you're loaded I'd urge caution in moving up to FX. The (huge) increase in cost is not reflected in the small increase in creative latitude and IQ (for most purposes).

Just my opinion. It seems to be a bone of contention on this forum, though.
Click to expand...

I'm a retired OAP so I can indulge myself from time to time
 
BillN_33 said:
I agree with your comments about super sharp images on here - lots of really good ones and I realise that many are taken from hides or "set up" situations - I do not want to do this as I enjoy bird watching and using my bins as much as my camera.
I would say that I am enjoying bird photography more than ever but I am now taking the opportunity to review all aspects of my hobby.
Click to expand...

If you want super-sharp images,then you are going to have to get close to your subject and that I'm affraid will most likely involve hides or feeding stations.
 
Last edited:
Hi are you trying to get really sharp images of birds is that the end goal.
 
wave01 said:
Hi are you trying to get really sharp images of birds is that the end goal.
Click to expand...

Hi wave - that's the general idea - looks like I need to buy a hide and set out places in our garden - living in rural France we have quite a lot of varied land and there are quite a few possibilities surrounding the house
 
may i ask what your technique is for taking the shots do you use burst mode or single shot
 
I tend to take one or two consecutive shots in one go - (maybe I'm still back in the days of film)
 
i tend to use continuous mode, A1 servo (not sure what nikon call it) AV and a fixed iso. i also use the back focus button. good luck
 
Phil Young said:
Absolutely. My sharpest camera is my panasonic LX7...go figure.
Click to expand...

Compact - tiny sensor- massive dof at even wide apertures thus less focussing errors
 
big soft moose said:
Compact - tiny sensor- massive dof at even wide apertures thus less focussing errors
Click to expand...

so which compact do you reckon I should use for bird photography

I have tried my M4/3 stuff with legacy tele's
My Canon S95 is not much use
My Leica M8 has really poor performance at ISO's over 640 … and the AF is non existent!!
I have tried Fuji bridge but ended up giving it to my son

My M6 with film - well it's just a waste of time for "birds"

maybe there is a compact with a small sensor out there that is good ……… can you advise
 
There isn't anything wrong with using a hide Bill to try and get better pics. Equally there is nothing wrong with trying to get birds in a more suitable location.

Probably the vast majority of birding pics on here and other forums have been taken in a controlled environment of some description even if that control is the use of just a hide to get closer.

Common sense needs to prevail however and I won't try and draw birds too far away from the safety of bushes and trees for example.

If you think that your lens/camera/TC combinations are not quite giving you the sharpness you think they should then its worth taking the time to check them on a steady tripod against a good contrast target in good light. You may find that a bit of MA is needed on certain combinations if your camera has that facility.
 
Thanks Gary - a hide is on my shopping list! ………. just cannot decide on the colour!!!
 
Bill, since you're a Nikon shooter and can afford to indulge your hobby a bit, it might be worth trying a 1 series CSC (I have a V1 which has an EVF as well as a rear screen) with the FT-1 adaptor so you can use AF-S lenses on it. The 1 series have a crop factor of 2.7x, so you get quite a bit of reach from even a 70-200 - a 70-300 has (at the long end) the EFL of an 810mm and the sensor's good enough to make use of even better lenses. I had a play with a friend's 600mm f/4 VR on a 1.4x teleconverter and it managed to AF on a target about 30' away using only a 1 LED torch as a light source (other than a tiny bit of daylight but not enough to shoot in). The result can be seen HERE. I should add that it's a bit noisy but for a small sensor at ISO 6,400 I'm not complaining!
 
Nod said:
Bill, since you're a Nikon shooter and can afford to indulge your hobby a bit, it might be worth trying a 1 series CSC (I have a V1 which has an EVF as well as a rear screen) with the FT-1 adaptor so you can use AF-S lenses on it. The 1 series have a crop factor of 2.7x, so you get quite a bit of reach from even a 70-200 - a 70-300 has (at the long end) the EFL of an 810mm and the sensor's good enough to make use of even better lenses. I had a play with a friend's 600mm f/4 VR on a 1.4x teleconverter and it managed to AF on a target about 30' away using only a 1 LED torch as a light source (other than a tiny bit of daylight but not enough to shoot in). The result can be seen HERE. I should add that it's a bit noisy but for a small sensor at ISO 6,400 I'm not complaining!
Click to expand...

Thanks Nod,
Should have mentioned I have a V1 and an FT-1 - mainly used it on a tripod with the 300mm f4 and sometimes with the Nikon x 1.4TC - always go back to the DSLR, (I suppose my "favourite is still the D300) ………. never really got on with it ……… I suppose that I have been discussing "equipment" too much and need to look into using hides and visiting nature reserves with man made hides.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top