Lacking image clarity

I use my camera mainly for taking pitures at motorcycle events and I think I'm getting a little better with every event I snap at. My only problem is that the initial, unedited shot looks pretty good and clear, but once you start to zoom in (even only a little) the image appears to loose a lot of it's clarity. For example, see below (please click on the link as I wanted to use the larges image res that Photobucket allows so that you can see what I mean)

Original,

http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t172/viperbiker/a10f60f6.jpg

Zoomed in a little,

http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t172/viperbiker/b3041d59.jpg

The info on the shot it,

180mm Focal Length, F/8, 1/250 sec and ISO-200.

The settings I feel were best for the situatation, but the only other thing I'd like to add is that it's a free-hand shot with SR on. As a comparison to the shots I take, a friend of mine is at the same stage of photography as I am (both relatively new at it) and shoots with a Nikon D40, and even when I use his camera, I get a better picture. His suggestion to me was that it's down to the SR being set to 'On' whereas his wasn't. Is there any truth in this or is it that his D40 takes a better shot than my K100D?

I never thought it made a difference, but for panning now on, turn off SR and see if it makes a difference.

Are non-panned shots unsharp too?

Not at all. Here are 2 non-panned shots I took in the drive-way last week and it has no such problems. I've not tried any panning with the SR off, but it might be worth a try.

Original,

http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t172/viperbiker/558914d5.jpg

Zoomed in,

http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t172/viperbiker/b61aea1e.jpg

Info - 18mm, F/9.5, 1/250 sec and ISO-200, also free-hand with SR on.

I seem to remember reading someone before claiming that SR actually made things worse when panning but I can't remember where it was (or even if it was on this forum). I've not done any scientific testing myself and I don't have many panned shots in my portfolio but here's one with SR on:




It probably displays a similar amount of softness around the edges at 100% as your example does, but that could well be just down to my (quite poor) panning skills.

The best way for you to find out is to take some shots with SR on and some with it off and see if there's a pattern that emerges - it'll be interesting to know what conclusions you come to.

Hi Viper,
Maybe you can explain a bit more what you mean by image clarity.
Unless i am missing something here, image clarity is something mostly is mentioned in relation to adjusting mid tone contrast.( gives punch to a picture) Something that is achieved during PP or in camera by the internal software algorithms of the manufacture. Nikon uses different algorithms as Pentax. So no need to compare here, because you own a pentax,right I honestly don't see how using SR could have any influence on the subject matter. SR only affects sharpness, I should hope.
Martin.

I just looked at the first two pics you posted - it just looks to me like a combination of flat lighting, camera movement and not being just quite in focus, still damn good given the conditions. BTW I didn't know Arlen Ness did sports bike stuff, I always knew him as a custom Harley builder par excellence. Has he been bought out by the Man?

Your 1st examples:
The original looks soft, so it'll look worse when magnified (zoomed in).

Your 2nd examples:
Original is crisp and sharp, magnified, you can see well defined jagged edges in various places.

Question: Is your camera set to record in JPG or RAW?

If JPG, you can expect more deteriation when magnified than if shot in RAW.