Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
Thread started 21 Oct 2014 (Tuesday) 14:12
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Something not quite right

 
EDM307
Member
46 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2014
Location: New Zealand
     
Oct 21, 2014 14:12 |  #1

Hi everyone, I am not getting as good clear photos when I bring them up to 100%, Using 7d with 70-200f2.8 non IS , and 17-40f4, I have used the 70-200 before on a 400d and 70-300USM IS lens, and always got crisp clear images when bringing up to 100%.

I might not be using the correct focusing settings , have tried single point, Al Servo, and Single Shot, on motor racing rugby, and landscapes.

I get clear ones when subjects are close, car parked, dogs etc, with both lens.

If putting some photos up here is any use let me know. And I will.

If anyone might know of any advise for me I will be very pleased thank you.

Till then I will get searching for tips of how to get this corrected, and try them out.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.



HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
29,208 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Likes: 1390
Joined Dec 2006
     
Oct 21, 2014 14:34 |  #2

You do understand that when you bring the 7D to 100 percent you are looking at much larger image than at 100 percent on the lesser camera. Its on reason why you shouldnt get overly excited by images at 100 percent. Its called pixel peeping and its a disease. How do you feel about your images when you look at them the same size on a screen? The above attached samples are too small and have been downrezed for attachment to the point quality is impaired. If you want to display for sharpness host them on a site like flickr and embed them here.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EDM307
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
46 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2014
Location: New Zealand
     
Oct 21, 2014 14:36 |  #3

One extra photo, hope it is ok putting them in here. When zooming up the photo it they go blurry, I did not get that before . Something I have not got right yet.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Qlayer2
OOOHHH! Pretty Moth!
Avatar
941 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Likes: 121
Joined Dec 2013
Location: Detroit, MI
     
Oct 21, 2014 14:40 |  #4

Can you repost with the exif data intact?

You are dealing with a lot more pixels coming out of the 7d vs the 400d- they will look different at 100% views because you have more pixels on the target- higher pixel density means more detail can be resolved, but may look worse when pixel peeping. Take a look at the pixel size/density differences in the link below.

http://www.digicamdb.c​om …eos-400d-vs-canon_eos-7d/ (external link)

You can solve this issue in two ways- print out the images in the size of your choice and view them at an appropriate distance, and see if you like them. Also, don't pixel peep.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
29,208 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Likes: 1390
Joined Dec 2006
     
Oct 21, 2014 14:41 |  #5

EDM307 wrote in post #17225598 (external link)
One extra photo, hope it is ok putting them in here. When zooming up the photo it they go blurry, I did not get that before . Something I have not got right yet.

I'll try again on the 400D lets assume a 100 percent image is around 16x20. When viewing the 7D file at 100 percent you are looking at the equivalent of a 20x30 ( I dont have accurate numbers, just use these for hypothetical comparison). Just because you are looking at them at 100 percent doesnt mean you are looking at the same thing.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EDM307
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
46 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2014
Location: New Zealand
     
Oct 21, 2014 14:41 |  #6

gonzogolf wrote in post #17225596 (external link)
You do understand that when you bring the 7D to 100 percent you are looking at much larger image than at 100 percent on the lesser camera. Its on reason why you shouldnt get overly excited by images at 100 percent. Its called pixel peeping and its a disease. How do you feel about your images when you look at them the same size on a screen? The above attached samples are too small and have been downrezed for attachment to the point quality is impaired. If you want to display for sharpness host them on a site like flickr and embed them here.

Ok Thanks for this, it was a way I use to think if it was clear when zoomed up and stayed clear it would be good in an enlargement for a printed photo.

Yeah I see the images at same size on screen they are clear, except some that I might not have on correct focus setting.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EDM307
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
46 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2014
Location: New Zealand
     
Oct 21, 2014 14:47 |  #7

Qlayer2 wrote in post #17225609 (external link)
Can you repost with the exif data intact?

You are dealing with a lot more pixels coming out of the 7d vs the 400d- they will look different at 100% views because you have more pixels on the target- higher pixel density means more detail can be resolved, but may look worse when pixel peeping. Take a look at the pixel size/density differences in the link below.

http://www.digicamdb.c​om …eos-400d-vs-canon_eos-7d/ (external link)

You can solve this issue in two ways- print out the images in the size of your choice and view them at an appropriate distance, and see if you like them. Also, don't pixel peep.

Ok Thanks, all learning for me which I knew was ahead when going to this equipment, which I want as I will get better photos in the end.

I thought the exif data would show, as when right click on image and click on properties at bottom, is that not right way.

Otherwise I am not sure how to intact data into images.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tonylong
...winded
Avatar
54,657 posts
Gallery: 60 photos
Likes: 544
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Vancouver, WA USA
     
Oct 21, 2014 14:56 |  #8

When you upload an image to the Web, the Exif can just disappear, so when you post a pic, post the Exif if it matters and in your case it does matter!!


Tony
Two Canon cameras (5DC, 30D), three Canon lenses (24-105, 100-400, 100mm macro)
Tony Long Photos on PBase (external link)
Wildlife project pics here (external link), Biking Photog shoots here (external link), "Suburbia" project here (external link)! Mount St. Helens, Mount Hood pics here (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
HappySnapper90
Cream of the Crop
5,145 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Oct 21, 2014 18:46 |  #9

gonzogolf wrote in post #17225614 (external link)
I'll try again on the 400D lets assume a 100 percent image is around 16x20. When viewing the 7D file at 100 percent you are looking at the equivalent of a 20x30 ( I dont have accurate numbers, just use these for hypothetical comparison). Just because you are looking at them at 100 percent doesnt mean you are looking at the same thing.

This is an excuse that people have passed around the internet and it isn't true. Having more pixels should not make them blurry/fuzzy. People going from the d700 (12mp) didn't get fuzzy photos from the d800 (36mp)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EDM307
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
46 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2014
Location: New Zealand
     
Oct 21, 2014 19:55 |  #10

tonylong wrote in post #17225650 (external link)
When you upload an image to the Web, the Exif can just disappear, so when you post a pic, post the Exif if it matters and in your case it does matter!!

The beach photo is , 7D,10.0s, f/9.0, ISO200, focal length 165mm.

The #4 car is, 7D 1/60s, f/7.1, ISO100, focal length 100mm.

Rugby one I will get later, is this details that helps any .




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EDM307
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
46 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2014
Location: New Zealand
     
Oct 21, 2014 19:59 |  #11

Rugby photo details are, 7D f/3.5, 1/250s, ISO800, focal length 108mm




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tonylong
...winded
Avatar
54,657 posts
Gallery: 60 photos
Likes: 544
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Vancouver, WA USA
     
Oct 21, 2014 21:15 |  #12

EDM307 wrote in post #17226186 (external link)
The beach photo is , 7D,10.0s, f/9.0, ISO200, focal length 165mm.

The #4 car is, 7D 1/60s, f/7.1, ISO100, focal length 100mm.

Rugby one I will get later, is this details that helps any .

EDM307 wrote in post #17226192 (external link)
Rugby photo details are, 7D f/3.5, 1/250s, ISO800, focal length 108mm

OK, you mentioned 100% crops, are all three cropped to that degree? The beach one, sure, the rugby one doesn't look closely cropped, the car one maybe somewhat cropped but it still looks good for a nice panning shot...?

The beach shot could use some work, sure...! But for a 100% crop, I wouldn't complain much, a bit of processing and it could produce a nice large print!!!


Tony
Two Canon cameras (5DC, 30D), three Canon lenses (24-105, 100-400, 100mm macro)
Tony Long Photos on PBase (external link)
Wildlife project pics here (external link), Biking Photog shoots here (external link), "Suburbia" project here (external link)! Mount St. Helens, Mount Hood pics here (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EDM307
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
46 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2014
Location: New Zealand
     
Oct 21, 2014 22:30 |  #13

tonylong wrote in post #17226335 (external link)
OK, you mentioned 100% crops, are all three cropped to that degree? The beach one, sure, the rugby one doesn't look closely cropped, the car one maybe somewhat cropped but it still looks good for a nice panning shot...?

The beach shot could use some work, sure...! But for a 100% crop, I wouldn't complain much, a bit of processing and it could produce a nice large print!!!

Thanks Tony for answering and helping out.

Beach I cropped I think, rugby one not to much , the car one I am sure I left uncropped.

It is more when I zoom up on them on the screen before cropping that I noticed them not clear from the 7D, compared to the other camera.

I will pick some to be printed as photos and enlarged at the shop, and see how the are .




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EDM307
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
46 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2014
Location: New Zealand
     
Oct 21, 2014 22:32 as a reply to  @ EDM307's post |  #14

The beach one I used a tripod and remote. So it was still.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tonylong
...winded
Avatar
54,657 posts
Gallery: 60 photos
Likes: 544
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Vancouver, WA USA
     
Oct 21, 2014 23:46 |  #15

For printing, I'd suggest a print size of, say, 12x18, or at the most 20x30 assuming your original image quality is good/great!


Tony
Two Canon cameras (5DC, 30D), three Canon lenses (24-105, 100-400, 100mm macro)
Tony Long Photos on PBase (external link)
Wildlife project pics here (external link), Biking Photog shoots here (external link), "Suburbia" project here (external link)! Mount St. Helens, Mount Hood pics here (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,406 views & 0 likes for this thread
Something not quite right
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Snap Dragon
619 guests, 266 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.