| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Help with Photo Issue
Jamey Price, Photographer, Student/Intern
 |
Charlotte | NC | USA | Posted: 9:46 PM on 10.31.09 |
->> Evening sportsshooters,
I have an issue and it is bugging me so badly and I can't figure out the issue at hand. I'm hoping someone has had, seen, or knows what to do about this.
Starting about a week ago, the images coming out of my camera became, well for lack of better words, are soft. I don't know what the problem is but basically, from what I can tell, there are NO hard lines in the images making them all appear fuzzed and basically out of focus...but barely. When you zoom on the images, it is almost like the ISO is running at 2000 or something because it grains tremendously but as you can see in the below image, it was only at 400 and sometimes not even that.
I am attaching a full resolution image link hoping that you might be able to pull it up and take a gander at it. Im also attaching a super zoomed part of the same image that helps illustrate my point. I can of course provide MANY more examples if this isnt quite sufficient. So you won't have to pull the EXIF info up... it is as follows...
Nikon D300 with 70-200F2.8VR
116mm
1/1250
F2.8
ISO400
Original
http://img265.imageshack.us/img265/5540/dsc6734.jpg
Zoomed
http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/5824/dsc67342.jpg
Please tell me what you think. I appreciate your time. Just hoping someone can help me out. Thank you!
Jamey |
|
Vasiliy Baziuk, Photographer
|
Rochester | NY | USA | Posted: 10:20 PM on 10.31.09 |
->> Jamey
it seems like everything looks fine.... you are prolly looking at the wrong part of the photo.... to me it seems like the main focus point is the foot/leg of the guy on the right.... and you are looking at guy the on the left.... at f/2.8 the dof will not carry over that far.... it seems like everything is where it should be.
i notice the same stuff on some of my pics when i shoot at f/2.8... if you are not focus right on the spot you want that's how it will look. it also seems like it was an overcast day when you shot that image so there prolly won't be much contrast and well defined lines in the subjects to make it seem sharp. what do you think? |
|
Jared Wickerham, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
Pittsburgh | PA | U.S.A. | Posted: 12:40 AM on 11.01.09 |
| ->> I agree with Vasiliy. He said it quite well actually. It looks to be an overcast day and the contrast just isn't there. Plus, you don't have much bokeh to compare the rider to the OOF background with since there's another rider in the frame. |
|
Jamey Price, Photographer, Student/Intern
|
Charlotte | NC | USA | Posted: 8:26 AM on 11.01.09 |
->> Yeah, it was heavily overcast...BUT, nothing looks sharp to me. Its just not there in my eyes.
I compared my image from the last race to that of someone shooting almost identical settings (1/1250, F2.8, 800ISO) and my image was just a wash and theirs was tack sharp (high ISO was for the low light at dusk).
While I realize shooting at 2.8 can be hit or miss, the focus point was dead center on the horses in question and it SHOULD have been sharp. At least it showed it so in the viewfinder just rarely comes out like that on the CF card.
Attached are two more images that I think also display the same characteristics. Shooting at 1/1250 should have eliminated the issue of camera shake and animal movement but both of these two photos just are not sharp.
Am I just crazy or are my eyes going (at age 22 haha)? Thank you for your help. I really appreciate it.
Image 1
http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/5759/dsc6737.jpg
Image 2
http://img682.imageshack.us/img682/4650/dsc7784.jpg |
|
Jeff Stanton, Photographer
|
Princeton | IN | USA | Posted: 9:19 AM on 11.01.09 |
->> Jamey, sometimes comparing your own images to somebody else's isn't exactly comparing apples to apples, so to speak. Everyone sets up their camera a little differently. There are many different body and lens combinations, brands, models, and of course each is set up for the use of each shooter.
As far as your gear, I have always felt the 70-200 2.8 VR (version 1) was always a tad less sharp than the 80-200. Some may not agree with me and that's okay. But after shooting with one and comparing it to my 80-200, I always liked the 80-200 better. I thought it was sharper and had better contrast. There again, that's just my feelings based on my own experience.
I don't know how you have your D300 set up, but in similar conditions, such as the horse racing under overcast conditions, you may try to bump up the contrast aboard the camera itself and see if that improves for you. Other than that, I felt the samples you provided were okay and workable. |
|
Eric Canha, Photographer
|
Brockton | MA | United States | Posted: 9:23 AM on 11.01.09 |
->> Jamie I don't know how old your gear is. I do know that I too see this on occasion. In my case my 70-200 is getting long in the tooth and has begun to develop a fine layer of internal dust and contaminates. A good way to see this is to shine a light (a high power led flashlight) through the lens at a slight angle. In my case this is causing a slight CA issue. At least that is my theory for the case of the CA.
Also depending on the environments that you shoot in you may also have built up a layer of contaminates on the sensor (the filter really). Nothing that a good wet cleaning won't fix. |
|
Jamey Price, Photographer, Student/Intern
|
Charlotte | NC | USA | Posted: 10:08 AM on 11.01.09 |
->> "sometimes comparing your own images to somebody else's isn't exactly comparing apples to apples"
I understand that. It was just such a drastic difference that I left scratching my head over it.
Thanks to you all. Ill keep playing around with it. Hoping for a sunny day soon so I can test under different conditions. And thanks for the tip Eric. Ill give it a look. Cheers for the help! |
|
Vasiliy Baziuk, Photographer
|
Rochester | NY | USA | Posted: 11:35 AM on 11.01.09 |
->> yea, try a sunny day and see how that works.
the second set of pics you posted do seem way too soft.
this is going extreme but consider the weather, the age of lens... are you using a monopod? and the horses are prolly moving pretty fast when you shoot them just before the finish line.
goodluck! |
|
Mark Peters, Photographer
|
Highland | IL | USA | Posted: 11:46 AM on 11.01.09 |
->> Jamey,
If you are experiencing this with all of your lenses, then try reinstalling your firmware. I picked this up from Clark Brooks. The idea is that this will basically give you a clean slate, fixing any minor file corruption that may have occurred. It might just be a placebo effect, but it seems to work when focus issues seem to creep in.....and it's free. |
|
Jamey Price, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
Charlotte | NC | USA | Posted: 2:37 PM on 11.05.09 |
->> Thanks for the thoughts thus far. I had a chance to use the camera on a sunny day recently, and I don't personally feel that the problem is any better.
Here is a (not very good) photo from the sunny day soccer shoot. In looking at it, Im still seeing noise, or a film on the image. It just doesn't look as tack sharp as I know the images that the camera and lens have produced before.
Thoughts? Or am I just crazy or is this a real problem?...or both? :D
Thanks again for your help. I really appreciate your time and thoughts.
Nikon D300
70-200mm
110mm
1/2500
F2.8
http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/8243/dsc7983.jpg |
|
Nick Doan, Photographer, Assistant
|
Scottsdale | AZ | USA | Posted: 2:49 PM on 11.05.09 |
->> Those soccer players look plenty sharp to me.
The horse racing photos looked more like Motion Blur than anything else. even at 1/1250, you need to know that the smaller faster objects moving independently will have more motion blur in them. (Much like a basketball player running down the court while dribbling and waving one hand...that hand waving has a lot of blur. Trying to put it into a better context.)
The Soccer photo seems fine, looks like a bright contrasty time, so the whites are slightly blown, do you have any tighter soccer shots with less houses in the background?
If you shoot at F4 or F5.6, do the problems still appear? I'm new to Nikon still so I have no real experience with how files look out of the D300. Do you have older images that you can compare to newer images? Did you reduce them to show us the same way? |
|
Jamey Price, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
Charlotte | NC | USA | Posted: 3:04 PM on 11.05.09 |
| ->> Ill post some older files with similar settings...after I get out of swim practice. Thanks for your time! |
|
Jody Gomez, Photographer
|
Murrieta | CA | USA | Posted: 8:39 PM on 11.05.09 |
->> Jamey - I had this problem with one of my bodies. I sent it into to Canon and it was a loose screw (the camera, not me). Send it in. If there's something there, they'll fix it. In my case I had my camera back in two days, it was perfect, and I was once again happy.
Jody |
|
Darren White, Photographer
|
Brisbane | QLD | Australia | Posted: 5:10 AM on 11.06.09 |
->> I think shoot at different focal lengths, at inaminate objects for a true test, sports at 2.8 is not ideal if you think the lens is out - do some calibration tests. Plenty of test charts out there.
You havent got VR switched on have you ? |
|
Jamey Price, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
Charlotte | NC | USA | Posted: 8:41 AM on 11.06.09 |
->> Jody and Darren,
I think those are my two best options. Im going to do some tests today on still life objects. Ill post the results. Whether Im imaginging the issue or not, Ive seen a problem in photos and I now dont "trust" the camera to get the photo...which is not a good thing to be lacking in.
Thanks again for your thoughts! |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|