Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
One More Time (Damn The Torpedoes)
Page <prev 2 of 3 next>
Apr 24, 2021 08:03:50   #
starlifter Loc: Towson, MD
 
You could have leveled the target, I'm a Virgo, I can't help it.

Reply
Apr 24, 2021 08:16:51   #
jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY
 
"Damn the torpedoes." In this case, torpedoes were early versions of mines. During the Civil War, Farragut was about to enter a harbor that was mined - full of "torpedoes" - but he wasn't about to let them stop him. “Damn the torpedoes! Captain Drayton, go ahead! Jouett, full speed!”

Reply
Apr 24, 2021 08:22:42   #
Drbobcameraguy Loc: Eaton Ohio
 
Gene51 wrote:
Focus Assist uses the Phase Detect AF system (PDAF) to establish communication between the lens and camera, so it can produce focusing errors if a particular camera and lens is out of focus. Setting in-camera picture controls for jpegs assumes that neutral on one camera is the same as neutral on another. They may be close, but not necessarily the same. Each camera sample has a unique color response - even for raw capture. Using a target like an Xrite ColorChecker Passport, will let you create a neutral camera profile that would result in color and exposure (I think) to be virtually indistinguishable from one camera to the next. When shooting events with second and third shooters and multiple cameras, I would create color profiles for each lighting scenario for each camera. It's bit of a pain, but it worked like a charm, saving hours of post processing. Also, any change in the lighting would result in differences in color balance and exposure - radical ones - especially if overcast.

The D700 is 4256x2832 px. The D850 is 8256x5504px. You would use software to resample the D850 so that the pixel count on the longest side = 4256px. There is no magic here, other than noise and image quality often improves when downsampling a high MP camera image - but comparing images of equal size is important to your illustration.
Focus Assist uses the Phase Detect AF system (PDAF... (show quote)


Hi Gene51. Please educate me. If the 850 images are downsampled they would be sharpest in the bunch since when you downsampled a large image does it not improve sharpness of the image? I'm ignorant of a lot of those practices. I shoot and look at my images at 100 percent and if sharp I'm happy. I tune my camera to my lenses and print a small amount. I understand the color management system so my prints match as close as possible. I need education in effects of downsampling. I'm sure now I have no choice but to read. Lol. I figure you can tell me the basics since I just got up. Lol lol. Thanks Bob

Reply
 
 
Apr 24, 2021 09:56:59   #
Hereford Loc: Palm Coast, FL
 
First thing I noticed is all your photos are crooked and vary in brightness so it is really difficult to compare them. I appreciate you did not want to adjust them in any way, but maybe this type of test is just too hard to do scientifically in the back yard.

Reply
Apr 24, 2021 10:02:32   #
cameraf4 Loc: Delaware
 
starlifter wrote:
You could have leveled the target, I'm a Virgo, I can't help it.


I know. My lawn slopes. I "fiddled" with it for a while but just said "Forget it" (or words to that effect).

Reply
Apr 24, 2021 10:03:13   #
cameraf4 Loc: Delaware
 
jerryc41 wrote:
"Damn the torpedoes." In this case, torpedoes were early versions of mines. During the Civil War, Farragut was about to enter a harbor that was mined - full of "torpedoes" - but he wasn't about to let them stop him. “Damn the torpedoes! Captain Drayton, go ahead! Jouett, full speed!”


Dave had a way with words.

Reply
Apr 24, 2021 10:10:25   #
cameraf4 Loc: Delaware
 
Hereford wrote:
First thing I noticed is all your photos are crooked and vary in brightness so it is really difficult to compare them. I appreciate you did not want to adjust them in any way, but maybe this type of test is just too hard to do scientifically in the back yard.


Good point. Although I thought things went well the first time around, just didn't have a 24MP camera to throw in the mix. [ https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-501318-1.html ]. Crooked then, too, as you can see. Kinda wondered if some skew might not be a good test for image detail with the Bayer array.

Reply
 
 
Apr 24, 2021 10:52:53   #
uhaas2009
 
You are using a D lens- screw drive focus. Every body and lens have different focus engine and different results. The 7000 I couldn’t use not every lens, certain lenses would hunt the focus with inaccurate focus. Following I had to learn: I have the 70-300mm 5.6- VR the focus engine broke (read reviews on eBay) and after the repair this lens works way better than new!- Nikon used a leftover engine from a other lens even wasn’t strong enough. Later my 7000 focus engine slowly broke down too-comment problem, too. The 17-55 2.8 DX lens what will still focus properly on my broken 7000! Just took longer.
On my 810 every lens I have focus probably but not every lens will focus probably on different camera body’s. It’s not 100% accurate either because the 50 1.8, 70-200 2.8 and 17-55 2.8 will get focus probably done no matter what body.
I don’t know if your test and my experience are on the same page. I’m wondering how the 80-200 2.8 D works on different bodies.
I hope your 810 doesn’t have a damage.....

Reply
Apr 24, 2021 10:59:21   #
cameraf4 Loc: Delaware
 
uhaas2009 wrote:
You are using a D lens- screw drive focus. Every body and lens have different focus engine and different results. The 7000 I couldn’t use not every lens, certain lenses would hunt the focus with inaccurate focus. Following I had to learn: I have the 70-300mm 5.6- VR the focus engine broke (read reviews on eBay) and after the repair this lens works way better than new!- Nikon used a leftover engine from a other lens even wasn’t strong enough. Later my 7000 focus engine slowly broke down too-comment problem, too. The 17-55 2.8 DX lens what will still focus properly on my broken 7000! Just took longer.
On my 810 every lens I have focus probably but not every lens will focus probably on different camera body’s. It’s not 100% accurate either because the 50 1.8, 70-200 2.8 and 17-55 2.8 will get focus probably done no matter what body.
I don’t know if your test and my experience are on the same page. I’m wondering how the 80-200 2.8 D works on different bodies.
I hope your 810 doesn’t have a damage.....
You are using a D lens- screw drive focus. Every b... (show quote)


You did read that I focused manually, right? I turned off Auto Focus and I "eyeballed" focus in the viewfinder and used the Focus Assist lights in the viewfinder to guide me. I think next time I'll use my 105mm Micro Nikkor and fill-the-frame as Paul suggested. Maybe that will show me something.

Reply
Apr 24, 2021 12:37:21   #
twowindsbear
 
cameraf4 wrote:
You did read that I focused manually, right? I turned off Auto Focus and I "eyeballed" focus in the viewfinder and used the Focus Assist lights in the viewfinder to guide me. I think next time I'll use my 105mm Micro Nikkor and fill-the-frame as Paul suggested. Maybe that will show me something.


Have you checked & adjusted - if necessary - the view finder's diopter setting so that the view finder is actually properly focused?

And, agreeing with others' posts, to make these "better images" - align the horizon in the image with the horizon in the scene.

Good luck with your quest.

Reply
Apr 24, 2021 13:12:47   #
SteveHmeyer Loc: Cincinnati OH USA
 
Here are three items that must be considered when testing “sharpness”:

1. By shooting outside you are shooting in an uncontrolled environment where a slight breeze or a thin cloud passing over or sun movement over the time the shoot took place can change the resulting sharpness.

2. Focus - in comparison tests do not trust autofocus - tweak focus each time - if you trust autofocus your test probably tells you how well the lens/camera autofocus combo works and not how sharp the lens/camera sensor is.

3. When testing different size sensors for sharpness the distance to the target should be adjusted so the target occupies the same area in the view finder for both sensors. Less distance for FF sensors than APS-C sensors for example.

If you keep the distance the same you are testing the resolving power of the lens not the sensor.

Reply
 
 
Apr 24, 2021 13:50:16   #
Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)
 
SuperflyTNT wrote:
While I agree about the exposure, wouldn’t downsampling the image size negate the entire purpose of the test?


Not if you are trying to compare similarly sized images - apples to apples. I suppose that you could upsample the lower res images as well - or pick something in the middle like 20 or 24 mp. But to be fair they should be compared at similar resolution.

Reply
Apr 24, 2021 13:52:20   #
Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)
 
SteveHmeyer wrote:
Here are three items that must be considered when testing “sharpness”:

1. By shooting outside you are shooting in an uncontrolled environment where a slight breeze or a thin cloud passing over or sun movement over the time the shoot took place can change the resulting sharpness.

2. Focus - in comparison tests do not trust autofocus - tweak focus each time - if you trust autofocus your test probably tells you how well the lens/camera autofocus combo works and not how sharp the lens/camera sensor is.

3. When testing different size sensors for sharpness the distance to the target should be adjusted so the target occupies the same area in the view finder for both sensors. Less distance for FF sensors than APS-C sensors for example.

If you keep the distance the same you are testing the resolving power of the lens not the sensor.
Here are three items that must be considered when ... (show quote)


These sensors were all the same size - and the point is that a very sharp lens will resolve more with a higher mp camera. I think the intent here was to compare low, medium and high resolution cameras with the same lens.

Reply
Apr 24, 2021 13:54:31   #
Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)
 
Gene51 wrote:
Not if you are trying to compare similarly sized images - apples to apples. I suppose that you could upsample the lower res images as well - or pick something in the middle like 20 or 24 mp. But to be fair they should be compared at similar resolution.


But the truth is that looking at the small sample images - all of which have been significantly downsampled for posting, reveals nothing. What I am seeing is a possible focus issue with the D700.

Reply
Apr 24, 2021 13:58:24   #
Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)
 
Drbobcameraguy wrote:
Hi Gene51. Please educate me. If the 850 images are downsampled they would be sharpest in the bunch since when you downsampled a large image does it not improve sharpness of the image? I'm ignorant of a lot of those practices. I shoot and look at my images at 100 percent and if sharp I'm happy. I tune my camera to my lenses and print a small amount. I understand the color management system so my prints match as close as possible. I need education in effects of downsampling. I'm sure now I have no choice but to read. Lol. I figure you can tell me the basics since I just got up. Lol lol. Thanks Bob
Hi Gene51. Please educate me. If the 850 images ar... (show quote)


Downsampling improves both sharpness/detail and noise relative to a lower resolution capture made on a different camera. Actually, compared to the original image, a downsampled image has less data and slightly lower image quality. Upsampling a lower res image generally looks pretty bad no matter what you do - even using the newest crop of AI-enhanced resampling/upsampling tech.

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 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.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.