What about this!

I intend to use my new toy indoors! Does noise, sharpness in this indoors shot under room light look okay! The

photo is just out of camera (cropped of course)!

Used 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II on 5DII.<div></div>

<p>It's sharp enough so that I can tell the local time... down to the second! Bravo. Looks just fine. Don't worry -- go out and shoot and ENJOY your excellent gear.</p>

<p>It looks good to me. I assume that you were testing the ISO 3200 element of your EXIF. There seems to be enough light that you had options with SS and aperture that you did not use and you mainly wanted to see if noise got objectionable. You accentuated shallow DOF shooting at 200mm with a fairly ope aperture. If you wanted more sharpness, then you might have stopped down an f-stop or two (you had plenty of shutter speed to work with).</p>

<p>Good comments David -- however, the OP is more than obliged to provide us the details, esp. ISO, exposure, and whether he used any EC (and how much pf the frame he cropped and resized for display here).<br>

Why shoud "we" have to do the EXIF research?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>the OP is more than obliged to provide us the details, esp. ISO, exposure,</p>

</blockquote>

<p>He did.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>He did.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br /><br>

Yup! I see the *title* of the image has it.......... My bad! <em> Mea culpa.</em><br>

<br /><br>

ISO 3200 is sweet. Good job.</p>

Your image appears to have a reflection or similar on the left side of the clock. Not sure what this is.

<blockquote>

<p>Your image appears to have a reflection or similar on the left side of the clock. . . .</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Guessing - Ghost Image of the clock face's Silver Surrounds? <br />Had a filter on the lens?</p>

<p>WW</p>

<p>Naah, just bad taste in clock's :-)</p>

 

Thanks, folks! Yes, I had a filter at the time! Taste for clocks varies from person to person - no good or bad!

<p>Husain - you may want to think about the filter - I do use filters for protection (I do not want to start the filter vs no filter religious war) on my Canons as they have a hard life. I do not do this with Leica or MF as they do not get in extreme situations as much - although the Leica sometimes does but Leica lenses are much smaller and easier to protect from damage in use. Cheap filters however can be a problem so if possible use at least good Hoya quality like Super HMC or better. Cheap filters can create all sorts of IQ issues.</p>

<p>Yes, there seems to be light haze over the clock's face, particularly around 5 o'clock, making the image less sharp than it should be.</p>

<p>I use filters only when I'm shooting in adverse conditions (e.g., saltwater spray) or need an optical effect that cannot be applied in post-production, such as polarization or Ev reduction (in which cases I use a polarizer or neutral density filter, respectively).</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>"light haze over the clock's face, particularly around 5 o'clock,"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes - that softness over/around the numeral "5" could also just be due to the clock's (glass/plastic) face ? ? ?<br /> In any case - maybe you (Husain) could make another photograph attempting to manufacture the same conditions and shoot with the filter off the lens: or generally make other comparative shots with and without the filter for your own education - you seem to be content and enthusiastic with your experimenting and getting pleasure from the results . . . have you pushed it to ISO6400 yet?<br /> WW</p>