Prev: Tyres... and stupidity.
Next: Happiness - possessions or experiences?
From: rick on 8 Aug 2010 12:13

"Paul Carmichael" <wibbleypants(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:8c82gdFpqrU1(a)mid.individual.net...
> Been out playing again today, just experimenting with this camera, trying
> to
> get a feel for what all the settings do. Got a piccie here that I quite
> like. I haven't messed with it, as my main target at the moment is to
> learn
> the camera, not the software (every damned picture is fuzzy even after
> resting the camera on something). It's got trees on it. But some trees are
> more fuzzy than others ie; the ones in the middle. Just wondering if
> there's
> an obvious reason for this.
>
> http://paulc.es/tmp/IMG_1031.jpg

Does look quite odd. Maybe they were shaking in a breeze? Or perhaps you
have a film of something on the sensor or lens?


--

Rick Brown
Sprint RS 955i


From: Paul Carmichael on 8 Aug 2010 12:36
rick escribió:

>
> "Paul Carmichael" <wibbleypants(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:8c82gdFpqrU1(a)mid.individual.net...
>> Been out playing again today, just experimenting with this camera, trying
>> to
>> get a feel for what all the settings do. Got a piccie here that I quite
>> like. I haven't messed with it, as my main target at the moment is to
>> learn
>> the camera, not the software (every damned picture is fuzzy even after
>> resting the camera on something). It's got trees on it. But some trees
>> are more fuzzy than others ie; the ones in the middle. Just wondering if
>> there's
>> an obvious reason for this.
>>
>> http://paulc.es/tmp/IMG_1031.jpg
>
> Does look quite odd. Maybe they were shaking in a breeze? Or perhaps you
> have a film of something on the sensor or lens?
>
>

The breeze could be it. It was breezy, but that would make the breeze
somewhat localised. Dunno. Just inspected the lens - clean as a whistle.

--
Paul.
CBR1100XX SuperBlackbird (Buen mueble de patio), Orbea Dakar
BOTAFOT #4 BOTAFOF #30 MRO #24 OMF #15 UKRMMA #30
http://paulcarmichael.org/ (content pending)
From: eatmorepies on 8 Aug 2010 13:14

"Paul Carmichael" <wibbleypants(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:8c82gdFpqrU1(a)mid.individual.net...
> Been out playing again today, just experimenting with this camera, trying
> to
> get a feel for what all the settings do. Got a piccie here that I quite
> like. I haven't messed with it, as my main target at the moment is to
> learn
> the camera, not the software (every damned picture is fuzzy even after
> resting the camera on something). It's got trees on it. But some trees are
> more fuzzy than others ie; the ones in the middle. Just wondering if
> there's
> an obvious reason for this.
>
> http://paulc.es/tmp/IMG_1031.jpg
>
> I *will* get there eventually.

1400 x 933 pixels? A 1000D's got a 3888 x 2592 sensor. Is your picture a
crop or have you got your camera set on a low resolution mode? If it's the
second try using the full resolution of the sensor (jpg fine or some such).
You may be trying to see detail in your pictures that the system can't
resolve.

What sharpening is the camera set to? It's possible that a little sharpening
will help clarify the detail. I know you don't want to look at software yet
but try this image with a little sharpening in a photo program. If it
improves the image then turn up the setting in the camera.

What lens is it? Some cheap telephoto lenses are very poor and you will get
badly focussed pictures no matter how careful you are - but try it on a
tripod to give it it's best chance. These cheap lenses can't resolve detail
and leaves on trees will never be resolved at those distances. You needn't
worry about diffraction limiting in this instance because diffraction
limiting doesn't start until f9.3 with this sensor and would certainly not
be noticable at f10.

The foreground trees/bushes may be showing a little leaf detail. The
background trees are showing some twig/branch detail but no leaf detail. The
mid ground trees may look fuzzy because very little leaf detail is there and
these mid ground trees don't seem to have the sticky out twigs of those
behind - hence may look more blurred.

A long lens used on scenery will be taking shots like this from some
distance. Heat haze, airborne dust or water vapour will blur detail.

John







From: Monkey on 8 Aug 2010 13:24
"Paul Carmichael" <wibbleypants(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:8c82gdFpqrU1(a)mid.individual.net...
> Been out playing again today, just experimenting with this camera, trying
> to
> get a feel for what all the settings do. Got a piccie here that I quite
> like. I haven't messed with it, as my main target at the moment is to
> learn
> the camera, not the software (every damned picture is fuzzy even after
> resting the camera on something). It's got trees on it. But some trees are
> more fuzzy than others ie; the ones in the middle. Just wondering if
> there's
> an obvious reason for this.
>
> http://paulc.es/tmp/IMG_1031.jpg
>
> I *will* get there eventually.

It's hard to tell without seeing the full-size image, but at first glance
I'd say your point of focus is somewhere in the foreground, so the trees and
building are just out of focus (the trees look more OOF than the building,
because they're fairly 'fuzzy' things anyway). You might have your autofocus
set on 'area' or something like that (so it tries to work out the best focus
point based on everything in the scene). If so, try setting it on 'centre'
or 'centre weighted' to get crisper focus on the subject in the centre of
the frame.

What have you got the camera set to? Full auto, a 'scene' mode, or aperture
/ shutter priority?

--
ZX6R F2 - The Gravelseeker
BOTAFOT #121, BBB #2


From: Monkey on 8 Aug 2010 13:27
"Paul Carmichael" <wibbleypants(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:8c84o0F73eU1(a)mid.individual.net...
> rick escribi�:

>> Does look quite odd. Maybe they were shaking in a breeze? Or perhaps you
>> have a film of something on the sensor or lens?

> The breeze could be it. It was breezy, but that would make the breeze
> somewhat localised. Dunno. Just inspected the lens - clean as a whistle.

Just the wind swirling around in the valley would do it. 1/500s should
freeze any movement unless it's *really* windy, but you could try a higher
ISO or wider aperture (lower number) to allow a higher shutter speed if you
want to see what difference it makes. Could also be heat haze (not a lot you
can do about that)?

--
ZX6R F2 - The Gravelseeker
BOTAFOT #121, BBB #2


 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: Tyres... and stupidity.
Next: Happiness - possessions or experiences?