Why is it not sharp .... mark II (Page 5): Good for you! There are exceptions to every rule, but that does not nullify the rule. So you have extraordinary control. Most people do not.

CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

Gene51 wrote:

D800, hand held, 600mm 1/25 sec

Good for you! There are exceptions to every rule, but that does not nullify the rule. So you have extraordinary control. Most people do not. I am a practiced shot with a rifle, and can also hand hold better than most people, but the advice is still sound. On a crop camera, a 300 lens is giving equivalent of 450mm, so by the conservative rule, the inverse double would be around 1/1000 shutter speed. Using VR, you also sacrifice a little sharpness, so the higher shutter speed is better than relying on VR. The angle of view with a 300mm is 4.7 degrees = that is the width of the entire frame. Which means that even a tenth of a mm of camera movement during the time that shutter is open will blur the image.

Meives Loc: FORT LAUDERDALE

The whole point of increasing the ISO was to make the aperture smaller (larger number) so the DOF (depth of field) would be greater. ISO of 800 would be a better choice. Your shutter speed is OK. The f stop should be f 11. Good luck. David

CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

Meives wrote:

The whole point of increasing the ISO was to make the aperture smaller (larger number) so the DOF (depth of field) would be greater. ISO of 800 would be a better choice. Your shutter speed is OK. The f stop should be f 11. Good luck. David

What do you feel decreasing the aperture would achieve for the OP's image? Do you think that the lack of sharpness of the entire image would be corrected by decreasing the aperture? Would increasing the DOF when the entire image is blurry, make it sharper?

Meives Loc: FORT LAUDERDALE

CatMarley wrote:

What do you feel decreasing the aperture would achieve for the OP's image? Do you think that the lack of sharpness of the entire image would be corrected by decreasing the aperture? Would increasing the DOF when the entire image is blurry, make it sharper?

The only time you want a sharp subject and blurry background is for portrait work. The tighter aperture makes all of the picture sharp and for landscape work this is better. If you were closer and had great light you could do a portrait of the bird. But first get everything sharper than work on portrait. I really like that your are experimenting and discussing your work. Many are too proud to learn. David

LaoXiang

For between $400 and $600 you can get the EF-70-300 USM lense which I think would give you a lot better results.

The biggest thing is technique, though. Sometimes after a long day I forget, and find myslef just pointing the camera and squeezing the button ... and that tiny movement in my hands form squeezing the button is enough to ruin the shot.

Everyone is making good suggestion ... but I want to feel important too. :)

I suggest going out and shooting anything ... walk around your neighborhood for half an hour each evening and shoot, wood piles, fences, bushes ... anything vaguely interesting. Do it to practice the mechanics of shooting. Adjust the aperture, ISO, and shutter speed. Be certain to stand in a stable posture, be certain to relax your breathing, take a breath and let a little out, Hold the Camera Absolutely motionless, and squeeze the shutter gently.

Sometimes when I see a shot I get overeager and just point the camera ... and always miss the shot. You'd think I'd learn.

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

Meives wrote:

The only time you want a sharp subject and blurry background is for portrait work. The tighter aperture makes all of the picture sharp and for landscape work this is better. If you were closer and had great light you could do a portrait of the bird. But first get everything sharper than work on portrait. I really like that your are experimenting and discussing your work. Many are too proud to learn. David

Where did you learn this idea? A non sharp background can be used for a variety of reasons. If you want everything sort of in focus just use a phone camera...yuk.

Best,
Todd Ferguson

10MPlayer Loc: California

CatMarley wrote:

Obviously you ignored the advice about shutter speed with a long lens. Also your exposure is off by about 2 stops. A Hand held 300 mm lens needs a 1/1000 to 1/2000 shutter speed, especially if the photographer is over 50 or has little upper body strength. Muscles are constantly moving even when you think you are perfectly motionless.

Agreed, and if you are older or weaker and you have that shakiness, I know I do, brace your body against a tree or a fence or a building. If none are available lie down on your belly and brace your elbows against the ground. As someone above mentioned, it's much like shooting rifle. In Marine Corps training they taught us to use the acronym BRASS. Breathe, Relax, Aim, Slack, Squeeze. Take a breath, let it out and relax, aim, press the button halfway down to take out the slack, gently squeeze off the shot. You may be tilting the camera to the right every time you punch at the button in your excitement to catch the shot.

10MPlayer Loc: California

Notorious T.O.D. wrote:

I will start saving for an upgrade and photography lessons too!!! That's just the way we build our houses here... No micro focus adjustments have been done...straight out of the box. Maybe it would be interesting if you got the chance to go out and shoot a stop sign at 500' at about the same time of day with your 100-400 and we could compare...

Best,
Todd Ferguson

I thought maybe the carpenter was drunk the day he framed in the windows.

CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

Meives wrote:

The only time you want a sharp subject and blurry background is for portrait work. The tighter aperture makes all of the picture sharp and for landscape work this is better. If you were closer and had great light you could do a portrait of the bird. But first get everything sharper than work on portrait. I really like that your are experimenting and discussing your work. Many are too proud to learn. David

You avoided answering any of my three questions. "What do you feel decreasing the aperture would achieve for the OP's image? Do you think that the lack of sharpness of the entire image would be corrected by decreasing the aperture? Would increasing the DOF when the entire image is blurry, make it sharper?" I suspect you have no answers.

The image of the bird was sharp nowhere. This is NOT a problem correctable by stopping down. There is no depth of focus problem to be corrected. The blurring had to be caused by either a defective lens - an inability to focus - or camera motion. Neither of these can be corrected by changing the aperture to a smaller diameter.

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

Could be...maybe left his rule and square at home that day!
Actually it is a kids daycare center. Totally built to be that way!

Best,
Todd Ferguson

CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

10MPlayer wrote:

Agreed, and if you are older or weaker and you hav... (show quote)

Target shooting is very good training for hand held photography. I learned how to shoot with an old .22 Winchester. Weighed a ton, and you really learned breath control and perfect relaxation to take away the shakes.

crazydaddio Loc: Toronto Ontario Canada

Precisely Correct.
At 300mm, you need to be at 1/1000 shutter speed to "guarantee" to take out camera shake. With IS you should be able to handhold down to 1/200 or even better with a still subject like a bird sitting in a field, but 1/1000 will remove any unwanted camera shake regardless. I have a 150-600mm Sigma and anything under 1/1600 shutter requires good handhold technique. When I shoot sports at 600m, it's 1/1600 shutter and bump the ISO until I get good exposure. (Crop camera)

stevenh0027 Loc: Melbourne Australia

Thanks for all of the good advice.
I will try some of the breathing techniques and increase the iso and shutter speed.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

stevenh0027 wrote:

Hi, A week or so ago I posted a picture and asked ... (show quote)

It looks to me, you did not use a tripod, therefore your image shows a lot of motion blur.

pithydoug Loc: Catskill Mountains, NY

stevenh0027 wrote:

Hi, A week or so ago I posted a picture and asked ... (show quote)

at first I thought at 300mm and 5.6 ap from that far away it had an extremely narrow DOF. But after looking at big pic nothing is in focus and suspect camera shake.