Lens vs Camera Opinions/Assistance/HELP
Jan 1, 2020 15:59:42 #
The images below are SOOC raw converted to jpeg. All were taken handheld at approximately (+/- 10 yards) the same distance from the subject. The lens is a Sigma 100-400 f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM C. The first group were all taken with a Canon 7d2. The focus point being the sign. Regardless of focal length, they all appear soft to me. Recent other shots taken with the same camera and lens combination often have the same result. The last two were taken with same lens on a 6d2. They are representative of other shots taken at the same time with the same body/lens combination. To my eye, the 6d2 combination shots are significantly sharper. I've been experimenting with same lens on the two bodies for the last week and the results are pretty much the same as below. Any thought on why? Unsteady me? Cropped sensor vs FF? I'm follickly challenged and can't be continually scratching my head.....
196mm w/7d2
(Download)
302mm/7d2
(Download)
400mm/7d2
(Download)
330mm/6d2
(Download)
260mm/6d2
(Download)
Jan 1, 2020 16:26:02 #
47greyfox wrote:
The images below are SOOC raw converted to jpeg. A... (show quote)
If you are focusing on the sign in DL the sign is sharp.I believe your issue is depth of field with the ISO you chose.
Jan 1, 2020 18:38:17 #
PixelStan77 wrote:
If you are focusing on the sign in DL the sign is sharp.I believe your issue is depth of field with the ISO you chose.
Thanks, Stan. Looking at these jpegs that I converted from raw files using the FastStone Image Viewer, I'm kind of surprised. They are much sharper than the raw files and SOOC jpegs. Both of whech appeared soft to me. Yes, I used the center focal point only and put it smack onto the sign.
Jan 1, 2020 19:33:29 #
Jan 1, 2020 21:12:54 #
imagemeister wrote:
Ever done a focus calibration / micro focus adjust ??
The lens has undergone an AF calibration, done by Sigma about 8-9 months ago. I haven't attempted a micro focus adjustment on the camera alone.
Jan 2, 2020 00:01:05 #
PixelStan77 wrote:
If you are focusing on the sign in DL the sign is sharp.I believe your issue is depth of field with the ISO you chose.
Alog with a very tight DOF the shutter speed may be to slow to illiminate camera shake. unless you have very steady hands hand hholding a 300mm lens is a difficult thing
Jan 2, 2020 01:01:16 #
boberic wrote:
Alog with a very tight DOF the shutter speed may be to slow to eliminate camera shake. unless you have very steady hands hand holding a 300mm lens is a difficult thing
Thanks, Bob. Shutter speed for all the cropped sensor "sign" shots was between 1/332 and 1/512 seconds. The truck shot is 1/512 and ducks on the creek is 1/256. F-stop is f/6.44-7.03 for the signs; f/6.44 for the two FF shots.
Jan 2, 2020 06:51:48 #
Try shooting a few shots at 1/1600 to eliminate you as a motion introducer...
Jan 2, 2020 07:46:52 #
ggab
Loc: ?
47greyfox wrote:
The images below are SOOC raw converted to jpeg. A... (show quote)
The way I see it, it appears as if the focus is a bit off.
The sign images are tough to determine since there isn't anything immediately forward or backward of the sign to judge.
I do not believe it is a depth of field issue.
I would suggest micro focus wide and tele on the 7D II.
Did you have OS on?
What were the focus points on the last two images?
I have both that lens and camera and have achieved very good results, especially with BIF shots.
The lens is my back up to my Canon L 100-400 II.
I needed to micro focus the lens however to get the best results.
Jan 2, 2020 07:51:47 #
What is your RAW converter? The valid comparison is using Canon's DPPv4 software assuming both cameras are set to the same exposure and the same picture style (Canon Standard).
It also would be more helpful to shoot the same subject with each camera with the same exposure settings at the same focal length. If we're going to look at a 'no unauthorized vehicle' sign from one camera, shouldn't we see the same sign from the other camera?
I agree the 6DII looks sharper, but there are too many variables to say why, especially when comparing JPEGs created by a RAW converter other than Canon's software. Assure both cameras are at their base ISO-100.
It also would be more helpful to shoot the same subject with each camera with the same exposure settings at the same focal length. If we're going to look at a 'no unauthorized vehicle' sign from one camera, shouldn't we see the same sign from the other camera?
I agree the 6DII looks sharper, but there are too many variables to say why, especially when comparing JPEGs created by a RAW converter other than Canon's software. Assure both cameras are at their base ISO-100.
Jan 2, 2020 07:53:08 #
ggab wrote:
The way I see it, it appears as if the focus is a bit off.
The sign images are tough to determine since there isn't anything immediately forward or backward of the sign to judge.
I do not believe it is a depth of field issue.
I would suggest micro focus wide and tele on the 7D II.
Did you have OS on?
The sign images are tough to determine since there isn't anything immediately forward or backward of the sign to judge.
I do not believe it is a depth of field issue.
I would suggest micro focus wide and tele on the 7D II.
Did you have OS on?
OS (IS) was on. Micro focus adjust suggestion taken. I plan on taking a few more shots today, all of the same sign at same location. Maybe even do the same with my 150-600 Cont. I did do a few shots with a 70-200 at full tele and my eyes, didn’t see too much. Converting with Canon’s DPP, as suggested in another thread post, and then perhaps, micro adjust for the lens.
Jan 2, 2020 07:55:02 #
ggab
Loc: ?
47greyfox wrote:
OS (IS) was on. Micro focus adjust suggestion taken. Will do.
You may also want to take the sign pictures again while using a tripod and compare the results.
This eliminates you as a potential problem. Make sure to turn OS off.
Then microfocus and to the tests again.
Jan 2, 2020 08:01:20 #
CHG_CANON wrote:
What is your RAW converter? The valid comparison i... (show quote)
Yeah, I agree. The truck and pond pics were taken on an earlier walk where I just wanted to capture a few with the body/lens combination. Only after I looked at them did I notice that they were sharper than some random shots taken (but not kept) the previous day with the 7d2. So, I took the sign shots from our back deck. Based on your suggestion, I could easily setup today and take shots with both bodies from the same deck spot, convert with DPP, and take another look. Thanks, Paul.
Jan 2, 2020 09:10:48 #
CHG_CANON wrote:
What is your RAW converter? The valid comparison i... (show quote)
To the OP:
The other thing to realize is that the “rule of thumb” minimum hand-holdable shutter speed is 1/(focal length * crop factor). Individual results may vary, so when testing, use a tripod.
Try to use the “sweet spot” aperture on the lens. That’s the aperture where coma, astigmatism, chromatic aberrations, and diffraction are all at their minimums.
DPreview.com and/or dxomark.com may have charted your lens performance. If not, try using an aperture two stops smaller than the widest one (I.e.; f/11 if max aperture is f/5.6), although for best APS-C performance, keep it wider than f/13. The smaller the sensor “sensel pitch”, the wider the aperture where diffraction starts to degrade image quality.
Jan 2, 2020 09:23:37 #
scubadoc
Loc: Sarasota, FL
burkphoto wrote:
img src="https://static.uglyhedgehog.com/images/s... (show quote)
I never heard that you must multiply the focal length by the crop factor to get the correct shutter speed. Isn’t focal length the same regardless of crop factor? I usually just do 3x the focal length so a 300 mm focal length lens will be shot at 1/1000 second. With IS on, you may be able to do 2x.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.