I need some help....PLEASE!
Aug 17, 2012 20:46:33 #
silver
Loc: Santa Monica Ca.
jimberton wrote:
quote=eskiles You did not say if you were using a... (show quote)
Always use manual focusing for this kind of photography.
Aug 17, 2012 21:35:29 #
jimberton wrote:
quote=Zero_Equals_Infinity As already discussed i... (show quote)
You have the answer in front of you. On a 4" x 6" it looked great. Now try printing 12" x 18" or 16" x 24" and see how it looks. Dollars to navy beans the softness of diffraction grabs your attention, compared to shooting at f8 or f10. With my D800, I hate stopping down further than f9 if I can possibly help it, (which is one of the reasons why I love my tilt-shift lens so much.) The D7000 has a comparable pixel density and is just as sensitive to shooting in the sweet range of apertures for your lenses.
I agree that focus stacking is an excellent choice for product photography. Use an ultra-sharp macro lens and go nuts, (if time is available.) The main impediment for me would be the manual setting of the focus rail. An automated/calibrated rail would go alone way to making the process painless.
Aug 17, 2012 22:12:50 #
Here's yet another 'wrench' to throw into the machinery. What about Image Stabilization or Vibration Reduction - are you using it with your camera on the tripod? THAT could be causing the 'softness' you're seeing.
Aug 17, 2012 22:59:39 #
I have the 17-55 Canon and in food shots sometimes go to f22 and have never had what you are speaking of. Can't imagine it is the lens that is the problem, not that Canon is perfect as we know. I rarely use any lens at that setting, even shooting at horse races I rarely go above 11 or16 on occasion. I have always felt the best exposures are more open but just personal opinion. Many food shots require a higher setting if client demands all in focus and I can't convenience them otherwise of the effects available to them. I was looking at a pizza shop photos a few days ago (large national company) and was surprised at how soft a few of the shots were in their entirety. Would love to hear what caused your problem. Good luck
Aug 17, 2012 23:50:05 #
BboH wrote:
Nothing to add - just posting so I'll get the follow up posts as they are added. This is quite fascinating.
You can just hit the watch button at the top of the post .
Aug 18, 2012 00:46:32 #
Aug 18, 2012 00:55:48 #
Nikonian72 wrote:
Mogul wrote:
All of these factors are moot. Read original post. OP has acceptable results using identical settings & procedure, with only difference being f/10 vs f/22.Printer and/or paper? Ink? Monitor calibration? Brand of card? Brand of tubes in lights? Ambient light? Even ambient humidity in some settings can create different results. Now, combine all the variables, write them down, take a match, burn them, and do it the way that works for you!
And different cameras, lens, lighting equipment, maybe time of day. There has to be a variable somewhere. And I did manage to struggle through the original post; as a matter of fact, it was rather well written. If you are so sure all the variables listed are moot, you come up with a definitive explanation!
Aug 18, 2012 01:24:21 #
Aug 18, 2012 01:24:43 #
you may also explore calibrating your lenses to see if they
are focusing correctly... or simply use Live view and manual focus at X10.
print out some downloadable PDF charts,
are focusing correctly... or simply use Live view and manual focus at X10.
print out some downloadable PDF charts,
Aug 18, 2012 01:40:10 #
Just bought a Tamron f 10-24. Shot at all apatures for a test. Some looked better than others, even f16, but f22 was auful.
Aug 18, 2012 01:57:13 #
Mogul wrote:
You stopped reading too soon. Very next post following OP's first: Circular Aperture Diffraction, which was re-iterated several more times by other photographers in following pages.There has to be a variable somewhere. And I did manage to struggle through the original post; as a matter of fact, it was rather well written. If you are so sure all the variables listed are moot, you come up with a definitive explanation!
This is exactly why OP will be comparing camera/lens combos head-to-head.
Aug 18, 2012 02:20:44 #
twowindsbear wrote:
How about posting the photos?? Scan the print from the seminar & scan a similar print that you've made. Let us 'see' the difference between the 2 shots.
Yes, it seems to be the sensible thing to do.
Post it in "store original" or forget sbout it.
Aug 18, 2012 02:27:58 #
twowindsbear wrote:
quote=jimberton quote=twowindsbear How about pos... (show quote)
I just tuned in to this topic and scanned thru the postings. The more I read the more bogus it all sounds.
The op has mostly been credible before but perhaps needs to listen to his wife on this one.
Do you really have the previous experience claimed and attend a paid siminar and come away so messed up?
Something is bogus.
Aug 18, 2012 04:06:49 #
Jackinthebox wrote:
E-W! There you are! We wondered when you would return. Hate & discontent, as usual. By the way, proper spelling is seminar.I just tuned in to this topic and scanned thru the postings. The more I read the more bogus it all sounds.
The op has mostly been credible before but perhaps needs to listen to his wife on this one.
Do you really have the previous experience claimed and attend a paid siminar and come away so messed up? Something is bogus.
The op has mostly been credible before but perhaps needs to listen to his wife on this one.
Do you really have the previous experience claimed and attend a paid siminar and come away so messed up? Something is bogus.
Aug 18, 2012 04:07:29 #
twowindsbear wrote:
quote=jimberton quote=twowindsbear How about pos... (show quote)
I think that's what he's offering to do next week. I'm going to wait and see what's posted.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.