Problem with Bluriness, could it be the camera?

I agree 100%. I got rid of a Sigma 18-200 zoom for that very reason.

A 28-135 IS almost followed it as well! 😀

Paul

A 18-200 is infrior to a recent 70-300 regardless of manufacturer. The 777 looks soft, es should be expected by the lense used.

I agree 100%. I got rid of a Sigma 18-200 zoom for that very reason.

It shouldn’t be producing blurry results though, should it? :rolleyes:

A 18-200 is infrior to a recent 70-300 regardless of manufacturer. The 777 looks soft, es should be expected by the lense used.

You do not know much about the camera or picture styles i gather.
suggest you try each style and see .

I know my 30D reasonably well having shot 50,000+ images on it.

I also know Picture Styles will not blur the front of the aircraft, even if you try making them. 😉

Paul

Old shape, both shots were taken at the lenses exteremes, i.e 200mm for Sigma and 300mm for Canon. Is there anything else you need from the EXIF? I can’t copy and paste it in, I would have to type it all out by hand.

Also noticed something in the EXIF data, the metering on mine is “Average” whereas the metering on Huw’s is “Pattern”. I don’t really know much about metering so I don’t know if that is important or not.

Paul, talk to me on MSN later, I’ll send you the originals.

There are programs for dumping the exif, however, to prevent typing it….do a PrtScr and paste it into MS Paint, edit out the junk and then save it as a Jpeg…post it.
The metering pattern shouldn’t really make a difference to the focal quality…but then again it might because Red light focuses at a slightly different length than Blue or Green (Hence the invention of apochromatic lenses).
I think we need a more controlled test. Tripod, reliable day for light constants, your camera only, set on manual and set at exactly the same aperture/shutter etc. Swap lenses on your camera. And preferably of the same subject, so it would have to be a static.
What focus mode was the autofocus on each camera? AI Servo, AI Focus or One shot?
Finally, wasn’t there some soft focus issue with the 400D, on some models?
Overcome by Formatting the S/w back to factory settings. I’m sure I read about it on the DP Review forum. If you do it, take a note of your preferenced settings (If any).

The Picture Styles menu won’t actually make a difference in this case, Vulcan558. Although you can adjust sharpness in there, this doesn’t seem to be a problem with general sharpening of an image. It’s more to do with either the lens or technique.

Paul

You do not know much about the camera or picture styles i gather.
suggest you try each style and see .

the 2nd shot is the worst.
the cockpit and front of the jet is soft ,
commom with this canon lens it degrades at the edges .

Old shape, both shots were taken at the lenses exteremes, i.e 200mm for Sigma and 300mm for Canon. Is there anything else you need from the EXIF? I can’t copy and paste it in, I would have to type it all out by hand.

Also noticed something in the EXIF data, the metering on mine is “Average” whereas the metering on Huw’s is “Pattern”. I don’t really know much about metering so I don’t know if that is important or not.

Paul, talk to me on MSN later, I’ll send you the originals.

In all honesty, Dan, we can’t really tell much from two completely edited and small images. Is there any way you can post the two originals, without any editing, side by side?

Paul

Well, the 2nd shot looks sharper. A Canon lens will always beat a Sigma (I’ve got a Sigma because I can’t afford OEM stuff)
So, the defining factor could be that Sigma 18-200. I assume it was at the top end (200). These massive focal length variable lenses are usually carp at the two ends of the range. I also assume that the Canon was not at the top end..i.e not 300 so thus not using the extreme end.
Could you type out the Exif data for the two shots please?

Finally got round to testing with someone elses camera equipment today. Let me know what you think. I’ll post more later from other angles. Also, these are fully edited (only resized to 800x), I can post resized orignals instead if you like.

My equipment: Canon 400D + Sigma 18-200 DC OS
Settings: f/8 ISO200 1/800

Now with Huws equipment (with me at the helm): Canon 400D + Canon 75-300
Settings: f/8 ISO200 1/500

EDIT: OS was off for the sigma shot, IS was on for the canon.

Also worth checking what picture styles you have set in your camera.
i find that standard or portrait produce soft flat images that need tweaking in photo shop.

I like the landscape picture style set from the custom menu offer good straight out the camera images .

if you shoot a RAW image you can view that image on your PC and select each of the picture style . this with give you some idea of the difference each one can make to your image.

The Picture Styles menu won’t actually make a difference in this case, Vulcan558. Although you can adjust sharpness in there, this doesn’t seem to be a problem with general sharpening of an image. It’s more to do with either the lens or technique.

Paul

Also worth checking what picture styles you have set in your camera.
i find that standard or portrait produce soft flat images that need tweaking in photo shop.

I like the landscape picture style set from the custom menu offer good straight out the camera images .

if you shoot a RAW image you can view that image on your PC and select each of the picture style . this with give you some idea of the difference each one can make to your image.

Well I’ve been examining the data from my tests at LTN. But it’s preety inconclusive. The aircraft were not moving in the way they were at LHR, and blur with my usual settings was minimal. And when I turned OS off and took my UV filter off, the difference was negligible. Occasional shots showed some blur. The results leave me leaning away from the idea of the problem with the camera. But I can’t say for certain.

Going to run a different test this weekend where I ill switch lenses with a friend for roughly half an hour and see how those images come out.

The pre-amp of my mixing desk won’t see that difference, whatever formulae you use! 😀

Now… Images…

You don’t need to shoot a plane to see if the problem is the lens. Taking a photo of a wall or something like that with a uniform surface will probably give a better indication of where the lens is soft.

Paul

Aye, but he said he was off to LHR.

There are formulae that prove this point, but lets get back on soft images. 🙂

The pre-amp of my mixing desk won’t see that difference, whatever formulae you use! 😀

Now… Images…

You don’t need to shoot a plane to see if the problem is the lens. Taking a photo of a wall or something like that with a uniform surface will probably give a better indication of where the lens is soft.

Paul

Hence why I said if the vast majority of images have the same softness then it’s almost certainly a lens problem, Dan.

Paul

OK, if you think it’s a lens problem, a test to do is a total side shot of an aeroplane. The DoF will naturally bring all of the fuselage in focus so if it’s blurry on one side it must be the lens or the unlikely dislodged sensor.
Next test is an aeroplane at about 45 degrees pointing left, then 45 degrees pointing right (At same exposure values).

I was actually thinking about directional cables when I wrote that post. The electrical signals in music change polarity up to 20,000 times a second. Surely the electrons being happier travelling in one direction rather than the other would have a somewhat detrimental effect on the sound quality rather than a positive one?!

It is, however, fun to wind up the new kids when they start in sound. I advise them to keep the multicores as level as possible because those poor little balanced signals from the mics and DI boxes on stage have a hard time getting uphill. Electrons have a mass, afterall, so why shouldn’t they be affected by gravity?
It keeps us amused for a few hours until we tell them it’s all rubbish! 😀

Paul

There are formulae that prove this point, but lets get back on soft images. 🙂

The point is Paul, that it’s not 1 in 30 that are like this. It’s more like 29 in 30. There were honestly very few keepers from that LHR trip. The following trip to LGW was slightly better, but the problem was clearly still there.

Hence why I said if the vast majority of images have the same softness then it’s almost certainly a lens problem, Dan.

Paul