Rolls Royce Special Edition
- Topic Locked - You will not be able to post to this topic. Inappropriate posting
Posted 19/07/2012 - 08:25
Link
Mannesty wrote:
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.
I know the images are not as sharp as they could/should be and this is down to the photographer, the circumstances of taking the shot etc etc. I only posted them as a general interest item, not to start a war. Obviously it will make me think twice before posting anything else.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.
I've opened the original file in photome but can't see anything relating to whether SR was on or off, can you point to where I should look.
Since I found out that SR turns off when a remote or timer is used I tend to leave it on and when using a tripod I use a 2s timer or the remote (CS205) so your observation of the SR not being locked is most probably right.
Posted 19/07/2012 - 09:20
Link
Had another look in photome and it shows Image Stabilizer:stabilized
so SR was switched on, just shows how much my hands shake and where you said:
SR Result stabilized
Shake reduction (Setup) 7
Shutter Release Half Press Time 0.75secs
SR Focal length 24mm
Shutter Count 365
none of the above means anything to me except to confirm it was switched on
and I need to take more snaps
so SR was switched on, just shows how much my hands shake and where you said:
SR Result stabilized
Shake reduction (Setup) 7
Shutter Release Half Press Time 0.75secs
SR Focal length 24mm
Shutter Count 365
none of the above means anything to me except to confirm it was switched on
and I need to take more snaps
Posted 19/07/2012 - 12:30
Link
Precise and to the point Smeggy
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 20/07/2012 - 10:09
Link
As much as I hate to be on-topic, I think there is a focussing issue caused by the reflective surface.
What I mean is that if you point your camera in a mirror it will focus on you, not the mirror.
I think therefore that the focus system became confused a it could not work out whether to focus on the car or the reflected foreground.
What I mean is that if you point your camera in a mirror it will focus on you, not the mirror.
I think therefore that the focus system became confused a it could not work out whether to focus on the car or the reflected foreground.
Posted 20/07/2012 - 10:27
Link
Gareth may be correct but I also wonder if you did any post process sharpening Stan. It was ages after I took up digital photography before I learned about the unsharp mask, then my pictures started becoming more sharp every time.
David
PPG: http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/davidtrout
David
PPG: http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/davidtrout
Posted 20/07/2012 - 12:16
Link
Thanks for the comments Gareth. I think you are saying I would have been better changing to manual focus in the circumstances. I will try that next time there are "mirror" surfaces fairly close up. Do you think using a polarising filter would have helped?
Thanks for the comments David. I had done a little post processing in as much as putting the darker patch on the bonnet which was completely blown out but can't remember what else I did. I would say yes to having used the unsharp mask after I'd tweaked various other settings, trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear
I do try to take on board advice from the members on here
Thanks for the comments David. I had done a little post processing in as much as putting the darker patch on the bonnet which was completely blown out but can't remember what else I did. I would say yes to having used the unsharp mask after I'd tweaked various other settings, trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear
I do try to take on board advice from the members on here
Posted 20/07/2012 - 13:01
Link
davidtrout wrote:
It was ages after I took up digital photography before I learned about the unsharp mask, then my pictures started becoming more sharp every time.
That's interesting, I've only just started making a habit of adjusting contrast, sharpening then resizing on mine. I must admit I was quite disappointed at how "un sharp" the photos were just on 1:1 viewing of the JPG, if it seems to be the norm to do this I am less concerned.It was ages after I took up digital photography before I learned about the unsharp mask, then my pictures started becoming more sharp every time.
That said I am currently on Paintshop Pro v5.0 or Photoshop 6, so I probably ought to get something a little more up to date.
Real name: Mike Edwards. My homage to seventies Vauxhalls: www.firenza.net
Camera - Pentax Kx, 18-55 kit lens, 18-200 Sigma, 50-500 Sigma, 500mm Tamron mirror
Camera - Pentax Kx, 18-55 kit lens, 18-200 Sigma, 50-500 Sigma, 500mm Tamron mirror
Posted 20/07/2012 - 14:08
Link
paulgee20 wrote:
This is all I ma going to say on this issue. If Smeggy has been banned, (even IF it has been a 'long process' there is certainly one other who should be banned as well, and I am sure WE all know who I am refering to for the comments made from within the 'position'. If nor then justice is a travesty IMHO.
+1This is all I ma going to say on this issue. If Smeggy has been banned, (even IF it has been a 'long process' there is certainly one other who should be banned as well, and I am sure WE all know who I am refering to for the comments made from within the 'position'. If nor then justice is a travesty IMHO.
Most forums realise that there is a core membership who add a lot to the discussions, even if their coments can be contenious.
Unfortunatly several of these have been driven away from PU, which IMO weakens the forum.
The coment that Smeggy was responding to could be seen as trolling, and his response seemed to me to not be unreasonable.
Mike
.
Pentax:K5ii, K7, K100D, DA18-55, DA10-17, DA55-300, DA50-200, F100-300, F50, DA35 AL, 4* M50, 2* M135, Helicoid extension, Tak 300 f4 (& 6 film bodies)
3rd Party: Bigmos (Sigma 150-500mm OS HSM),2* 28mm, 100mm macro, 28-200 zoom, 35-80 zoom, 80-200 zoom, 80-210 zoom, 300mm M42, 600 mirror, 1000-4000 scope, 50mm M42, enlarger lenses, Sony & micro 4/3 cameras with various PK mounts, Zenit E...
Far to many tele-converters, adapters, project parts & extension tubes etc.
.[size=11:].Flickr• WPF• Panoramio
.
Pentax:K5ii, K7, K100D, DA18-55, DA10-17, DA55-300, DA50-200, F100-300, F50, DA35 AL, 4* M50, 2* M135, Helicoid extension, Tak 300 f4 (& 6 film bodies)
3rd Party: Bigmos (Sigma 150-500mm OS HSM),2* 28mm, 100mm macro, 28-200 zoom, 35-80 zoom, 80-200 zoom, 80-210 zoom, 300mm M42, 600 mirror, 1000-4000 scope, 50mm M42, enlarger lenses, Sony & micro 4/3 cameras with various PK mounts, Zenit E...
Far to many tele-converters, adapters, project parts & extension tubes etc.
.[size=11:].Flickr• WPF• Panoramio
Posted 20/07/2012 - 14:12
Link
X's 2
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 20/07/2012 - 15:04
Link
gartmore wrote:
You should both be ashamed of yourselves. Gartmore for making a plainly inflammatory post (otherwise known as trolling), and the OP for marking it as helpful.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?
Pray tell, in what way was gartmore's post helpful to you?
Peter E Smith - flickr Photostream
Posted 20/07/2012 - 15:20
Link
Peter, Smeggy has made many controversial statements on here. Some would say trolling too. Maybe this was not one.
Maybe Stan thought it was, and Gartmore re-assured him that there was nothing wrong with the focusing. Stan has not been engaged in the ongoing politics of this forum and I think you are being unfair on him.
As for Gartmore - a more detailed explanation would have been better than trolling. So, its only Stan I am defending
Do you know that Smeggy was banned because of this thread?
ATB anyway
Maybe Stan thought it was, and Gartmore re-assured him that there was nothing wrong with the focusing. Stan has not been engaged in the ongoing politics of this forum and I think you are being unfair on him.
As for Gartmore - a more detailed explanation would have been better than trolling. So, its only Stan I am defending
Do you know that Smeggy was banned because of this thread?
ATB anyway
Posted 20/07/2012 - 15:27
Link
That is a very interesting car Stan. Thank you for showing us the photographs.
802 posts
17 years
Sat in Chair
-------------------------------------------------------
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