 |
Looks largely in part to the fog/smog. What exactly were you focusing on, and is your tripod sturdy, or was it windy? Many of us seemed to have issues with sharpness at first, and sometimes I see it most when people are using P mode.
Posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
though i agree that this picture could be soft because of the atmophere, i too have been having a hard time getting really sharp pictures out of the D40 too
Posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
mainly down to lens?
Posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
Check out the Photostream, there are lots of very sharp pictures being taken with the D40. I'd go back to basics, completely reset the camera (in case there is an option set that you don't know about), and go take some pics of some flowers or something using the kit lens.
Posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
The F/8 aperture is probably not the best for landscapes like this (higher F-stop would be better, like f/16 or f/22). Combined with the fog/haze it's difficult to get it sharp.
Posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
Thanks for all your feedback, it is very helpful and gives me a lot of learning points. Much appreciated.
Posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
good call on the going back to the beginning. i also wonder if my camera just needs a good cleaning. i take it to the beach. i shoot pictures of my husband woodworking (kicking up dust and whatnot). any recommendations on a place to find tips on proper camera care and maintenance?
Posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
Actually, I've noticed that any aperture beyond f/8 or f/9 happen to be less sharp as they get smaller.
Smaller apertures are supposedly sharper. That's because the smaller the aperture, the smaller the DOF. But that's not a magic formula. Most lens have an 'optimal spot' where they make sharper pictures. They're usually located in the middle of the focal range.
Talking about D40's kit lens, the 18-55mm, I noticed the 'optimal spot' resides somewhere between f/8 and f/9. SLRGear.com seems to agree with me.
Posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Thanks for the tips folks!
I took what you said on board and went back to take the same photo from the same location again.
1) Took the photo at 0650am before the haze/smog builds up.
2) Waited for a bit more sunshine.
3) Used a 55-200 VR at 102mm rather than a 18-55mm at 55mm. This meant I didn't have to crop so much afterwards and possibly its a better lens.
4) Balanced a 1L bottle of water on the tripod legs to give it more stability.
5) Full manual mode rather than auto.
5) Increased to ISO400.
6) f/13 rather than f/8.
7) Made a conscious effort to focus on the tower.
And here is the result, which I think is a lot crisper:
Originally posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
groundcloud (a group admin) edited this topic 31 months ago.
|
 |
you got much better positioning of the sun there too. The tower's got some nice light coming from the side, same ges for the shopping center or whatever it is beyond the roads. Evenings and mornings are usually nicest colorwise, nothing worse than these dull rainy days like today though -.- ...
Posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Wow, the new one is MUCH better.
Posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
rclhk [deleted] says:
Wonderful, much nicer -- but you changed so many variables it's not possible to tell which ones made a difference.
Posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
That's true, but there were so many sensible tips that I am going to incorporate many of them into my normal practice - such as finding the best time of day, going up from f/8 for landscape etc.
Posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
Excellent, looks like you found some better light to work with.
I agree that haze/smog/dust in the air make it difficult to get good landscape shots. I deal with it a lot here in Arizona. I fiddle with the settings until I find what works best.
Posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
Wow. I cant see the difference.nothing....
congrats...great second shot. Those changes made quite a difference.
Originally posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
thehotchili2000 edited this topic 32 months ago.
|
 |
Second shot shows there's no problem with your camera... And you are one quick learner!!!
There ARE sharper lenses than either of those. The difference is $$$$. Spending more money on a lens is going to make much more "sharpness difference", IMHO, than would spending more money on a camera body.
Probably a liter of Perrier would have worked better than the water -- something about smaller bubbles leading to greater tripod stability, I'm told (though I've heard Ken Rockwell uses San Pellegrino on his tripods).
Originally posted 31 months ago.
(
permalink
)
rotary cooling edited this topic 31 months ago.
|
|
I have taken this photo today with my D40:
Go to the "original" size and look carefully at the area of focus in the near end of the bar code... I think the sharpness is really stunning...!
I have used LAB mode to reduce noise and increase sharpness - there are links in the description to tutorials that describe how to do this.
Posted 31 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
I'm wondering why you deleted my comment???
Posted 31 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
I didn't delete anything. I think you posted in this disucssion: www.flickr.com/groups/51903796@N00/discuss/72157600265381...
Posted 31 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
Re using apertures of f16 and smaller as a means fo getting sharper photos... Your photos will actually start to get softer at some point using smaller apertures due to light defraction. For a variety of reasons, on digital cameras defraction starts to occur at larger apertures than it does with 35mm film cameras.
Most lenses are their sharpest at f8 with some lenses being sharpest at f5.6. This is not to say you should not use F11 or even F16. Definitley use smaller apertures when your goal is increased depth of field. Just don't use them because you want sharper photos.
Here's a site with lots of lens reviews that shows you at what aperture and focal length each lens is the sharpest.
www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html
Posted 31 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
Couple of more minor points to add:
Did you, per chance, use the bayonet lens hood on your 55-200mm VR? Depending on the angle of the light in relation to your lens, the hood could be helping you out.
For those tripod shots, try using the self-timer and eliminating any possible hand tremor from the equation.
Some judicious filtration could help. UV filter if you haven't already got it can help a little with the smog and circular polarizer (while not very usable with the 55-200mm's big bayonet hood) can work wonders.
Posted 31 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
Would you like to comment?
Sign up for a free account, or sign in (if you're already a member).
|
Nikon D40/x Users /
Discuss
Feed – Subscribe to Nikon D40/x Users discussion threads
|
Deutsch
|
English
|
Español
|
Français
|
