Reading mode: Light Dark

Ok, some of you will hate me for posting this but...

Go to last post
Hi Bob,

I have sent you a reply by email. you will probably receive it soon. the picture look wonderfull but as i was expected it is blurred and i think it would have turned out much sharper with the use of a tripod. Although if you say it is printing fine then its ok.

You can also use some sharpening, but surely once it is rescaled it look quite sharp.

The sky is very nice also, this is surly a shot no doubt :)

Daniella
Bob S said:
Mofongo said:
Daniella3d wrote:
Also the notion of sharp picture is relative to the people looking
at a picture...some will find a shot sharp as other will find the
same shot blurred..I am really picky on the blur factor :)
Click to expand...
Daniella,
In another post earlier today you asked me to send you the original
file of this 1/2 second shutter speed, hand held Uzi shot that I
posted a while ago so you could judge the quality. I'm very happy
with the 5x7 print I got from it. Well, I sent it and I still
havn't heard your opinion...Bob



--
'Today is the tomorrow you worried about yesteday'
Click to expand...
 
wow, now i am impressed! :) this is even better feature than the IS LOL..very nice pic...i guess i'll try that when i have the chance.

I just ordered a star filter...may be i should cancel that order before its too late..ho my!

thanks for sharing the picture with us...is there a full size version of this somewhere that we can see?

Daniella
misha said:
Daniella3d said:
Look really good! did you use a star filter?
Click to expand...
No, it's all natural!
--
Misha
Click to expand...
 
Daniella,

When using a tripod IS should be turned OFF - Agree. It may effect the image (ideally should not). For any people it should help (in reality it still should help). As you can see I still agree with you but only up to 60%.
... and I have got it! :-)
Leo
Daniella3d said:
But for some other people the IS might actually ruine the shot in
good light and fast shutter speed, like it did for me.

got it?

Daniella
Leo said:
Daniella3d said:
In my case i was doing my best to be very steady and this was
confusing the IS and i was getting blurred picture because of the
IS. So for people with steady hand at fast shutter speed..the IS
might be better OFF.

Daniella
misha said:
I did a test with the 2100 at full zoom indoors, shutter speed
about 1/20, shooting a map across the room - a 10 shot series with
IS on, then 10 with IS off, repeated - with IS on most of the shots
were quite sharp, though some more than others; with IS off, maybe
2 out of 10 were fairly sharp. Your results may vary, but for most
people th benefit of IS is pretty obvious.
--
Misha
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
I guess you did not got it...i was not using a tripod, i had blurred shots because i was holding the camera too steady. but its ok, i got the right explanation for this so no need to explain anything. but thanks for trying.

Daniella
Leo said:
Daniella3d said:
But for some other people the IS might actually ruine the shot in
good light and fast shutter speed, like it did for me.

got it?

Daniella
Leo said:
Daniella3d said:
In my case i was doing my best to be very steady and this was
confusing the IS and i was getting blurred picture because of the
IS. So for people with steady hand at fast shutter speed..the IS
might be better OFF.

Daniella
misha said:
I did a test with the 2100 at full zoom indoors, shutter speed
about 1/20, shooting a map across the room - a 10 shot series with
IS on, then 10 with IS off, repeated - with IS on most of the shots
were quite sharp, though some more than others; with IS off, maybe
2 out of 10 were fairly sharp. Your results may vary, but for most
people th benefit of IS is pretty obvious.
--
Misha
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Daniella68313 said:
Daniella3d wrote:
Hi Bob,

I have sent you a reply by email. you will probably receive it
soon. the picture look wonderfull but as i was expected it is
blurred and i think it would have turned out much sharper with the
use of a tripod. Although if you say it is printing fine then its
ok.

You can also use some sharpening, but surely once it is rescaled it
look quite sharp.

The sky is very nice also, this is surly a shot no doubt :)
Click to expand...
Thanks, for being hand held it came out sharper than I could ever imagine and for that I thank the IS system ( and a very steady hand ;> )) ). I have my camera set to soft sharpening so after normal processing and unsharp mask, the print came out beautiful!

I never could have taken this shot as sharp as it was hand held were it not for the IS. This I know for sure.

This shot was taken while on a casual stroll while I was waiting for my wife to get her hair done so I would have never taken my tripod with me.

This is where the IS shines. I'm sure every shot you and I take could be techniquely sharper if we used a tripod on every shot but the reality is that we don't. This is where a steady shooting technique along with IS will get sharp pictures that would never be possible without it. I think you would have to use IS on a regular basis to really appreciate it...Bob

--'Today is the tomorrow you worried about yesteday'
 
Hi,

I think we probably have a bit different difinition of what is sharp. I am very picky i suppose and if its not very sharp, and i meen very sharp, i just usually don't keep them. There is only one image that i had that was blurred and i still wanted to keep because i liked it. I managed to rescale it and sharpen it enough so it look not so bad at 1000 x 800, but i know its blurred and it will never be looking good printed in 10 x 8.

As for your church picture, i am sure it will not print so good at 10 x 8, but look really good in small format for the web and probably ok at 5 x 7.

The picture that was blurred was very nice so i kept it, but it does not print well at 10 x 8 unfortunatly, this is the picture:

http://www3.pbase.com/image/679967
Bob S said:
Juli Valley said:
Daniella3d said:
Hey July, can i see that pic of the moon you took?

Daniella
Click to expand...
Sure. Here it is.
Click to expand...
Sure looks sharp to me Juli. Nice shot...Bob
Mofongo said:
http://www3.pbase.com/image/492079
--
Juli
Click to expand...
--
'Today is the tomorrow you worried about yesteday'
Click to expand...
--Daniella http://www.pbase.com/zylenC7OO discussion group: http://www.homepet.com/cgi-bin/c700/UltraBoard.cgi
 
Yup :) Of course, I haven't taken any pics like this one with so many reflections, but I had one with a sunset and some reflections off the water and it was awesome! Looked like little stars dancing on the water.

Karen
Daniella3d said:
You meen you have this star effect natually with the lens without
using any star filter? wow, i have to try this..i did not know the
Olympus lens had this, although i noticed some of this effect on
big lamp in my night shots..they are smaller but i was not
pointing so directly as the lights.

Daniella
Click to expand...
 
Daniella3d said:
Hi,

I think we probably have a bit different difinition of what is
sharp. I am very picky i suppose and if its not very sharp, and i
meen very sharp, i just usually don't keep them.
Click to expand...
I am also very picky and know sharp when I see it. A also know that an image taken in the soft setting in camera when viewed at 100% will appear soft and with proper proccessing and sharpening be very nice for large prints.
Daniella68313 said:
As for your church picture, i am sure it will not print so good at
10 x 8, but look really good in small format for the web and
probably ok at 5 x 7.
Click to expand...
Actually after processing and sharpening this print looked stunning at 5x7. I had it printed at Walmart.com and when I picked it up the people there were blown away by the quality and sharpness of it. The only reason I did not print it at 8x10 was because the crop would have messed the composition. I'm quite confident this would make a nice 8x10 also more than acceptable for the most discerning eyes.

I'm sure no body's gonna hate you for your opinions on IS but when you ask people to send you full size originals (especially ones taken in soft setting) so you can "judge the quality" and than reply saying they are not up to your standard and are blurred when the end result after processing is a stunning print, at this point you are starting to irritate...

Bob
--'Today is the tomorrow you worried about yesteday'
 
Daniella3d said:
Glad you also notice that, as there is some skeptical here LOL :)

Anyway, the C2100 is a great camera, i am not saying its not and i
liked it very much...just that explain my blurred pictures.

I guess the trick with the IS is to do like you did...be lousy on
the holding and you are actually getting better picture! amazing :)

Daniella
kbelloise said:
First let me say, I noticed the same thing myself. After already
having the 700, I think I got so used to holding the camera as
steadily as possible so my first couple of shots with the IS turned
on in the 2100 where not what I had hoped for.

My solution.... I just don't try so hard to hold the camera
sooooooo steadily anymore :)

Anyway, holding the camera steady doesn't " confuse" the IS. The IS
is actually gyrating inside the lense barrel. It's meant to
counteract camera shake, but if there is no camera shake it can
actually cause it. It is, after all, a continuosly moving mechanism
inside the lens barrel.

Karen
Daniella3d said:
The strange thing is that with my my regular Minolta film SLR, i
was getting a lots of blurred pictures at only 200mm zoom.

I am not saying that the IS is not usefull and for some people with
shaky hands that is surely the solution. Just in some case it can
cause problem, if you are actually holding the camera quite steady.

I know many of you have noticed this if the C2100 is on tripod, but
am i the only one who had a problem with IS for having too steady
hands?

Daniella
Leo said:
misha said:
I did a test with the 2100 at full zoom indoors, shutter speed
about 1/20, shooting a map across the room - a 10 shot series with
IS on, then 10 with IS off, repeated - with IS on most of the shots
were quite sharp, though some more than others; with IS off, maybe
2 out of 10 were fairly sharp. Your results may vary, but for most
people th benefit of IS is pretty obvious.
--
Misha
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Well , it appears we have another entry into the most rediculous
thread contest! It will surely go platinum by the end of the day. This
ranks right up there with" Photoshop price bewilderment".
Here we have a woman who is so smart and so sharp and so steady
that she can trick the Olympus IS system in to malfunctioning and
therefore has had to switch to a C-700 to compensate for it.
If only I had known before rushing to buy a 2100!

LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL!

All jokes aside ,the recommendations in the 2100 manual on p.97
are there for a reason. They are of course not etched in stone.
Perfectly focussed pictures can taken with or without IS,even in all
of your " controlled " tests.

Daniella, again your pictures are beautiful as are everyone elses here!
My Nascar photos posted a while back didn't get much attention ,but
there is a very limited audience . I have some interesting photos
taken at an MTV video shoot that I will be posting shortly also some
shots from my daughters beauty pageant this weekend.I hope to
have lots of constructive criticism.

Lets have more pictures !

Tim
 
Bob S said:
Mofongo said:
Daniella3d wrote:
Hi Bob,

I have sent you a reply by email. you will probably receive it
soon. the picture look wonderfull but as i was expected it is
blurred and i think it would have turned out much sharper with the
use of a tripod. Although if you say it is printing fine then its
ok.

You can also use some sharpening, but surely once it is rescaled it
look quite sharp.

The sky is very nice also, this is surly a shot no doubt :)
Click to expand...
Thanks, for being hand held it came out sharper than I could ever
imagine and for that I thank the IS system ( and a very steady hand
;> )) ). I have my camera set to soft sharpening so after normal
processing and unsharp mask, the print came out beautiful!

I never could have taken this shot as sharp as it was hand held
were it not for the IS. This I know for sure.

This shot was taken while on a casual stroll while I was waiting
for my wife to get her hair done so I would have never taken my
tripod with me.

This is where the IS shines. I'm sure every shot you and I take
could be techniquely sharper if we used a tripod on every shot but
the reality is that we don't. This is where a steady shooting
technique along with IS will get sharp pictures that would never be
possible without it. I think you would have to use IS on a regular
basis to really appreciate it...Bob
Click to expand...
Hi BB.

Since I first saw that shot I've been wanting to shoot something similar. I love the whole framing with the dark blue sky in the background. A little working on the overexposed left clock could make this shot even greater.

Maxven
 
Maxven said:
Hi BB.

Since I first saw that shot I've been wanting to shoot something
similar. I love the whole framing with the dark blue sky in the
background. A little working on the overexposed left clock could
make this shot even greater.
Click to expand...
Thanks Maxven,

Actually, I did rework that side a little bit. Maybe I'll try again and spend a little more time. I'm glad you enjoyed it...Bob--'Today is the tomorrow you worried about yesteday'
 
3DTIM said:
Well , it appears we have another entry into the most rediculous
thread contest! It will surely go platinum by the end of the day. This
ranks right up there with" Photoshop price bewilderment".
Here we have a woman who is so smart and so sharp and so steady
that she can trick the Olympus IS system in to malfunctioning and
therefore has had to switch to a C-700 to compensate for it.
If only I had known before rushing to buy a 2100!
Click to expand...
I agree totally. This is a ridiculous thread. --Juli
 
3DTIM said:
3DTIM wrote:
Well , it appears we have another entry into the most rediculous
thread contest! It will surely go platinum by the end of the day. This
ranks right up there with" Photoshop price bewilderment".
Here we have a woman who is so smart and so sharp and so steady
that she can trick the Olympus IS system in to malfunctioning and
therefore has had to switch to a C-700 to compensate for it.
If only I had known before rushing to buy a 2100!

LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL!
Click to expand...
I agree, Ridiculous. I always tell people not to use the IS an excuse not to hold steady and use sloppy technique but rather to always practice steady shooting technique with or without IS.

I would think that most people who regularly use the 2100 with IS would agree with that. I can say that some of my shots that I've taken as slow as 1/2 second shutter speed I never could have got even close as sharp without IS. Anyhow, I couldn't be happier with IS. If any thing, it's taught be to use a better, steadier technique because it lets me shoot alot slower as a result...Bob --'Today is the tomorrow you worried about yesteday'
 
kbelloise42680 said:
kbelloise42680 said:
You meen you have this star effect natually with the lens without
using any star filter? wow, i have to try this..i did not know the
Olympus lens had this, although i noticed some of this effect on
big lamp in my night shots..they are smaller but i was not
pointing so directly as the lights.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
The more you stop the lens down, the more pronounced the star effect will be. Also, the closer the lights, the stronger the effect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top