What's wrong
Apr 4, 2021 18:12:40 #
JRD3
Loc: Richmond, VA
I took this photo is a darkened building. I ran ISO up to 2000 so I could hand hold.
Image shot on D750, 24mm, f 4 @1/80. It is not sharp. High ISO? camera shake?
Comments welcomed.
Image shot on D750, 24mm, f 4 @1/80. It is not sharp. High ISO? camera shake?
Comments welcomed.
Apr 4, 2021 18:16:21 #
Apr 4, 2021 18:26:50 #
Ysarex
Loc: St. Louis
JRD3 wrote:
I took this photo is a darkened building. I ran ISO up to 2000 so I could hand hold.
Image shot on D750, 24mm, f 4 @1/80. It is not sharp. High ISO? camera shake?
Comments welcomed.
Image shot on D750, 24mm, f 4 @1/80. It is not sharp. High ISO? camera shake?
Comments welcomed.
It is sharp where it's in focus. It's probably not in focus where you intended. Focus is on the bottom of the window/door far left side of the photo.
Apr 4, 2021 18:29:30 #
It's noisy for sure. I tried DeNoise on the JPG file without any real improvement. If you shot it at f4 you have a very shallow depth of field. IMHO you just missed on focus
Apr 4, 2021 18:38:12 #
Another possibility for "unsharpness" may be that there are several big glass panels stacked on top of each other. As they are set off a fraction, so is the reflection of the individual panes. And this may be the reason for the unsharp perception.
Apr 4, 2021 19:26:34 #
Apr 4, 2021 22:16:00 #
Apr 5, 2021 00:55:56 #
Apr 5, 2021 05:18:52 #
Apr 5, 2021 06:16:56 #
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
JRD3 wrote:
I took this photo is a darkened building. I ran ISO up to 2000 so I could hand hold.
Image shot on D750, 24mm, f 4 @1/80. It is not sharp. High ISO? camera shake?
Comments welcomed.
Image shot on D750, 24mm, f 4 @1/80. It is not sharp. High ISO? camera shake?
Comments welcomed.
No, not camera shake, your windows in the background are sharp. I believe the problem is that the glass in the foreground has two panes of glass, each reflecting an image, since they are separated by a small distance, they each reflect and image that do not overlap. That's my take.
Apr 5, 2021 06:54:19 #
"Wonder if a polarizer would had made a difference." Polarizers have nothing to do with focus. They eliminate reflections in the glass, if that is what you were referring to. Polarizers have a factor of 2 stops of light which means that when in use the camera gets darker by 2 stops. No polarizer makes an image sharper.
For a dSLR f4 is an aperture that will render a shallow depth of field. The door on the left is in focus, I do not know if you focused there but consider that acceptable focus occurs 1/3 in front and 2/3 behind the point of focus. This is more obvious at close range with small apertures like f11.
In this particular case f11 or f16 would have yield more depth of field.
For a dSLR f4 is an aperture that will render a shallow depth of field. The door on the left is in focus, I do not know if you focused there but consider that acceptable focus occurs 1/3 in front and 2/3 behind the point of focus. This is more obvious at close range with small apertures like f11.
In this particular case f11 or f16 would have yield more depth of field.
Apr 5, 2021 07:09:31 #
If your referring to the multiple images on the glass, it's due to multiple panes of glass. If you hold a match in front of the glass, you'll see 2, 3, 4 reflections, one for each pane.
Apr 5, 2021 07:52:41 #
Apr 5, 2021 07:57:06 #
Nice result. I like experimenting like that, too. It's good to know what you and your camera can do in "an emergency." I once shot Kodak 32 ASA film at 3200 - and I got pictures.
Apr 5, 2021 09:13:36 #
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.