Ugly Hedgehog® - Photography Forum
Is it me or the lens?
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 next>>
Feb 11, 2019 17:12:23   #
speters (a regular here)
 
LeeK wrote:
First time on this topic area. Hope it's right. I recently got a new lens and have been trying it out. The lighting conditions weren't the best but I wanted to use it. I find that when I download and then look at the ''View Actual Size' option, none of them look very clear. In the past, I have used this function on Windows Photos, to help me determine how well focused the picture is.
The new lens is a Nikon 300-70mm. My old one was a Nikon 200- 50mm.

In these cases it usually comes down to an operater issue, as most all lenses are able to produce nicely focused images. It would be helpful if you could give a few more details about how you do achieve focus with said lens and camera! But given your example shots, they do not look too bad to me, especially considering the lens used. In situations like this it does become a bit more challenging to nail the focus right were you like it to be, so a bit input on your side should help you get the desired results.

| Reply
Feb 11, 2019 18:00:11   #
LeeK
 
speters wrote:
In these cases it usually comes down to an operater issue, as most all lenses are able to produce nicely focused images. It would be helpful if you could give a few more details about how you do achieve focus with said lens and camera! But given your example shots, they do not look too bad to me, especially considering the lens used. In situations like this it does become a bit more challenging to nail the focus right were you like it to be, so a bit input on your side should help you get the desired results.
In these cases it usually comes down to an operate... (show quote)

I almost always a single focus point and did in all these cases. I try to put it directly on the bird's eye. I also forgot that I took one of them through a clean window but I didn't see any difference to those that I didn't do that.

| Reply
Feb 11, 2019 18:04:41   #
LeeK
 
LWW wrote:
I think most are here to help.

The main thing is practice and have fun.

I don’t know how old you are, but onthe film days this hobby cost a fortune in film and development to learn.

Thanks for the specific tips about decreasing movement. And, yes, thank goodness for digital. I was never into it as much as I am now but I have always taken a lot of pictures. Of course, not 50 to 75 almost every time I go out into my yard and see something.

| Reply
Feb 11, 2019 18:29:27   #
DanielB
 
I Second this. Shutter speed too slow for hand held at 300mm.
TonyP wrote:
Hi Lee, assuming you didnt use a tripod and seeing you say they were at 300mm, my guess is you have a bit of camera shake affecting your samples.
Being a new lens and perhaps not being used to the extra weight and length, I think 1/125 and 1/200sec exposure is a bit brave.
Try 1/500th sec and work up from there, light permitting of course.
Cheers

| Reply
Feb 11, 2019 19:11:20   #
LeeK
 
DanielB wrote:
I Second this. Shutter speed too slow for hand held at 300mm.


From what people say, shutter speed does seem to be the main culprit.

| Reply
Feb 11, 2019 19:12:33   #
swartfort
 
I am amazed at how often people are timid in using the ISO available to them. It seems to me that the big marketing used in camera sales are MP and ISO. This is similar to the HP race in cars/trucks/motorcycles. Newer camera bodies can, and are designed to use ISO at numbers that many of us shied away from just a few years ago. My D3400 gave me acceptable images at up to 3200 if I used it properly. I think my D7500 is even better!!
Here is a link to some images shot at high ISO:
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-571903-1.html
I know they are not perfect, and pixel peepers will complain, but I much prefer a bit of background noise vs. a shot that looks less than sharp. You can see below the gear I use. As always, downloads are the best way to view images....

| Reply
Feb 11, 2019 19:19:31   #
LeeK
 
swartfort wrote:
I am amazed at how often people are timid in using the ISO available to them. It seems to me that the big marketing used in camera sales are MP and ISO. This is similar to the HP race in cars/trucks/motorcycles. Newer camera bodies can, and are designed to use ISO at numbers that many of us shied away from just a few years ago. My D3400 gave me acceptable images at up to 3200 if I used it properly. I think my D7500 is even better!!
Here is a link to some images shot at high ISO:
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-571903-1.html
I know they are not perfect, and pixel peepers will complain, but I much prefer a bit of background noise vs. a shot that looks less than sharp. You can see below the gear I use. As always, downloads are the best way to view images....
I am amazed at how often people are timid in using... (show quote)

Nice pictures. How do they print?

| Reply
Feb 11, 2019 19:25:03   #
swartfort
 
LeeK wrote:
Nice pictures. How do they print?


16x20 from a quality lab.... NO PROBLEM
Check this out.... ISO 12800.... had no other choice.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/142486771@N06/30700033298/in/datetaken-public/

I knew I was pushing it... and NO, it is not my best work... but a very usable image...I have this printed to 10x12 and is hanging in my barber's shop.

| Reply
Feb 11, 2019 19:37:42   #
LeeK
 
swartfort wrote:
16x20 from a quality lab.... NO PROBLEM
Check this out.... ISO 12800.... had no other choice.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/142486771@N06/30700033298/in/datetaken-public/

I knew I was pushing it... and NO, it is not my best work... but a very usable image...I have this printed to 10x12 and is hanging in my barber's shop.


Wow. I don't see myself printing any larger than 16x20. Nice picture of heron.

| Reply
Feb 11, 2019 19:37:57   #
IDguy (a regular here)
 
Also birds always move. You need at least 1/500 s but 1/1000 will do better.

You might try M mode with min fstop, 1/500, and auto ISO.

| Reply
Feb 11, 2019 19:38:43   #
LeeK
 
IDguy wrote:
Also birds always move. You need at least 1/500 s but 1/1000 will do better.



| Reply
Feb 11, 2019 19:50:59   #
LWW (a regular here)
 
.

| Reply
Feb 12, 2019 07:58:38   #
Don, the 2nd son
 
TonyP wrote:
Hi Lee, assuming you didnt use a tripod and seeing you say they were at 300mm, my guess is you have a bit of camera shake affecting your samples.
Being a new lens and perhaps not being used to the extra weight and length, I think 1/125 and 1/200sec exposure is a bit brave.
Try 1/500th sec and work up from there, light permitting of course.
Cheers



| Reply
Feb 12, 2019 08:01:35   #
Don, the 2nd son
 
I also was afraid to increase ISO but finally experimented and found that with a bit of overexposure the noise was not as much of a factor as I had feared. Now the sky's the limit when needed. Up the ISO and get the shot, with a bit of extra exposure that is.
LeeK wrote:
I will try that. I am reluctant to increase the ISO but it does make sense.

| Reply
Feb 12, 2019 08:04:24   #
BurghByrd
 
In addition to the many good suggestions you might also consider a monopod; much easier to carry than a tripod. Even if you don't attach it to the camera it still can provide stability and doubles as a walking stick if you wish.

| Reply
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 next>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2019 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.