How do I get it tack sharp?

betty1704 wrote in post #5606391
I actually did that. I'll try the CombineZM. Is it quite easy to do it?
I'm downloading it now.

CombineZM does great especially if there is little movement between shots.

Forgive me for going back to fundamentals:

Lenses are not at their best wide open (lowest aperture number). Lens faults show up more, and the sliver-thin depth of field makes precise focusing more difficult.

And when cameras and subjects move, they leave a trail on the sensor while the shutter is open.

Both of those facts can soften an image.

So, the key to getting any image tack sharp is to 1.) stop down to the optimal aperture, and 2.) use a beefy tripod. These are the secrets that separate the real pros from the rest of us. If you want tack sharp at wide apertures, buy high-end lenses. And then use a tripod to keep from wasting that money.

An old truism says that hobbyists talk about cameras and lenses, serious amateurs talk about lighting, and pros talk about tripods. (I'm all three.)

It used to be worse. I was making an image of the 270-year-old aqueduct for the Espada Acequia in San Antonio some years ago. It had vines and trailers hanging of it, fed by the seepage. Any puff of breeze would set them dancing. I was using Ilford FP4 shot at ISO80 in a 4x5 Cambo, using a 121mm Super Angulon. That lens really delivered the goods at f/32, and with the lighting conditions my shutter speed was about 1/8 or something like that. Of course, I had the camera on a very heavy tripod. But I had to wait for the breeze to be still and the vines to stop swaying. I stood there for 25 minutes, with my thumb on the cable release and my eyeballs drying, waiting for the moment. Need a print measured in feet rather than inches? That's what it takes (I didn't need that, but I was in my anal perfectionist phase as a photographer in those days.)

We're lucky that we can get to reasonably optimal by f/8. (That was wide open for that old Super Angulon.)

Rick "who focused such images with a 10x loupe on the ground glass" Denney

Agreed with above, and here's also a short copy+paste list of mine for maximum sharpness:

- Tripod
- Aperture: F8 - F11 (usually, depends a bit on the lens)
- Lowest ISO
- Focus well (when using AF, use the centre point for best accuracy)
- Prime lens (or avoid the extreme FL ends when using zoom lenses)
- Try to use the centre of the lens (when composition allows)
- Mirror lockup
- Self-timer (10 sec or 2 sec)
- Remote control (wireless preferably)
- Shoot RAW, sharpen only in post-processing

I don't think it was mentioned which of the 70-300mm lenses we're talking about here, but at 300mm the sharpness may decrease somewhat.

C2S wrote in post #5606753
Agreed with above, and here's also a short copy+paste list of mine for maximum sharpness:

- Tripod
- Aperture: F8 - F11 (usually, depends a bit on the lens)
- Lowest ISO
- Focus well (when using AF, use the centre point for best accuracy)
- Prime lens (or avoid the extreme FL ends when using zoom lenses)
- Try to use the centre of the lens (when composition allows)
- Mirror lockup
- Self-timer (10 sec or 2 sec)
- Remote control (wireless preferably)
- Shoot RAW, sharpen only in post-processing

I don't think it was mentioned which of the 70-300mm lenses we're talking about here, but at 300mm the sharpness may decrease somewhat.

I was going to mention that.

I've had 2 telephotos (so far...lol). A Tamron 75-300 which was relatively sharp (for a cheap lens) until after 200mm, then it got soft. My Sigma 70-200 is only good at f/2.8 below 100mm (or something like that), after that I gotta use F4 and then it's pretty good.

So I would suggest trying shooting at 100mm or 150mm and f/8, I'm sure you'll seperate the plant from the background without any problems.

DStanic wrote in post #5607553
I was going to mention that.

I've had 2 telephotos (so far...lol). A Tamron 75-300 which was relatively sharp (for a cheap lens) until after 200mm, then it got soft. My Sigma 70-200 is only good at f/2.8 below 100mm (or something like that), after that I gotta use F4 and then it's pretty good.

So I would suggest trying shooting at 100mm or 150mm and f/8, I'm sure you'll seperate the plant from the background without any problems.

Yup, easier said than done. To use a FL of 100 or 150mm I have to get closer and guess what? AF does not work, u get that irritating crwww crwww sound neither does manual focus. I mean if I want to fill the picture with the subject. Unless I use 100mm or 150mm at the same distance I was at 300mm and then crop it. Tomorrow or Saturday I'll try again and post the best result ,that is ... if my gardener did not cut the dried rose bush
I haven't used the combine thingy yet. I'll also give it a try.

The DOF is about 3 mm at 300 mm and f/7.1 and 1.2 meters.

betty1704 wrote in post #5618444
Yup, easier said than done. To use a FL of 100 or 150mm I have to get closer and guess what? AF does not work, u get that irritating crwww crwww sound neither does manual focus. I mean if I want to fill the picture with the subject. Unless I use 100mm or 150mm at the same distance I was at 300mm and then crop it. Tomorrow or Saturday I'll try again and post the best result ,that is ... if my gardener did not cut the dried rose bush
I haven't used the combine thingy yet. I'll also give it a try.

Opps sorry. I re-read your previous post. Didn't realize you couldn't get any closer...

betty1704 wrote in post #5606304
Used 70-300mm lens on a tripod, manual mode, manual focus +/- 1.5 m distance. It was a cloudy day. The smaller thorn is slightly behind the big thorn but I wanted that angle, as it looks like the bigger thorn is "giving a mouthful" to the smaller thorn.