Just how sharp is sharp enough?
Oct 2, 2019 09:41:21 #
Lknack
Loc: NOCO
I must say that I am overwhelmed with the info and willingness to help from everyone.
I'm old too and my eyes are not up to the task of focusing quickly so I have to depend on auto focus, except when the camera is on a tripod and I can take my time and get my glasses adjusted just right.
The eagle was probably not the one to show as it is one of my sharpest photos (taken with a "kit" lens). The football kid, I was trying to get the grand-kid in the foreground and separate the others but it didn't focus where I wanted it to and the others were too close for the DoF to kick in (I think). The flower was shot off a tripod (in the wind) and I think looks ok until you zoom in and nothing is really focused.
I think I just need to practice/experiment/read more.
Again, thanks much, I'll be back with more questions in the future.
I'm old too and my eyes are not up to the task of focusing quickly so I have to depend on auto focus, except when the camera is on a tripod and I can take my time and get my glasses adjusted just right.
The eagle was probably not the one to show as it is one of my sharpest photos (taken with a "kit" lens). The football kid, I was trying to get the grand-kid in the foreground and separate the others but it didn't focus where I wanted it to and the others were too close for the DoF to kick in (I think). The flower was shot off a tripod (in the wind) and I think looks ok until you zoom in and nothing is really focused.
I think I just need to practice/experiment/read more.
Again, thanks much, I'll be back with more questions in the future.
Oct 2, 2019 09:42:19 #
Mac wrote:
#1 looks good to me.
#2 the kid in the foreground looks ok. The other kid and the coach are a little out of focus, probably due to shallow Depth of Field.
The same with #3, the flower looks fine, but the bud is out of focus. Probably shallow DoF again.
#2 the kid in the foreground looks ok. The other kid and the coach are a little out of focus, probably due to shallow Depth of Field.
The same with #3, the flower looks fine, but the bud is out of focus. Probably shallow DoF again.
I think you answered your own question, i.e., "shallow DOF". In picture #2, at f/6.3, 136mm, and an estimated distance to subject of 25', your DOF goes from approximately 2' in front of subject to 2' behind. Anything out of this range will not be in sharp focus. f/8 would give you slightly more DOF but, at this focal length, only about another foot or so. f/11 would give sharp focus from 3 feet in front of subject to 4' behind. The more you zoom in the more you decrease the DOF.
Oct 2, 2019 09:43:56 #
Lknack wrote:
I’m relatively new to digital photography and have... (show quote)
Regarding the manual focus lens, does the A6000 have manual focus assist and focus peaking? If it does this could help with using the manual lens.
Oct 2, 2019 09:44:07 #
gvarner
Loc: Central Oregon Coast
Lknack wrote:
I must say that I am overwhelmed with the info and... (show quote)
Have you adjusted the diopter setting for you viewfinder? I have to change that once in a while as my old eyes get older or I get new glasses.
Oct 2, 2019 09:46:55 #
Lknack wrote:
I must say that I am overwhelmed with the info and... (show quote)
Yes, practice. Work at it and take many, many images. The digital files are free and they only cost you the time to take and to review, freely discarding anything that didn't work. With the tripod over the flower, I would have come away with 20 if not 50 versions, with different apertures and different focus points, then sorting out the best 1 or few on the computer later. And as mentioned in the prior comment, use the display at the maximum zoom to 'see' the location and quality of focus to confirm you're getting what you think you're getting.
That shooting practice with the review practice also helps give you the confidence and familiarity with the camera and the settings that tend to work best, where it becomes 10- to 20- to achieve an excellent version rather than a 50-frame exercise of all the different settings and apertures.
Oct 2, 2019 10:26:50 #
Lknack wrote:
I must say that I am overwhelmed with the info and... (show quote)
Thanks for asking these questions! I have pondered similar future purchases. I have the a6000 and kit lenses and hear so much about “tack sharp.” Appreciated all the helpful comments you received. Especially about how and how much to sharpen pp. Helpful.
I might get a macro lens. Rented the Sigma 100-400 for a trip—to shoot bears at Brooks Falls AK—but otherwise it was difficult to hand-hold.
There is so much talk about the latest equipment but I’m not eager to spend a fortune—priority on retirement travel/experiences, not photos.
Oct 2, 2019 10:50:49 #
Lknack
Loc: NOCO
Very helpful, thanks to all, a lot to digest for sure.
Back in the old days of "brass and glass" I had some of the best equipment--Hasselblad, Canon F1 and ended up using Olympus OM1 & 2. But I was working, making big money. Now retired and finding digital is about like comparing the "model T" to a new BMW. But like CHG CANON said---the images are free!
One more question about sharpness. I have heard but forgot to turn off the stabilization when mounting the 100-400 on the tripod to take the flower shot. Would that have made a difference?
Back in the old days of "brass and glass" I had some of the best equipment--Hasselblad, Canon F1 and ended up using Olympus OM1 & 2. But I was working, making big money. Now retired and finding digital is about like comparing the "model T" to a new BMW. But like CHG CANON said---the images are free!
One more question about sharpness. I have heard but forgot to turn off the stabilization when mounting the 100-400 on the tripod to take the flower shot. Would that have made a difference?
Oct 2, 2019 10:55:26 #
Picture Taker
Loc: Michigan Thumb
What is sharp enough? That could your choice or opinion, it also has to do with picture size 54X6 or 30X40. also what the picture is. A art wall hanging does not have to be dead sharp as a oil painting is not photo sharp.
Enjoy you pictures and keep improving in what you take and don't beat your self up on the limitations of lenses, cameras and tripods.
Enjoy you pictures and keep improving in what you take and don't beat your self up on the limitations of lenses, cameras and tripods.
Oct 2, 2019 11:01:10 #
Lknack wrote:
Very helpful, thanks to all, a lot to digest for s... (show quote)
A best practice is to disable the stablization on a tripod, although specific cameras and lenses can detect a tripod and this action would be unnecessary. You should check for any recommendations within the equipment manual(s) as well as testing both off / on in your own results to confirm. The center details of the flower are not almost sharp where the equipment could be the suspect. Rather, you should use the 10x zoom in the display and confirm the details as you shoot.
Oct 2, 2019 11:23:39 #
Yes, visual acuity plays a part in the perception of sharpness or detail in an image. So we could lump visual acuity as another factor of perception.
gvarner wrote:
My own eyes are not that sharp any more, but then I’m old. So my eyes contribute 100% to what I perceive as sharp. Then there’s the display media, whether it be a screen or a print. These also affect the perception of sharpness. Balance these factors with your pursuit of the holy grail of the most expensive high quality glass and camera combinations.
Oct 2, 2019 11:25:42 #
Oct 2, 2019 11:43:20 #
Those images are fine, you are just not setting your camera properly for depth of field. Practice using the proper F stop for the depth you need. Do a little reading to understand that concept.
As far as how sharp does it need to be depends on your uses. If enlarging to 20x30, better glass is more of a need than if you are making 5x7's. Generally speaking, buy the best glass you can afford because that is more important than the body it is on.
As far as how sharp does it need to be depends on your uses. If enlarging to 20x30, better glass is more of a need than if you are making 5x7's. Generally speaking, buy the best glass you can afford because that is more important than the body it is on.
Oct 2, 2019 11:57:47 #
timcc
Loc: Virginia
I think you're very close on all three shots. I use the a6000 with the 55-210 kit lens and a Zeiss 16-70, and both lenses are capable of very sharp images with this camera. Occasionally I tweak my shots with a little bit of "clarity" in post, and the 1st and 3d pics would probably benefit from a very slight clarity adjustment to bring out the eye, feathers, and flower petals (both shots have nice bokeh, BTW). I generally avoid the "sharpen" slider -- you see a lot of over-sharpened photos these days.
Oct 2, 2019 12:01:53 #
Eagle: sharp as a tack. A little dark.
Football: acceptably sharp, a little soft, very nice for an 18-200 lens.
Flower: mildly out of focus, bud in the way, BUT light is very good. The flower looks backlit, stunning,
Worth an honorable mention😀
All IMHO
Football: acceptably sharp, a little soft, very nice for an 18-200 lens.
Flower: mildly out of focus, bud in the way, BUT light is very good. The flower looks backlit, stunning,
Worth an honorable mention😀
All IMHO
Oct 2, 2019 12:30:55 #
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.