What magnification in LR = Acceptable Focus? I have a T3i with a EFS 55-250mm 1:4.5-5.6 IS STM lens. My images look good up to a point. Then I see the sharpness of many of the other...

Silvermeteor Loc: South Carolina, USA

I have a T3i with a EFS 55-250mm 1:4.5-5.6 IS STM lens.

My images look good up to a point. Then I see the sharpness of many of the other photos and mine become a poor second place finisher.

I accept the fact that images shot with my lens will never compete with those from a primary lens yet this is what I have and the best that I can afford at the moment.

Because you can zoom in so far in LR5 my images never look sharp to me. You simply cannot pick out the detail like you could if I were using a 300mm f2.8 prime lens on a full frame sensor.

I have attached an image I took today. It was cloudy out and I was only using a monopod. Also attached is a screen capture of the same image at 2:1 magnification in LR5. No image enhancements were applied.

At what level of magnification or what other criteria should I use to determine if my lens/camera/photographer combination is functioning at the highest possible level?

Is there another telephoto lens that is affordable (I'm on Social Security) that might move me to a better result.

Original image

(Download)

Screen capture 2:1 magnification

(Download)

mcveed Loc: Kelowna, British Columbia (between trips)

You should not judge or evaluate photos at great than 1:1. Enlarging beyond that introduces pixelation (you are able to see individual pixels) and they look softer. Your second image has very fine pixelation but that is making the image look softer than it really is. It's OK to view at greater magnification to repair faults and edit details but not to evaluate sharpness.

Silvermeteor Loc: South Carolina, USA

I have been beating myself up for months over this. Thank you for your response. I guess my images may not be so bad after all considering the quality of my equipment.

birdpix Loc: South East Pennsylvania

mcveed is correct in that you should not evaluate sharpness at greater than 1:1. Additionally, you need to consider how large it will be printed or viewed at. In other words that 13x19 might look like crap but when printed at 5x7, it's perfectly OK. Additionally, that poor 13x19 viewed at 10 feet will look OK, too. Have you ever looked at a billboard up close? You almost can't make out what the image is but when seen from the roadside looks great.

Silvermeteor Loc: South Carolina, USA

Maybe one of you can help me a little further.

I see these gorgeous images of birds that have been cropped to get in close and the eyes are crystal sharp. I have never had that kind of resolution.

Is it even possible on an APS-C format camera and, if so, is there a moderately priced lens someone on a fixed budget might be able to acquire?

birdpix Loc: South East Pennsylvania

Silvermeteor wrote:

Maybe one of you can help me a little further.

I see these gorgeous images of birds that have been cropped to get in close and the eyes are crystal sharp. I have never had that kind of resolution.

Is it even possible on an APS-C format camera and, if so, is there a moderately priced lens someone on a fixed budget might be able to acquire?

It certainly is possible with an APS-C camera. With a 250 mm lens, you will need to get reasonably close to the bird and, most importantly, focus on the eye of the bird. To do the latter, you may need to use only a single focus point.

Silvermeteor Loc: South Carolina, USA

I have been using single focus points most of the time. It is harder when shooting small birds because you often get the background. lol Then you can't even see the bird.

I have been using IS and from what I have been reading this may induce problems at shutter speeds of 1/500 or faster.

Many people suggest a tripod, shutter release or Live View. Wow! When I have birds coming to the feeder they simply do not stay in one place to make these practical options.

I am sure they would have their place but more likely on larger birds wading or nesting. I cannot picture someone doing either effectively while trying to capture a variety of small song birds that even refuse to land on the same branch.

birdpix Loc: South East Pennsylvania

Silvermeteor wrote:

I have been using single focus points most of the ... (show quote)

I agree, tripods, shutter releases, and live view are not the answer.

I certainly understand your frustration. No one told the birds they were supposed to pose for us humans. Yet, they often do just that. Many species will sit on a branch for a few seconds before going to the feeder. Some, like Chickadees and Titmice will take a sunflower seed to a branch and open the shell, sitting there for 5 or 10 seconds. Some birds will only feed on the ground so make sure you spread some feed in a convenient place. Smear some peanut butter on the side of a tree and the woodpeckers will spend lots of time digging it out of the crevasses. Most important of all is to spend time studying their habits and you will begin to notice patterns of behavior you can use to get the shot.

I find that with some lenses I own, IS slows down the autofocus system. Turn it off if you are shooting at higher shutter speeds.

If you have any questions about my knowledge in this area, just check out either of my web sites.

Allen Hirsch Loc: Oakland, CA

Silvermeteor wrote:

Maybe one of you can help me a little further.

I see these gorgeous images of birds that have been cropped to get in close and the eyes are crystal sharp. I have never had that kind of resolution.

Is it even possible on an APS-C format camera and, if so, is there a moderately priced lens someone on a fixed budget might be able to acquire?

I use a 40D and 50D, both crop sensor bodies. I have a 25+-year-old lens, 500L f4.5, that cost me less than 1/4 what the new equivalent 500L runs. I also had a 300L and have a 400L that I can handhold because they're only f5.6, also bought used, so they were relatively inexpensive.

With good glass and good technique, you can definitely get the kind of resolution that will stand up even with significant cropping, even using a crop sensor body.

Look at some of these to see what I mean:

http://allenh.zenfolio.com/f323018815

Silvermeteor Loc: South Carolina, USA

Allen they look very nice. I have just made three posts in the Gallery section titled Backyard Birds of South Carolina.

I had to make three separate posts since I only seem able to post three images at a time.

Ahhhh. I just read below how to do it. Oh well. Everyone is a newb at some time. lol

Thanks for your input.

mcveed Loc: Kelowna, British Columbia (between trips)

Silvermeteor wrote:

Allen they look very nice. I have just made three posts in the Gallery section titled Backyard Birds of South Carolina.

I had to make three separate posts since I only seem able to post three images at a time.

Ahhhh. I just read below how to do it. Oh well. Everyone is a newb at some time. lol

Thanks for your input.

Your bird shots look OK at the size you posted. The downloads are no bigger than the thumbnails though so it is hard to evaluate them. You must have resized them before posting to a pretty small size. The idea is that the download should be your original, before resizing, image. UHH will downsize for the thumbnail.

EnglishBrenda Loc: Kent, England

I noticed that you took this photo using at 1/30 second on a monopod. I think this is quite slow without a tripod and the leaf may have been moving slightly.

sueyeisert Loc: New Jersey

mcveed wrote:

You should not judge or evaluate photos at great than 1:1. Enlarging beyond that introduces pixelation (you are able to see individual pixels) and they look softer. Your second image has very fine pixelation but that is making the image look softer than it really is. It's OK to view at greater magnification to repair faults and edit details but not to evaluate sharpness.

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Don, the 2nd son Loc: Crowded Florida

I bought that lens for my daughter and tried it out before I gave it to her. I was originally disappointed. Got to experimenting with it and found that the IS is a bit slow to spin up. When I counted to three after depressing the shutter button the images improved markedly. Now that means that "snapshots" will require a higher shutter speed to negate the dependance on IS. Also with a modest cost lens the tried and mostly true axiom is to stop down two stops for typically the sharpest result. I have taken some great pics with the lens when operating in it's "sweet" spot.

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

Hi Silvermeteor - I think with modern sensors that for printing at size A4, (or my preferred 6x4" or 5x7") that viewing at 50% is all you need for assessment.
I would also think that the pics you are comparing to yours will certainly have had the benefit of PP - sharpening and contrast adjustment if nothing else - and gamma adjustment most probably.
If printing for inclusion in an album, 5x7" is probably the most comfortable viewing size.
Del