Soft Images (Page 2): Are you using a tripod on the shots of the boats on the water I would think you would not have a weight issue that way and your pictures might be sharper too.

RichardSM Loc: Back in Texas

MikeMcK wrote:

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.

Are you using a tripod on the shots of the boats on the water I would think you would not have a weight issue that way and your pictures might be sharper too.

MikeMck Loc: Southern Maryland on the Bay

SnappyHappy wrote:

I would try it again from a tripod to see what you get

Excellent point. Thanks.

MikeMck Loc: Southern Maryland on the Bay

RichardSM wrote:

Are you using a tripod on the shots of the boats on the water I would think you would not have a weight issue that way and your pictures might be sharper too.

That's true.

MikeMck Loc: Southern Maryland on the Bay

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.

Thanks.

rjaywallace Loc: Wisconsin

MikeMcK - your post prompted me to investigate more details re the Canon T6S. One user review on the B&H site mentions a compatibility problem involving a Sigma lens. The user concluded that a firmware upgrade might be of some help but doesn't specify whether the upgrade should be applied to the T6S or the lens. Thought you might find that comment interesting.
/Ralph

Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan

A few observations.

- The combination of the horizon tilted to the right and the smeared highlights running diagonally from top left to lower right suggests camera motion from pressing the shutter. When you pressed the shutter the camera moved slightly down and to the right during exposure.

- There is some atmospheric distortion.

- You focused on a point that is much, much closer than the boats, approximately in the middle of the frame, which meant you focused on the water about 30 yards out or so.

Mike

LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field

Blenheim Orange wrote:

A few observations. br br - The combination of t... (show quote)

Agree with Mike on the point of focus, it's about midway in the image. Having said that, at this distance and with some atmospheric distortion, my feeling is that you are simply too far away to get a satisfactory image of the boats on the horizon. I was recently at the Oregon Coast and photographed some whales at 300mm. Frankly, my old eyes resolved the imaged better than what I saw on download

DaveHam Loc: Reading UK

At that distance focal depth/F stop is not an issue; the ships look to be several hundred meters away. It's highly unlikely that the lens or the aperture are the problem. There is no difference between shooting wide open or stopped right down for dof.

There looks to be a fair amount of moisture in the air; if it was the case then at that distance a sharp image would be impossible to achieve due to the lensing effect of the moisture.

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

Blenheim Orange wrote:

A few observations. br - The combination of the h... (show quote)

I agree your post absolutely - I think focus has picked up on a large bottle buoy just to the right of centre. Certainly that is the sharpest ?point, but even at that focus distance the left hand side of the pic is really blurry. Haze obviously plays a part, but the lens and /or compatibility (as someone suggested) needs checking out.

DavidPine Loc: Fredericksburg, TX

Many problems can be reduced by using a tripod for landscape images.

MikeMcK wrote:

Handheld.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Haydon wrote:

Are you sure you're not experiencing "atmospheric distortion" from far away distance cutting through vaporized water?

That was my first thought, but the focus is better about halfway to the boats. The waves and the buoys are sharper.

BobHartung Loc: Bettendorf, IA

Haydon wrote:

Are you sure you're not experiencing "atmospheric distortion" from far away distance cutting through vaporized water?

I think that you have hit the proverbial nail on the head Haydon. Moving up to a 300 mm lens won't solve the issue.

ole sarg Loc: south florida

of course it looks soft it was a hazy day!

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.

gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast

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.

Lots of moisture between you and the ships, all that gets magnified when you enlarge the pic. In RAW you can sharpen that away (somewhat) with increasing Clarity and Vibrance. It helps.

waapl01

I think ur dealing with environmental issues like haze on hot days, JS!!

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.