Rolls Royce Special Edition
- Topic Locked - You will not be able to post to this topic. Inappropriate posting
Posted 18/07/2012 - 08:15
Link
Quote:
Smeggypants...What is the best way to test my lenses for these problems. Thanks for the useful comments.
I thanked you for your comments in as much as I thought you would reply to: "What is the best way to test my lenses"Smeggypants...What is the best way to test my lenses for these problems. Thanks for the useful comments.
Yes, I like to receive constructive critique on my photographs in as much as when there is an obvious problem a solution is offered, I did request a method of testing the lenses so had taken note of what you had said.
No, I do not want a long drawn out discussion. Initially the photographs were posted as a general interest item. I had never seen a Rolls Royce with an "Aluminium" body and thought others may be interested in seeing it too.
I think this thread has run its course, unless of coure you have a suitable answer to my initial question, along the lines of that kindly provided by Philip aka MrB
Posted 18/07/2012 - 08:51
Link
tyronet2000 wrote:
Yes, I like to receive constructive critique on my photographs in as much as when there is an obvious problem a solution is offered, I did request a method of testing the lenses so had taken note of what you had said.
No, I do not want a long drawn out discussion. Initially the photographs were posted as a general interest item. I had never seen a Rolls Royce with an "Aluminium" body and thought others may be interested in seeing it too.
I think this thread has run its course, unless of coure you have a suitable answer to my initial question, along the lines of that kindly provided by Philip aka MrB
Forums aren't a real time conversation. Had MrB had not got there first I would have given an identical piece of advice. I'm sure you'd agree it would be pointless repeating what he said?Quote:
Smeggypants...What is the best way to test my lenses for these problems. Thanks for the useful comments.
I thanked you for your comments in as much as I thought you would reply to: "What is the best way to test my lenses"Smeggypants...What is the best way to test my lenses for these problems. Thanks for the useful comments.
Yes, I like to receive constructive critique on my photographs in as much as when there is an obvious problem a solution is offered, I did request a method of testing the lenses so had taken note of what you had said.
No, I do not want a long drawn out discussion. Initially the photographs were posted as a general interest item. I had never seen a Rolls Royce with an "Aluminium" body and thought others may be interested in seeing it too.
I think this thread has run its course, unless of coure you have a suitable answer to my initial question, along the lines of that kindly provided by Philip aka MrB
Regardless, you not only thanking a non-constructive poster who had no interest for helping you for his ill-meant reply of 'twaddle', and further highlighting it in green, exposes what you really thought of my well meant help.
I couldn't care less about Gartmore's personal games ( and no it's not the first time ), but for the rest of us who are here for the photography I thought this forum is about giving feedback to each other so we can get a 2nd opinion on our work in order to perhaps improve.
I appreciate you didn't specifially ask for critique on the photos themselves, and yes it's a mighty fine and unusual car, but I was only trying to be helpful.
[i]Bodies: 1x K-5IIs, 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
Posted 18/07/2012 - 10:45
Link
I apologise for not mentioning in my first post that I love the shots of the Rolls, although I agree with Smeggy about the focus. I also realise that you didn't request critique but, as I am sure you know, the images' apparent focus could be enhanced with a bit more processing. For example:
[IMG]http://i1200.photobucket.com/albums/bb327/MrB154/Reworked%20Photos/RR-00_K5_0729a1.jpg[/IMG]
Just my opinion, of course.
Philip
[IMG]http://i1200.photobucket.com/albums/bb327/MrB154/Reworked%20Photos/RR-00_K5_0729a1.jpg[/IMG]
Just my opinion, of course.
Philip
Posted 18/07/2012 - 12:56
Link
Personally really appreciate it when someone gives me constructive critisism that is delivered in a genuine way.
Posted 18/07/2012 - 14:22
Link
Well said Smeggy, constructive help would be far better, and a far more mature response from one of the User Team!
K5's (2)both gripped, K10d gripped, Pentax 28-90 f3.5, Sigma 18-250mm, Sigma 150-500mm. Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro, Sigma 10-20 f.4-5.6.EX DC, Hoya 135 f2.8, Take on 28mm f2.8 Pentax AF360 flash, 2 fill in slaves. 30 metre remote release, Rt angle viewfinder, Giotto NOT 3261B Tripod with Manfrotto 808Rd4 ball head, Manfroto 4861RC2 monopoly, shoulder stock, various filters etc, Panasonic SET HBS HD Video cam, Tamrac Explorer 8x backpack and a sore back.....
-------------------------------------------------------
Photography is an index for measuring futility and pride.......
Paul
:wink
http://s743.photobucket.com/home/pg20_photos/index
https://www.flickr.com/photos/pg20
-------------------------------------------------------
Photography is an index for measuring futility and pride.......
Paul
:wink
http://s743.photobucket.com/home/pg20_photos/index
https://www.flickr.com/photos/pg20
Posted 18/07/2012 - 21:36
Link
Smeggypants wrote:
You're supposed to be part of the 'team' and that means helping people here in a manner that contains some substance rather than just shouting 'twaddle' and embarrassing yourself.
Your suggestion that the OP's lens could be back focussing by some 10ft or so is nonsense. gartmore wrote:
You could do yourself a favour and start helping photographers. You may not know anything about AF Fine tuning on cameras but that doesn't mean others do not. Smeggypants wrote:
Both shots look out of focus here. It looks like there's some back focussing going on #1 the spare tyres are more in focus than the first and on #2 the car behind looks more in focus.
have you calibrated the AF fine tune for your lenses?
More twaddle Both shots look out of focus here. It looks like there's some back focussing going on #1 the spare tyres are more in focus than the first and on #2 the car behind looks more in focus.
have you calibrated the AF fine tune for your lenses?
You're supposed to be part of the 'team' and that means helping people here in a manner that contains some substance rather than just shouting 'twaddle' and embarrassing yourself.
You've gone to great lengths elsewhere to tell us just how much you eschew rules and so on but fondly imagine there is some 'rule' that I cant have an opinion of my own.
Ken
“We must avoid however, snapping away, shooting quickly and without thought, overloading ourselves with unnecessary images that clutter our memory and diminish the clarity of the whole.” - Henri Cartier-Bresson -
“We must avoid however, snapping away, shooting quickly and without thought, overloading ourselves with unnecessary images that clutter our memory and diminish the clarity of the whole.” - Henri Cartier-Bresson -
Posted 18/07/2012 - 22:28
Link
The camera doesn't have to be back focusing by 10 feet to give the effect observed. E.g. On the second photo the lens was set at f=24mm and aperture f/4. If it was focused accurately on a point 12 feet away, the depth of field would be from 8 feet to 24 feet. But if it was actually focusing just 2 feet beyond at 14 feet, the depth of field would extend from 9 feet to 34 feet. This could have the effect of making the car parked after the Rolls appear in the zone of sharpest focus.
Philip
Philip
Posted 18/07/2012 - 22:31
Link
It depends on where the point of focus was chosen. We don't know if it was centre point, somewhere else, or whatever. It's entirely possible the camera selected an inappropriate point.
Best regards, John
Posted 18/07/2012 - 23:04
Link
Quote:
Your suggestion that the OP's lens could be back focussing by some 10ft or so is nonsense.
You've gone to great lengths elsewhere to tell us just how much you eschew rules and so on but fondly imagine there is some 'rule' that I cant have an opinion of my own.
It's a shame,Gartmore, this was not your original contribution, rather than "Twaddle"!Your suggestion that the OP's lens could be back focussing by some 10ft or so is nonsense.
You've gone to great lengths elsewhere to tell us just how much you eschew rules and so on but fondly imagine there is some 'rule' that I cant have an opinion of my own.
I've seen before, on PU, how posts get "out of hand", tempers & personalities run out of control.
I find it v. sad.
If this event has led to Smeggie's departure, then doubly so.
Roger.
The more I look, the more there is to see!
Posted 18/07/2012 - 23:06
Link
johnriley wrote:
It depends on where the point of focus was chosen. We don't know if it was centre point, somewhere else, or whatever. It's entirely possible the camera selected an inappropriate point.
I would say the photographer was entirely at fault by not knowing what the camera was set at, can't even remember if SR was on or off I just pointed at the car and when the camera went "beep" pressed the button all the way in. Kerchunk! job done Apologies to all offended by this post.
It depends on where the point of focus was chosen. We don't know if it was centre point, somewhere else, or whatever. It's entirely possible the camera selected an inappropriate point.
Posted 18/07/2012 - 23:12
Link
tyronet2000 wrote:
can't even remember if SR was on or off I just pointed at the car and when the camera went "beep" pressed the button all the way in. Kerchunk! job done
Or was it [job done]? If you check the EXIF data, it will tell you if SR was on or off, and if it was on, whether it had locked or not. I suspect it was either turned off, or it was turned on but you pressed the shutter button to quickly and SR had not locked.can't even remember if SR was on or off I just pointed at the car and when the camera went "beep" pressed the button all the way in. Kerchunk! job done
It'd be interesting to know either way. Photome should provide the EXIF information needed.
FWIW: I don't think the images are as sharp as they could be. Whether it's a focussing issue or slight camera/sensor shake, I'm not sure. What I am sure of is, they are not sharp.
Peter E Smith - flickr Photostream
7671 posts
16 years
Smegland
Both shots look out of focus here. It looks like there's some back focussing going on #1 the spare tyres are more in focus than the first and on #2 the car behind looks more in focus.
have you calibrated the AF fine tune for your lenses?
Put a page of text (e.g. a magazine page) flat on a table in good lighting. Set Av Mode and set the 18-135 lens to 50mm focal length with open aperture f/4.5. Hold your camera (steady hand can work but tripod is best) looking down at the page at an angle of about 45 degrees, and about 50cm away. Use the centre focusing point to auto-focus on an obvious word in the text, e.g. one at the start of a paragraph, and take the photo. View the image on the LCD and magnify the view. The word should be in sharpest focus, plus a few lines of text below that word (i.e. nearer to you) and a few more lines above (i.e. further away from you). (Because of the way depth of field works, there should be more lines of text in focus above the word than below.) Repeat the test several times to check and, if necessary, apply some lens fine adjustment and re-check. On a K-5 it is in menu C4/26. My 18-135 on a K-5 needs +4 of fine adjustment.
Philip
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283