Soft Images
Aug 22, 2015 08:42:10 #
I live near the Chesapeake Bay. I like to take pictures of ships. These ships are far away, near the horizon. I have been using a Canon T6S. When I use a Sigma 18-250mm Lens at F8 and I magnify the picture in Picasa, the result is terrible. My question is, if I decrease the lens opening by increasing the F stop will the image be sharper? Thanks for your help.
Aug 22, 2015 08:44:08 #
MikeMcK wrote:
I live near the Chesapeake Bay. I like to take pictures of ships. These ships are far away, near the horizon. I have been using a Canon T6S. When I use a Sigma 18-250mm Lens at F8 and I magnify the picture in Picasa, the result is terrible. My question is, if I decrease the lens opening by increasing the F stop will the image be sharper? Thanks for your help.
Are you sure you're not experiencing "atmospheric distortion" from far away distance cutting through vaporized water?
Aug 22, 2015 08:50:02 #
Stoping down will increase your depth of field but you will have to compensate with longer exposure or increased ISO. What shutter speed did you shoot the soft focus with?
Aug 22, 2015 08:55:15 #
MikeMcK wrote:
I live near the Chesapeake Bay. I like to take pictures of ships. These ships are far away, near the horizon. I have been using a Canon T6S. When I use a Sigma 18-250mm Lens at F8 and I magnify the picture in Picasa, the result is terrible. My question is, if I decrease the lens opening by increasing the F stop will the image be sharper? Thanks for your help.
Hello Mike
I see at the bottom of your page you list your list of what you own. Why don't you use the 5DMk lll and the 70-300mm L len's as apposed to the Sigma 18-250?
Aug 22, 2015 08:55:35 #
Haydon wrote:
Are you sure you're not experiencing "atmospheric distortion" from far away distance cutting through vaporized water?
Excellent point, no, I'm not sure. These shots were taken about 1000.
Aug 22, 2015 08:56:55 #
SnappyHappy wrote:
Stoping down will increase your depth of field but you will have to compensate with longer exposure or increased ISO. What shutter speed did you shoot the soft focus with?
Shutter speed was 1/400.
Aug 22, 2015 08:58:53 #
RichardSM wrote:
Hello Mike
I see at the bottom of your page you list your list of what you own. Why don't you use the 5DMk lll and the 70-300mm L len's as apposed to the Sigma 18-250?
I see at the bottom of your page you list your list of what you own. Why don't you use the 5DMk lll and the 70-300mm L len's as apposed to the Sigma 18-250?
I have and the pictures were much better. I was trying to see if I could use the Sigma, the answer may be no, I can't. There is always the weight issue.
Aug 22, 2015 08:59:38 #
It might be helpful to post some example photos (and click Download) so we can get a better idea of what is going on.
Aug 22, 2015 09:01:59 #
rjaywallace wrote:
It might be helpful to post some example photos (and click Download) so we can get a better idea of what is going on.
I thought I did, but I have now. Thanks.
Aug 22, 2015 09:15:29 #
MikeMcK wrote:
Shutter speed was 1/400.
That fast enough to eliminate subject movement as the problem. Are you shooting handheld or from a tripod?
Aug 22, 2015 09:16:12 #
SnappyHappy wrote:
That fast enough to eliminate subject movement as the problem. Are you shooting handheld or from a tripod?
Handheld.
Aug 22, 2015 09:18:15 #
MikeMcK wrote:
Handheld.
I would try it again from a tripod to see what you get
Aug 22, 2015 09:21:34 #
Haydon wrote:
Are you sure you're not experiencing "atmospheric distortion" from far away distance cutting through vaporized water?
:thumbup: :thumbup:
Aug 22, 2015 09:30:01 #
I had that Sigma on a Nikon mount and it was sharp out to about 220mm. Most zooms have a sweet spot somewhere shy of the maximum. I have the 18-300 now and it is good out to about 270mm. I do better shooting at a shorter focal length and cropping in the computer to get a little more range and still be sharp. My 2 cents.
Aug 22, 2015 09:33:05 #
Mr PC wrote:
I had that Sigma on a Nikon mount and it was sharp out to about 220mm. Most zooms have a sweet spot somewhere shy of the maximum. I have the 18-300 now and it is good out to about 270mm. I do better shooting at a shorter focal length and cropping in the computer to get a little more range and still be sharp. My 2 cents.
That photo was taken at 212 mm.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.