Mouldy tangerine tree - but HELP needed with sharpness issue!

pjm1

pjm1

Messages
4,182
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
Yes
I haven't posted in this section before, but I think it's more suitable for my slightly surreal shot I took last week. However, I'm not looking for particular critique on the image (always welcome, mind) but instead help with a problem I'm having with it.

It was a shot for the TP52 and as an image, I'm reasonably happy that it came out more or less how I wanted... BUT, I have an issue with image sharpness. I think I've ruled out focusing (the depth of field should be huge with a 17mm lens and f/11) and likewise camera or subject shake (1/160th and flash). So I'm struggling with what's causing the general image softness - I didn't add particularly large amounts of NR before processing...

Here is the image at zoomed-out res:

Week 9: The Living World by Paul M, on Flickr

And here is a link to it full size (1:1): https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1690/25368512985_256824fb19_o.jpg

Focusing was done manually by eyeball but then with reference to the distance scale. I was between 0.5 and 1m from the subject, so setting focus at 0.7 should have meant way more than that range should have been in focus. Hyperfocal distance would have been about 1.2m for reference.

So the only thing I'm left with is the lens is a touch soft even at f/11 (disappointing) at the short end of its zoom range. It's otherwise a nice lens, but it's the only thing I can pin it on...

Help!
 
Hiya Paul I just put the full size image on the the xray veiwing monior (im at work and it is designed to view small detail so thought i would see what you ment) and honestly the tree and orange look sharp to me on both monitors, the plant pot looks maybe little nosiey but i wouldnt notice it if i wasnt really looking hard. So maybe I just missed it or cant see it but i really cant help other than that. Goodluck.
 
Hi Ruth - thanks for looking. It's definitely noisey as I pulled back a lot of shadow detail on that pot. I also didn't want to add loads of NR as I didn't want it... erm... to go soft!

To me, it does look generally a bit soft, although not sufficiently so that it feels out of focus. So I'm wondering if it's just the lens. I have a 70mm macro which I use whenever I can as it's ultra-sharp - the difference in edge detail is huge, so maybe because I've been using that I'm expecting very high edge definition (which this definitely doesn't seem to have to me).

It could just be my expectations are too high in that regard? Perversely, when I'm using my macro for shooting people (focal length is nice on the crop sensor for that) I have to soften parts selectively, but it's lovely to get that crispness on eyelashes and hair detail.

Thanks for taking the time to look and comment (y)
 
Possibly diffraction softness creeping in, although it shouldn't be too bad at f/11. My bet would be on slightly missed focus though. Yes, DoF should be deep enough at small apertures but at that close focussing distance, it can't work miracles. I think you're probably right in discounting camera shake since it was flash lit, unless there was enough ambient to register significantly as well as the flash exposure.

Finally, at the screen size and resolution I'm viewing on, the shot as posted doesn't look too soft, it's only really when pixel peeped that it does seem to suffer a bit.
 
Thanks Nod... good thinking on diffraction. I'm still not sold on missed focus TBH - it was bang on at f/2.8 (i.e. focusing manually through the lens with the modelling light on full) but it could just be a combination of factors all adding together to soften the image - lens stopped down, diffraction, very slightly "off" and low light. Good point about pixel-peeping as well... how often do we do that in real life?!

(Also worth noting the whole circle of confusion / DOF tables thing is based on an image being printed, rather than us pixel-peeping, so that might explain it).

Cheers!
 
I like the idea (can't see any sharpness issues here either) - you could replace the tangerine with some ten pound notes dangling to get a really good image that might sell... After all, everyone wants a money-tree :)
 
I do agree about the lack of sharpness being present. There are places where it looks to me like the trailing edges of some of the branches have bled slightly, as though there were movement when the image was captured. Was the camera tripod mounted and was image stabilisation switched off?
 
Thanks Toni... it was handheld so shouldn't have been an IS issue. Never mind - I will get out and shoot some more with both this and a different lens and see if I can eradicate the issue. If I can then I will try to reintroduce it again just for my own peace of mind to know what's caused it!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top