keerthi Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 <p>This picture was taken on my D40X at f7 and 55mm end of the 18-55 kitlens.I thought the trees on the bank appear to be soft at that aperture.Is it a limitation of the lens?</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommyinca Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 <p>My guess, no as the 18-55 nikkor is one of the better kit lens out there. What was the shutter speed? ie: Wind move leaves but not rock :-)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james_calron Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 <p>The shutter speed seems to be a bit low (you can tell the water stream isn't frozen as you would think it'd be in the daytime at 55mm). Did you have it on manual? Do you know the shutter speed? It certainly looks too...soft/mushy for f/7.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rene gm Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 <p>The 18-55 at F7 should be sharp enough. There must be some other reason (wrong focus, camera shake). Of course, the exposure in the image is terrible.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Laur Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 <p>It's very difficult to tell what's really going on (at the detail level) once you've resampled the whole image down to this size. Better to crop a chunk out, at full resolution, and post that. <br /><br />But based on what we see here: was this hand-held? At 1/160th on your shutter speed - which was the case here - that's certainly slow enough to induce some motion blur. You're also quite over exposed (see the loss of detail in the white water). If you shoot in RAW, you might be able to increase the shutter speed, which will reduce camera motion blur and get those highlights under control), and then tease up some of the shadow detail in post production without increasing noise too badly. It's a very high contrast scene, which always makes metering difficult. Of course, it's also hard to tell at what distance you were focused. Certainly at f/7, you could have been focused on foreground rocks and lose focus on those trees.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
User_276104 Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 <p>I saved the photo and opened it in Capture NX - shutter speed was 1/160s, which is acceptable for DX 55mm. Camera shake could still be the culprit, though.</p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kari v Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 <p>Hard to say looking at so small image but it appears that nothing is really sharp here. Camera shake and/or missed focus.<br> Shouldn't be lens problem, 18-55 is fine at f7.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dieter Schaefer Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 <p>The EXIF data indicate a focus distance of 2.66m (7.6ft) - and a DOF of 0.67m (~2ft) ranging from 2.37m to 3.03m; it is also indicated the the right AF area was used and that dynamic AF was selected. Focusing that close would certainly explain the softness in the background - but it is hard to imagine that those data are correct giving the scene in the image. If, however, those data are correct, then I am wondering what the camera focussed on exactly. Is this the full image or a crop?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keerthi Posted April 20, 2009 Author Share Posted April 20, 2009 <p>I always shoot manual .It was quite windy and the camera was hand held.As Matt suggested I am posting a crop at full res.I am also posting a similar pic with exposure of 1/400 sec at full res for comparison.</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keerthi Posted April 20, 2009 Author Share Posted April 20, 2009 <p>This pic at f7,1/400sec,hand held,55 mm</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keerthi Posted April 20, 2009 Author Share Posted April 20, 2009 <p>I guess it was a wrongly chosen AF area.Ichose a slow shutter speed to induce motion blur on the water surface and exposed for the highlight.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dieter Schaefer Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 <p>Second image (1/400s) EXIF indicates the same focus distance of 2.66m...</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 <p>Looks like camera shake motion blur. Since you described the day as windy and you were shooting handheld, a much faster shutter speed would be appropriate.</p> <p>The usual guideline - shutter speed equivalent to focal length (1/30th sec for 28mm, 1/125 for 105mm, 1/250 for 200mm, etc.) - is only marginally useful. It assumes ideal conditions, no wind or vibration, good use of body alignment, and perfect technique to gently squeeze the shutter release button. Any variation from those ideals would require a faster shutter speed. My personal rule of thumb is to double the shutter speed for the focal length, but I'm not as steady as I used to be.</p> <p>Check your technique. If possible have someone watch you while you're shooting. I see a lot of people unconsciously flinch and jab the shutter release button. This won't always produce noticeable motion blur with very fast shutter speeds or indoor flash, but will in other conditions.</p> <p>When in doubt, test using a tripod or other support. This will help rule out variables such as camera shake.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now