Fao ?Hoppy Garry Edwards .. anyone

Hell on earth said:
So what lens would you suggest in the space I have,

I keep thinking the tamron 28-75mm
Click to expand...

I use the Tamron 28-75mm all the time, it's pretty much fixed to my D700, it works for me, as it's a nice sharp lens, and as i am normally in small spaces, the focal length is good, i do try not to go below 40mm unless it's group shots, not always easy but just about doable :)
 
TG. said:
I use the Tamron 28-75mm all the time, it's pretty much fixed to my D700, it works for me, as it's a nice sharp lens, and as i am normally in small spaces, the focal length is good, i do try not to go below 40mm unless it's group shots, not always easy but just about doable :)
Click to expand...

This. Although recently used my recently sold 70-200 in a rightish space (ended up with tight crops).

The Tamron's are very good. Before I went full frame I used the non vc 17-50 f2.8. Great iq and good in tight spaces.

On the D90 I had a working space of not more than 6-8 feet and produced some ok results with 3 speedlights (one key plus two others!).


Hat's Entertainment, hat's entertainment! by Sir SR, on Flickr

The 17-50 is a great cheap option! Admittedly a bit of distortion in the above but deliberate as it adds to the shot!

Jealous of the space you have and I think you'll definitely get there - determined and keen to learn!

S
 
Sir SR said:
This. Although recently used my recently sold 70-200 in a rightish space (ended up with tight crops).

The Tamron's are very good. Before I went full frame I used the non vc 17-50 f2.8. Great iq and good in tight spaces.

On the D90 I had a working space of not more than 6-8 feet and produced some ok results with 3 speedlights (one key plus two others!).


The 17-50 is a great cheap option! Admittedly a bit of distortion in the above but deliberate as it adds to the shot!

Jealous of the space you have and I think you'll definitely get there - determined and keen to learn!

S
Click to expand...

Thank you, I'm finding it a bit hard going at the mo but will get there

H
 
Hell on earth said:
You are right Garry, this took a sharp left into lighting when it was about focus
But anyway, the lighting and DoF are helpful

I am trying to start with one light
Today was just to hot to be indoors so took some outside shots that are in the people and portraits forum
http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=494541

| did fancy coming up to your class but have other commitments.
H
Click to expand...

If you are getting flare and glare, then this is a lighting issue that can totally screw focussing, and make images look very soft. They are all inter related
 
Richard King said:
If you are getting flare and glare, then this is a lighting issue that can totally screw focussing, and make images look very soft. They are all inter related
Click to expand...

Yes looking that way

I did some tests today and there is nothing really wrong with the camera D7000
I was a far bit sharper and better definition than the D5100 so I'm going to sell it and put the money towards a better lens or two

A 50mm f1.8 D for sure, cheap and good
then maybe the 28-75mm :thinking:

H
 
I don't understand your logic...

The camera back is no more or less sharp - it is the (correctly focussed) lens that ensures focus.

I tell you what - go shoot a portrait at f8, ISO 100, camera set to aperture priority, outside (on one of these bright days), with the subject in the shade. Make sure you are in the shade too. Then post the result back up

If you have a reflector (take a second shot), reflect some of the sun in from one side (about 45 degrees) camera /head height)

Post the results back
 
Richard King said:
I don't understand your logic...

The camera back is no more or less sharp - it is the (correctly focussed) lens that ensures focus.

I tell you what - go shoot a portrait at f8, ISO 100, camera set to aperture priority, outside (on one of these bright days), with the subject in the shade. Make sure you are in the shade too. Then post the result back up

If you have a reflector (take a second shot), reflect some of the sun in from one side (about 45 degrees) camera /head height)

Post the results back
Click to expand...

As it goes I did just that today, I'll post later. but not with a reflector :(

I have to do other stuff for a couple of hours.

H
 
Richard King said:
I don't understand your logic...

The camera back is no more or less sharp - it is the (correctly focussed) lens that ensures focus.

I tell you what - go shoot a portrait at f8, ISO 100, camera set to aperture priority, outside (on one of these bright days), with the subject in the shade. Make sure you are in the shade too. Then post the result back up

If you have a reflector (take a second shot), reflect some of the sun in from one side (about 45 degrees) camera /head height)

Post the results back
Click to expand...

I've not had time to do anything this evening.


What are you on about, as I'm now sure what you mean.
Am I going by the on camera screen ? no

H
 
dp
 
Last edited:
deleted
 
Last edited:
Richard King said:
I don't understand your logic...

The camera back is no more or less sharp - it is the (correctly focussed) lens that ensures focus.

I tell you what - go shoot a portrait at f8, ISO 100, camera set to aperture priority, outside (on one of these bright days), with the subject in the shade. Make sure you are in the shade too. Then post the result back up

If you have a reflector (take a second shot), reflect some of the sun in from one side (about 45 degrees) camera /head height)

Post the results back
Click to expand...

As requested only @ISO 200


DSC_8574 by HS-uk, on Flickr

DSC_8573 by HS-uk, on Flickr


H
 
Last edited:
The first image looks better than the second. In the second image your SS is at ROT minimum. ROT SS is only good for "acceptable sharpness" not "critical sharpness." And it is photographer dependent based upon your personal ability and camera being used. The greater the pixel density of the sensor the higher the SS will need to be.

I personally use 2xFL as my minimum when I can get it.

Your handholding technique/SS shouldn't be the issue for the studio shots under ~200mm unless there is enough ambient that is being recorded after the flash is over.
Maybe try putting the shutter speed up to x-sync for some studio shots and see if that makes a difference. It's really the only thing I can think of at this point. Unless the studio is actually dark enough to be causing AF/MF difficulties which seems unlikely.
 
Last edited:
And raking the ISO up to 400

DoF seems to be wider in this ?


DSC_8566 by HS-uk, on Flickr

H
 
Last edited:
sk66 said:
The first image looks better than the second. In the second image your SS is at ROT minimum. ROT SS is only good for "acceptable sharpness" not "critical sharpness." And it is photographer dependent based upon your personal ability and camera being used. The greater the pixel density of the sensor the higher the SS will need to be.
Click to expand...


Shot in Aperture as requested

In all shots I was leaning against a wall


I personally use 2xFL as my minimum when I can get it.
Click to expand...

So in photo 2 it was 48mm 1/80. you would go to 100 ?

Your handholding technique/SS shouldn't be the issue for the studio shots under ~200mm unless there is enough ambient that is being recorded after the flash is over.
Maybe try putting the shutter speed up to x-sync for some studio shots and see if that makes a difference. It's really the only thing I can think of at this point. Unless the studio is actually dark enough to be causing AF/MF difficulties which seems unlikely.
Click to expand...

I did try upping the ss in studio but no real difference

H
 
Last edited:
Hell on earth said:
And raking the ISO up to 400

DoF seems to be wider in this ?
Click to expand...

This is using the longest FL and the same aperture. so if you were standing in the same place it has the least DOF technically. But it also has the fastest SS.
So in photo 2 it was 48mm 1/80. you would go to 100 ?
Click to expand...
Yes, if possible. In fact I'd go even higher than that if possible but only if I had my desired aperture and base ISO.
 
Hell on earth said:
As requested only @ISO 200


DSC_8574 by HS-uk, on Flickr

DSC_8573 by HS-uk, on Flickr


H
Click to expand...
These are acceptably sharp - By doing what I said you have confirmed a few things. In "normal operation" (not stupidly high contrast, not high ISO, not a silly apeture) your camera and lens shoot a decent enough sharp image

let me run through a few things with you

1. Lenses have a sweet spot (each lens is different) but in general it is a few stops narrower than the max aperture. So on my 60mm 2.8, it is at at 5.6. With each new lens, I run some tests to find its optimal apeture. Too wide and you are suseptable to chromatic aberration, and T&S Shell error. Too narrow and diffraction rears its ugly head. Most lenses are good at f8 for SLR type cameras

2. If you fire flash at a wall in a confined space, the chances are this is bouncing back at you

Draw your shooting environment on a piece of paper, and draw where the lighting is, and where the camera is. I guess that if you pretended the wall was a mirror, your camera could see the flash head. If this is the case, you are going to be very susceptible to glare and flare. Glare and flare make what would have been a sharp image, look very soft. they also confuse your cameras focussing

if the wall is flat, light bounces off the wall at the same angle it hits it as. If you are using "big splashy lighting" i.e. shoot through umbrella, large unflagged softbox etc.. then the light will be hitting the wall at a range of angles, and most of the rest of the room too
To make the light not bounce right back at you, you are going to need to be "practical and inventive"

3. If the light is bouncing straight back at you, it is most likely bouncing straight back at the subject, and that is going to kill any degree of separation you had with the subject and the background. This will make the edges of the subject look overcooked and soft
 
In all shots I was leaning against a wall
Click to expand...
At this point I'm going to have to say SS is one of your issues, at least for outdoor shots. Maybe your holding technique is bad, or your just not as stable as others. As I said, it's just a ROT and it definitely doesn't apply to every photographer or every camera. My personal absolute minimum used to be notably below ROT. But I've gotten older and my cameras now have more MP's so my absolute minimum has increased. and it's different for the D800 and the D4.

And this makes me think that there is something very basic which is also the problem with the studio shots and somehow I can't see it.
My recommendation to sort it is to go into full manual mode with auto ISO disabled. Set the SS to x-sync (1/200-1/250), set the aperture to something reasonable like f/8, and set the ISO to minimum. Set the focus point to single/center and put in on something with good contrast. Use a tripod (or set the camera on something and use the timer). If the lights are TTL use them that way. If they are variable strobes crank the power if needed. If they are constant lights move them closer until you get an acceptable exposure (maybe not great lighting).

If it still has sharpness issues the problem isn't you. The next thing to try would be focusing with liveview (contrast detection) and then manually with liveview zoomed in to 10x.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the replies Guys

Richard, as with the convo with the other Richard (Hoppy) to much bouncing light around the studio is a main issue, my fault for painting everything white and I'm looking at damping it

Steven, I have tried all of that over the last couple of weeks, have so many photos of a tripod it's unreal :(

H
 
sk66 said:
Have you tried all of it together at the same time? If you have, then I'm afraid I can't be of any more help from over here...
Click to expand...

Well there is a dent in the wall the same size as my head

Not every image is soft but very few are pin sharp, very frustrating :(

H
 
Hi Guys

While I know this is not lighting and studio I hope you can still help

After a very bad day yesterday where I did not have one image that was not soft in a number of shoots and feeling like throwing everything in the river along with myself, I set up a strict test this morning.

I did it this way after reading this link http://daystarvisions.com/Docs/Rvws/D7000/pg2.html Same Camera same lens, only change was SS as I used the SB.

50mm f8 1/125 ISO 100 with a SB600 at 1/8-3
All fired from a tripod with an ir remote, some in live view all spot focus on the text.
1 with fine tune at -5
1 at +5
Half with expo delay on.

VR was off on all shots.

I swear I can't see an improvement in any, they all look the same to me, all still soft at 2x mag :crying:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/42129014@N06/sets/72157634679948370/

Helen
 
Last edited:
I'm not an expert on cameras, some people on here are and you may get a better answer from them, but I have a couple of thoughts.

1. The focus might just be off, it happens. If so, your camera needs to go back.
2. Are you doing any sharpening in PP at all? You need to. The vast majority of DSLR cameras are fitted with an anti aliasing filter in front of the sensor, AKA anti-idiot filter. It has it's uses, but it does make the images soft, not a problem as long as you apply sharpening in PP.

Quite a few years ago, I had a Kodak DCS14N. In many ways, it was a disaster, but it didn't have an anti idiot filter fitted to it and the resolution was unbelievably good, compared to other cameras of the same era
 
Garry Edwards said:
I'm not an expert on cameras, some people on here are and you may get a better answer from them, but I have a couple of thoughts.

1. The focus might just be off, it happens. If so, your camera needs to go back.
2. Are you doing any sharpening in PP at all? You need to. The vast majority of DSLR cameras are fitted with an anti aliasing filter in front of the sensor, AKA anti-idiot filter. It has it's uses, but it does make the images soft, not a problem as long as you apply sharpening in PP.

Quite a few years ago, I had a Kodak DCS14N. In many ways, it was a disaster, but it didn't have an anti idiot filter fitted to it and the resolution was unbelievably good, compared to other cameras of the same era
Click to expand...

Hi Garry I did nothing to these on flickr

I have tried one in PS USM 250% Threshold 5 and the radius of 1px brings them in
Not a big shift

But really I should be getting better than the OoC

The only thing now is try another better lens then I'll know if it's the camera I guess.


H
 
Not every image is soft but very few are pin sharp, very frustrating
Click to expand...

Have you examined the pin sharp images in detail to see how they differ from the rest?
 
Last edited:
Why not just lay a ruler down on a table, focus on a middle number and see where your focus falls on the ruler?

You want to make it as easy as you can to see if focus is out, here is how I checked my 35mm, as you can see it's easy to see it back focusing


35mm f1.8g by Ivan Shingler's Photos, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
Hell on earth said:
Hi Garry I did nothing to these on flickr

I have tried one in PS USM 250% Threshold 5 and the radius of 1px brings them in
Not a big shift

But really I should be getting better than the OoC

The only thing now is try another better lens then I'll know if it's the camera I guess.


H
Click to expand...

don't waste your money. If you're free Friday come round and we'll get some test charts up, see if its you or the camera
 
Ivan S said:
Why not just lay a ruler down on a table, focus on a middle number and see where your focus falls on the ruler?

You want to make it as easy as you can to see if focus is out, here is how I checked my 35mm, as you can see it's easy to see it back focusing
Click to expand...

sorry about my cropping

@ 50mm set at a 45 from left to right
all the same


18 by HS-uk, on Flickr

@105mm set 45

Front one (left) is a little soft ?


15 by HS-uk, on Flickr

25mm set 45

All soft

16 by HS-uk, on Flickr


So I puller the left one forward about 3in

Still all evenly sort ?


17 by HS-uk, on Flickr


Looking like the lens ?

H
 
Last edited:
boyfalldown said:
don't waste your money. If you're free Friday come round and we'll get some test charts up, see if its you or the camera
Click to expand...

Thanks for the offer, I'm trying to take me out of it using a tripod and remote first.

H
 
Last edited:
Helen, are you trying to do a focus check? If so, you are too close and a lot of lenses are not at their most accurate when you push to the edge of their operating envelope.

You need to be at a realistic distance, with a flat target square to the camera, plus a three-dimensional element so you can see where the point of sharpest focus actually is, at lowest f/number. Very easy - try a cereal box and ruler, see post #40 here http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=310467&page=2
 
HoppyUK said:
Helen, are you trying to do a focus check? If so, you are too close and a lot of lenses are not at their most accurate when you push to the edge of their operating envelope.

You need to be at a realistic distance, with a flat target square to the camera, plus a three-dimensional element so you can see where the point of sharpest focus actually is, at lowest f/number. Very easy - try a cereal box and ruler, see post #40 here http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=310467&page=2
Click to expand...

Edit, I did this the other day, measuring the distance from the focus target


H
 
Last edited:
Sorry everyone, I'm most likely driving you as mad as I'm going

Thanks for your help anyway

Very fed up :(
H
 
Last edited:
I see they are 1/10th SS, you are using a solid/expensive tripod?

Shiny batteries are not really that good to see focus issues, something with text like my example would be much easier to see a problem, out of the 4 pictures it looks like the second one has come out the sharpest with the battery on the right the sharpest which suggests to me the lens may need to be tuned and that the other 3 pictures may be blur/camera shake, I know my D7000 makes some movement when the mirror moves out the way, quite violent really and movement can be felt, at such a shutter speed it could be picking up on it, you can try mirror up mode if you like if you have to use 1/10th, i'd suggest a much faster speed though, like 1/250th with flash next time or up the ISO
 
Hell on earth said:
I swear I can't see an improvement in any, they all look the same to me, all still soft at 2x mag :crying:
Click to expand...

Lol. 2x as in 200%? That'll make any image look soft.
At f/8 w/ a 50mm there might be enough DOF to make a +/-5 adjustment hard to see.
I only looked at one of the examples but it looked plenty sharp to me at full size.
I judge most of my images at closer to 50% (for print/reduced web sizes). I only go to 100%+ for fine editing.
 
Last edited:
sk66 said:
Lol. 2x as in 200%? That'll make any image look soft.
At f/8 w/ a 50mm there might be enough DOF to make a +/-5 adjustment hard to see.
I only looked at one of the examples but it looked plenty sharp to me at full size.
I judge most of my images at closer to 50% (for print/reduced web sizes). I only go to 100%+ for fine editing.
Click to expand...

No sorry I did not mean 2x of Actual pixels, if I did that, pixelation would be clear

To me they are soft with a lot of detail missing, maybe my eyes are better or I'm being more critical.

H
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top