Bob_A wrote in post #8052764
Agree ... at least not without some explanation as to why these were chosen. All have very slow shutterspeeds ... maybe to show the limits of IS?
This is before i started post processing things, There is 0 sharpening applied to any of that..meaning that yes, They are quite soft...darn AA filters
All were shot handheld, at ISO100, So yes, i was demonstrating how good the IS was to a degree, but you are indeed right, those are horridly sharp [Shows how bad your memory can be]
Hang on let me apply some of my post processing knowledge to a couple to demonstrate...Sadly the RAW files are on a disk buried somewhere, So i edited from the HQ JPEGs...
This was shot through a window which surely didnt help things:
And this one i never can get the exposure/color -just- right, The lighting was poor i just love it because of the subject and how oblivious she is to the world around her..truthfully the lighting in there was a bit of a pain i feel looking back on them...nothing looks quite great color-wise
Now then, heres some later ones i perhaps should have used before..
Ignore the black blob on the liscense plate please..
Ok ok, again with the blur, This was shot from a car doing 60...and im not sure the stand is in focus [or would be in focus] on top of it...
Very sadly it seems most of what i shot with this lens were things with little to no detail, lit poorly, or otherwise crap, All my really -really- good stuff in the timeframe was done with other lenses..Really upsetting when im trying to prove a point