Nashville with Sigma 10-20mm @ 10mm.

[JohnC]

What do you all think? No editing was done except chopping out the extra sky and hill where I was standing.

Click for full size. :)

http://home.comcast.net/~nx330mustang/Nashville_WA.JPG

[Bob-E]

Looks good to me. Where's the exif y0! Might want to stop that thing down some as it's a little suspect at the edges. Maybe a tad noisy in the dark sky too, but I can't remember. I peeked at this quick this morning and now I can't view it at work.

[Sean]

YEah looks good. Tad noisy but its better than i could do.

BTW, did CVS move their home office to Nashville?

[JohnC]

Looking at that picture and previous shots makes me think I have a focus problem, or something is going bad.

One of my very first shots of riverfront is tack sharp with similar F/# and shutter speed - with noise reduction off. I forgot to turn NR off for this shot, but if anything it should have been as focused/sharp or better. :wall:

I'll show you a fill size example in a sec....

[JohnC]

OK, now look at these two (one shot wasn't level and centered, but just peep for noise, focus, and sharpness).

Taken with Nikon D80 with 18-135mm lens. :)

Pic 1 (http://home.comcast.net/~nxnitrousmustang/DSC_0027.JPG)

Pic 2 (http://home.comcast.net/~nxnitrousmustang/DSC_0026.JPG)

Makes the first look OOF or slightly noisy doesn't it? And lately they look this way with the Nikon lenses, too. :confused:

[Sean]

YEah it does. the First pics in your last post looks the best I think. Thats taken with NR off also?

[jdmpwr07]

nice pic :up:

[JohnC]

YEah it does. the First pics in your last post looks the best I think. Thats taken with NR off also?

Yep, look at the EXIF. NR is off on both of those. Either NR being on degrades the picture quality, or something is wrong with my D80. :reef:

[Bob-E]

I think 10mm is just gonna be a little soft and have some CA at the edges. Nature of the 10mm beast. If wide's your thing, shoot panos or get a full frame sensor camera and shoot at 17mm. I'd look at a print before you get too bent out of shape on the IQ, because I think it's fine.

[JohnC]

I think 10mm is just gonna be a little soft and have some CA at the edges. Nature of the 10mm beast. If wide's your thing, shoot panos or get a full frame sensor camera and shoot at 17mm. I'd look at a print before you get too bent out of shape on the IQ, because I think it's fine.

Nah... I think something is up with my D80. :\

After you two mentioned those issues, I looked back and all my more recent photos seem to exibit the same problems, regardless of lens used or focal length.

[Sean]

Whats EXIF? Im still learing here. What Ive learned is pretty much from you guys. Im not on other photography forums. Thats why I wanted one on here.

[Bob-E]

try f8 and see if that helps. depth of focus will be infinity at 10mm.
http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html


The distortion sounds typical for this lense
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_1020_456_nikon/index.htm

but like I said, the photos look fine to me.

[JohnC]

try f8 and see if that helps. depth of focus will be infinity at 10mm.
http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html


The distortion sounds typical for this lense
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_1020_456_nikon/index.htm

but like I said, the photos look fine to me.

It was shot at 15 sec, F/11, ISO 100, NR on...

Much like I already said, seems something is up because no matter what settings, lens, etc., I notice this oof/noise look to the photos at 100%.

Don't you think those two older photos look better as in no noise and better focus? They were both shot with NR off at ISO 100 and (1) F/11 for 30sec, and (2) F/13 for 30sec.

Then again, maybe it's just me being too picky. :confused:

[Bob-E]

It was shot at 15 sec, F/11, ISO 100, NR on...

Much like I already said, seems something is up because no matter what settings, lens, etc., I notice this oof/noise look to the photos at 100%.

Don't you think those two older photos look better as in no noise and better focus? They were both shot with NR off at ISO 100 and (1) F/11 for 30sec, and (2) F/13 for 30sec.

Then again, maybe it's just me being too picky. :confused:


I'm saying you're stopping down too much. There is no reason to use f11 or f13 if f8 has a dof of infinity. And it should help your image quality some. The edges of a 100% photo will never be good at 10mm. At 100% you'ld be printing like 19x13 which you'll probably never do, in other words, stop looking at 100%;)

[tnhatch03]

http://home.comcast.net/~nxnitrousmustang/DSC_0026.JPG

i liked that one!!

[JohnC]

I'm saying you're stopping down too much. There is no reason to use f11 or f13 if f8 has a dof of infinity. And it should help your image quality some. The edges of a 100% photo will never be good at 10mm. At 100% you'ld be printing like 19x13 which you'll probably never do, in other words, stop looking at 100%;)

I have examples of F/9 and F/13 with all other settings the same and the DOF and sharpness on the outside edges are night and day. We're talking going from blurry to in focus here. :stare2:

I really don't feel like uploading & posting two more 3mb pictures, so if you want to see those PM me your email.

[northtnguy]

I'm saying you're stopping down too much. There is no reason to use f11 or f13 if f8 has a dof of infinity. And it should help your image quality some. The edges of a 100% photo will never be good at 10mm. At 100% you'ld be printing like 19x13 which you'll probably never do, in other words, stop looking at 100%;)

Nope, it would be more like printing 36x50 and even at that size, you wouldn't put your nose right on the print.

I agree with Bob-E ... STOP pixel peeking :lol:

Don't forget your crop factor, either. That 10mm is really a 15mm on your camera and still a good, wide angle lens.

Did you use manual focus or auto focus?

[JohnC]

Nope, it would be more like printing 36x50 and even at that size, you wouldn't put your nose right on the print.

I agree with Bob-E ... STOP pixel peeking :lol:

Don't forget your crop factor, either. That 10mm is really a 15mm on your camera and still a good, wide angle lens.

Did you use manual focus or auto focus?

I pixel peep because I want some good (large) prints soon as I get the shot I'm looking for. AF was used, tripod, remote shutter release, etc. :)

[northtnguy]

I pixel peep because I want some good (large) prints soon as I get the shot I'm looking for. AF was used, tripod, remote shutter release, etc. :)

OK, I'll buy that. :D

Mirror lock-up?

How about taking a 100% crop and printing that out and seeing how it looks?

How about taking the same shot using your F828? You know how good those Zeiss optics are on the F828 ... How about the sensor on the D80? Have you cleaned it? (Just throwing out suggestions ... I think the pictures look pretty good the way they are)

Maybe all of us should meet and take the same shots and compare notes??

[JohnC]

This is an old shot made with the DSC-F828 (not level, was a rookie), but was resized and I don't know how much Adobe degraded the quality. I'd have to reshoot this to really compare it.

http://www.hometown.aol.com/nxnitrousmustang/images/51at800x600.jpg

[abailey362]

might be a stupid thought, but was there any wind when you were taking the second pictures. Some of the street lights look to have motion blur in the second pic, where the first one doesn't. Looked like OOF at first, but a couple of the single lamp posts are too large to just be a focus problem.