Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Not happy with focus
Page <prev 2 of 6 next> last>>
Feb 11, 2018 19:17:39   #
Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England
 
jarneyd wrote:
Thanks, I was on Cape Cod. I will give your suggestions a try. The difference in sharpness between Gene 51's and mine are like night and day. Very nice shot. Thanks again


Yes, they are, D ....

But, Gene's shooting with a 36MP camera vs. your 24MP camera, using a Sigma Sport 150-600 (a two-thousand dollar lens) plus he's had many years of experience.

Don't feel bad ... you did quite well ... stay at it ... but try a different focus point ... eyes, head tuft ... whatever ... and a tripod, maybe - rather than a monopod ....

Reply
Feb 11, 2018 22:16:44   #
Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)
 
jarneyd wrote:
Thanks, I was on Cape Cod. I will give your suggestions a try. The difference in sharpness between Gene 51's and mine are like night and day. Very nice shot. Thanks again


Where on the Cape?

The image heavily processed to increase edge contrast, giving the appearance of increased sharpness.

I did the same to your first image.


(Download)

Reply
Feb 11, 2018 23:04:31   #
SharpShooter Loc: NorCal
 
jarneyd wrote:
I was able to find a snow owl to shoot yesterday and he was pretty sedentary even with folks coming and going to get his Photo. I used my D7100 with a Sigma 150-600 on a monopod stabilazation active because of the high winds, with the Iso up a bit to keep the Shutter speed up and because of the grass blowing right in front of his face, I used his front shoulder as my focus point. It just doesn't seem as sharp as it should be. I also shot with my D600, Nikon 80-200, 2.8 with a 2x converter and no stabilazition and had about the same result. Then I tried with the 600 and the Sigma and basically got the same result. I used his shoulder for my focus point in each photo. It was late afternoon and overcast. Am I expecting to much or is there something I could try for a better result?
Thanks for your informed replies.
I was able to find a snow owl to shoot yesterday a... (show quote)


Calculate your DoF, maybe the eyes are to far behind the shoulder to be sharp, or maybe the noise is just to great to allow any sharpness.
You don't say if you cropped and that 2x can't possibly be helping much.
If you had time to try all those cameras and lenses, why didn't you try to get closer for better shots?
SS

Reply
 
 
Feb 12, 2018 05:39:05   #
Wanderer2 Loc: Colorado Rocky Mountains
 
<<a Sigma 150-600 on a monopod stabilazation active because of the high winds>>

In this situation, a long telephoto, high wind, and monopod, I wouldn't be able to get sharp images because I'm just not able to do so consistently with a monopod and would use a tripod. That's just me however - I'm basically incompetent with a monopod - and I'm not saying that's what happened in your situation. But, you might experiment with a tripod next time to see if it makes any difference.

Reply
Feb 12, 2018 05:49:38   #
Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)
 
SharpShooter wrote:
Calculate your DoF, maybe the eyes are to far behind the shoulder to be sharp, or maybe the noise is just to great to allow any sharpness.
You don't say if you cropped and that 2x can't possibly be helping much.
If you had time to try all those cameras and lenses, why didn't you try to get closer for better shots?
SS


If you've ever shot snowy owls you'd realize that getting closer is usually not an option - a)if there are any bird people there, they will through rocks at you, b)if there are other photographers there, they will through rocks at you, and c)the owl will just fly off if you try to get closer than 50 yds.

Reply
Feb 12, 2018 06:02:59   #
joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois
 
jarneyd wrote:
I was able to find a snow owl to shoot yesterday and he was pretty sedentary even with folks coming and going to get his Photo. I used my D7100 with a Sigma 150-600 on a monopod stabilazation active because of the high winds, with the Iso up a bit to keep the Shutter speed up and because of the grass blowing right in front of his face, I used his front shoulder as my focus point. It just doesn't seem as sharp as it should be. I also shot with my D600, Nikon 80-200, 2.8 with a 2x converter and no stabilazition and had about the same result. Then I tried with the 600 and the Sigma and basically got the same result. I used his shoulder for my focus point in each photo. It was late afternoon and overcast. Am I expecting to much or is there something I could try for a better result?
Thanks for your informed replies.
I was able to find a snow owl to shoot yesterday a... (show quote)


This is a tough scene because of the blowing grass, low contrast flat lighting and white subject. I think the image needs to be processed differently...add some contrast and sharpening they will look satisfactory.

Reply
Feb 12, 2018 07:29:57   #
jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY
 
Chris T wrote:
Or, perhaps, that metal-looking contraption on top of his head...


It's a tiara. She's Queen for a Day!

Reply
 
 
Feb 12, 2018 08:11:47   #
gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast
 
Low contrast scenes always look soft. They may be in sharp focus but are difficult for the eye/brain to interpret that.

Reply
Feb 12, 2018 08:17:04   #
dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia
 
jackpi wrote:
The AF system in your camera will struggle at f8. A 2x converter will also cause a loss of sharpness. Also, the 150-600mm lenses are not as sharp at 600mm as at 500mm. I would focus manually at around 500-550mm with the 150-600mm lens, at f8 or f11.




Manual focus. Perhaps live view. Do not understand your choosing the shoulder as a focus point. There are no sharp lines to help the AF while the iris provides a good target point. However, since you clearly had a fairly stationary subject (owls are good like that, they will often wait for you to turn away before flying off) manual focus might have been a better choice. And yes 500mm is sharper on that lens generally. And you could even gone as far as f16

Reply
Feb 12, 2018 08:42:42   #
pcbiwer
 
Take a tripod along when you shoot with long lenses. The extra weight is worth the effort considering how much your long lenses already weigh. You have meta-data recorded on your shot which you did not disclose. You'll see this in the picture's properties file. So the bird is sedentary...you have the time. The weather was overcast and windy. Probably you're shooting f 4.5 wide open at 1/800 second with the grainy ISO rating of 1600. With a tripod, you could shoot at f 8.0 with ISO 400 at 1/60 second. If you ever shoot from your car (or in my case, often from a motorcycle), shut off the motor; lose the vibration (as well as the urgency to rush on to the next view) and take numerous shots. If I'm making "grab shots", I use sports mode AF with two or three shots in succession. It increases the likelihood that one is sharpest and no eyes are closed in a blink.

Reply
Feb 12, 2018 08:54:48   #
leftj Loc: Texas
 
rmalarz wrote:
The focus point was probably not the most judicious. I'd suggest focusing on the eyes. The shoulder is a somewhat non-defined edge. The camera probably had problems trying to figure out what you were trying to keep in focus. The eyes, preferable anyway, would give a sharper edge to focus, as well as greater contrast.
--Bob


Probably a valid point. It also sounds like the weather conditions might have bee a factor.

Reply
 
 
Feb 12, 2018 08:59:13   #
Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England
 
jerryc41 wrote:
It's a tiara. She's Queen for a Day!


Oh, is it, Jerry? ... I was wondering about that ....

It looks like a tap in D's pics ... but you can plainly see it's part of a snowy owl's plumage in Gene's pic ....

"She" - huh, Jerry? ... You can tell the gender - can you?

You are so very clever!

Reply
Feb 12, 2018 09:01:31   #
Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England
 
pcbiwer wrote:
Take a tripod along when you shoot with long lenses. The extra weight is worth the effort considering how much your long lenses already weigh. You have meta-data recorded on your shot which you did not disclose. You'll see this in the picture's properties file. So the bird is sedentary...you have the time. The weather was overcast and windy. Probably you're shooting f 4.5 wide open at 1/800 second with the grainy ISO rating of 1600. With a tripod, you could shoot at f 8.0 with ISO 400 at 1/60 second. If you ever shoot from your car (or in my case, often from a motorcycle), shut off the motor; lose the vibration (as well as the urgency to rush on to the next view) and take numerous shots. If I'm making "grab shots", I use sports mode AF with two or three shots in succession. It increases the likelihood that one is sharpest and no eyes are closed in a blink.
Take a tripod along when you shoot with long lense... (show quote)



Reply
Feb 12, 2018 09:32:06   #
bcrawf
 
jarneyd wrote:
I was able to find a snow owl to shoot yesterday and he was pretty sedentary even with folks coming and going to get his Photo. I used my D7100 with a Sigma 150-600 on a monopod stabilazation active because of the high winds, with the Iso up a bit to keep the Shutter speed up and because of the grass blowing right in front of his face, I used his front shoulder as my focus point. It just doesn't seem as sharp as it should be. I also shot with my D600, Nikon 80-200, 2.8 with a 2x converter and no stabilazition and had about the same result. Then I tried with the 600 and the Sigma and basically got the same result. I used his shoulder for my focus point in each photo. It was late afternoon and overcast. Am I expecting to much or is there something I could try for a better result?
Thanks for your informed replies.
I was able to find a snow owl to shoot yesterday a... (show quote)


I see that the focus is a bit to the foreground of the subject in all three images, suggesting that the grasses in front of the bird may have been what the auto-focus cued on. But I agree with some others' comments that getting the shoulder sharp would still not give the desired sharpness to the face/eyes, since the depth of field is so limited as you have photographed.

Reply
Feb 12, 2018 09:50:05   #
camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.
 
The subject seems to me was stationary. Even so I tend to shoot continuous firing but keep AF-S as my main focus modality with the center sensor selected. This has worked for me.
We all know that the aperture in use is important because even at great magnifications we always have the advantage of some depth of field. A high ISO setting is a must to allow a high shutter speed in conditions like this when it is cloudy and windy.
The exposure was off, I do not believe I have to comment on that. The first shot is easily 1.5 stop underexposure. The others are also underexpose. Editing programs can improve on that exposure using curves and some sharpening to improve on the quality of the photograph. I tend to use selective sharpening also when in need although I am not aggressive using it.
I used the third shot to do what I would have done in post with my image. I used Photoshop and I hope the gentleman who is the original poster will not mind my intrusion. I am only trying to help.
I am sure Mr. Perry will be the first one to tell you that most AF problems are operator's problems. When I am using AF with lenses that have IS or VR, I wait a second after I achieve focus to snap the shot. That gives the IS or VR a chance to stabilize the image. That is what I have done for years and it seems to work very well for me. Obviously, I am talking about stationary subjects.
You have gotten excellent advise for your inquires from other members so I believe that using those advises at your next shooting should improve on your technique...and make sure the histogram in camera shows a good exposure.


(Download)

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 6 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.