Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 28, 2003, 5:01 PM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 37
Default Here's An Example of Soft Focus for EF 24-85mm

http://www.onlinephotographers.com/g...copy.sized.jpg


This shot is straight out of the camera, no photoshop. Shot at full zoom. Sure, the light was dim when I took this shot but I used a tripod. To me, I was expecting better quality images with the 10D and this lens. Would like to hear your comments.
SteveZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Oct 28, 2003, 5:52 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 610
Default

this picture can easily be corrected with PS 7.0 for more sharpness, I see no issue at all...
tuanokc@hotmail.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 28, 2003, 5:59 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

Two things:

1) What is the shutter speed, focal length, and aperture?

There is motion blur of the subject, (the knee blur) which isn't apart of the rest of the picture. This fits with your use of a tripod. But it probably means that the shutter speed was not very high.

2) If you sharpen it in irfanview, it looks much better.

Have you ever used a digital camera before? Most consumer grade cameras (A80, for example) produce "sharper" picture because their settings default to more incamera sharpening. If you had one, you might be used to this. The 10D is specifically set to have less sharpening. This is actually a good thing. The reason for it is that it's much easier to add sharpening, it's harder to remove it. Canon (and other DSLR making companies) assume that a DSLR is going to be used in a variety of settings... and therefor is isn't safe to assume the amount of required sharpening.

Not only that, PS is much better at adding sharpening than the camera is. It has a lot more processsing power and memory... and time. You want the picture written quickly so you can take another picture. You won't want it wasting time doing a lot of fancy sharpening.

Now, if you really want the out-of-camera pictures sharper and you'll willing to have pictures that might be over sharp some of the time, then you can increase the incamera sharpening. It might not be as good as PS's, but it's not bad and then you won't have to do it when post processing.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 28, 2003, 6:01 PM   #4
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 37
Default

Is the softness a result of the 10D? The EF 24-85mm? Both? After spending all that money on a DSLR and lenses I kind of figured the image would be sharper WITHOUT using PS.
SteveZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 28, 2003, 6:10 PM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 37
Default Thanks, Eric s

I suppose you're right. Perhaps I'm too use to in camera sharpening, having previously owned other digital cameras. My 10D images look great at wide angle, its just the zoom shots that I find disappointing, so it could EF 24-85mm lens causing the softness.
SteveZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 28, 2003, 8:29 PM   #6
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

1. The picture is sized too small to determine anything...
2. How can you guys say this is sharp when there's no detail in the hairline, or in the eyelash?
3. Slow shutter speed is evident by the movement that Eric pointed out!
4. The dark wood grain on the left is clearly the most defineable, ie most detailed, area overall... (again motion blur is highly suspected)

USM will get you the 'impression' of sharpness, but this picture is definetly unjudgeable with the current size... and definetly not worth printing even after sharpening!
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 28, 2003, 8:44 PM   #7
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 37
Default

Don't think that is motion blur, NHL. This kid was sitting perfectly still. It probably had more to do with the cheap tripod I was using. Maybe I jarred the tripod when I took this shot creating motion blur
SteveZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 28, 2003, 8:56 PM   #8
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

It could be, but the boy's leg definetly moved as Eric also pointed out!

...Also check the wooden wall/edge to the left. This is the sharpest area of the entire picture so I doubt it's the cheap stand since this would be blurry too (and it's not) see the detail in the woodgrain vs the boy hair line!

Try the same with flash and let us know... That would take away the movement issue from the picture (but don't stop down the aperture) so we can judge the lens... shooting a flat newspaper would be best to check this sort of lens problem.
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2003, 4:04 PM   #9
-jb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 189
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveZ
Is the softness a result of the 10D? The EF 24-85mm? Both? After spending all that money on a DSLR and lenses I kind of figured the image would be sharper WITHOUT using PS.
The 10D probably doesn't take as sharp a picture "out of the box" as most point and shoot cameras. If you want to use images directly from the camera, you might want to change some of the image processing parameters. Try bumping the contrast, sharpness and saturation up a notch or two to match your taste. (See page 56 in the 10D manual.)

I think you could improve the picture shown above by using a faster shutter speed. Try bumping the film speed up to 400 or maybe 800 so that you can use a shutter speed of at least 125th of a second.

It's a nice picture. Take another shot at it...

-jb
-jb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 30, 2003, 10:48 AM   #10
Member
 
Alex Campuzano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 42
Default Soft Image

I'm no pro, but I do know that increasing the zoom DECREASES your aperature. Larger aperatures generate sharper images. Similar to comparing a 35mm shot (small aperature) and a 4x5 chrome (large aperature). There is no comparison in sharpness.

Look at your lens and it will say something like f1:2.8 - 4.7. The wide shot at uses the 2.8 while the zoom uses the 4.7 (smaller).

HTH

Alex
Alex Campuzano is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 6:14 PM.