D70s sharpness

Here is a sample from my D70s. It is taken with the SB400 bounced off the ceiling through my Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 XR Di lens. A mode, f/4, 1/60", sharpening, tone and saturation auto, color mode II, out of camera jpeg with no pp at all. I notice that it is really soft, and this is duplicated in a lot of my photos, but not all. See the hairs on the cat's head for example, al a mush and no clear details. With my previous cam, D50, this type of pic would have come out way sharper than this.



Any ideas why the lack of sharpness? Could you please comment? What am I doing wrong? Should I set the sharpness differently? Is it motion blur? Or do I have to start shooting everything in raw and just take the time to pp? I hope there is nothing wrong with my system.

Here, I found a second one with the same issue, the only difference is A f/2.8. Narrower DOF, but even in the area of maximum sharpness there is much blurr.



For reference, here is one with my old D50 with an SB600 bounced off the ceiling through a Nikon 28-105 f/3.5-45 G, A mode f/5.6 1/60" all processing settings auto, also in-camera jpeg.



Why do the hairs on the cat's body look so much sharper?
Thank you so much for your input.

Oh, yes, credits: The cat in the pics is Anais the man-eating beast. Also featured is my wife Ondina

I sharpen every photo that I take with my D70s. You can adjust the sharpness in the camera's menu. But I just leave it at the factory default and take care of sharpness during post processing.
--



I got a Nikon camera, I love to take a photograph!!

I'm only going to say that last photo is a killer!
--

http://stagner.smugmug.com/

There are several factors to consider here. The first two pictures have a lot less light and contrast than the third one. Lack of contrast and low light makes it hard to judge sharpness. The opposite is true: the cat's whiskers look quite sharp because they are brighter and have more contrast with the background.

Also, the aperture (f/4) and the distance to the subject will give you a shallow DOF, so not everything will be in focus. The third picture was taken at f/5.6, a little better for DOF. It looks like there was much more contribution from the flash in that one. Perhaps you were using B-TTL (fill flash) in the first two, and straight TTL in the third one?

--
Regards,

Rafael
http://www.pbase.com/aviles
-----------------------------------------

“The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes but in having new eyes.” M. Proust

I think it is a problem with the photos being underexposed and the post processing technique. You may want to bring up the levels or bump up the exposure and also increase the contrast using curves. That will bring out the sharpness in the cat's fur. Also apply some USM. By the way I think the photo is sharp. Look at the eyes and the whiskers.

Laslo
--
lv1
http://laslo.smugmug.com

looks like your flash did not fire or underpowered.

Animal fur eats up light. You need direct flash + the bouce. D70 under exposes to save highlights. Jack up your exposure untill the histogram is on the right side. Looks 2 me your pix are underexposed. Everything else on forum looks OK. As was mentioned cats wiskers are sharp but they are so much lighter than everything else in photo.
--
deziner-d

I think what you're really seeing here is lack of contrast. In the area of the cat where contrast is greater the pic aapears to be sharper as it should. A sharp photo has everything to do with contrast, the difference perceived between two edges is what we really digest as a sharp photo. Think of USM, whether it be in film and two negs, one softer than the other, sandwiched together to create a more defined edge and the perception of a sharpeer photo. Had the cat been exposed properly, 1/2 - 1 full stop more you would see these edges more clearly, even in the grey haired areas and this post would be for not.
--
John

Visit my gallery below

http://www.betterphoto.com/gallery/gallery.asp?memberID=100286

Thank you guys. Reading your replies I realize how much I have to learn. I appreciate your imparting your knowledge.

Thanks!

Is your Tamron as sharp as your Nikkor?

I love my D70s.. more than the D200 I had..

However there is not a single pic than I don't pp for sharpness..

Out of the camera pics just have to have some amount of USM to be sharper..

btw your pic with the girl and the cat is GREAT !

here's one of mine :



and one more :



Lionel P

After I have uploaded a new curve, I don't have sharpness/contrast issues on jpeg right out of the camera.

Lionel P: Are the two examples without PP ?
--
Peter (Wigen) DK
D70s - 18-70 ED (kit lens) - SB600
And lot's of tricks from this forum.

Thanks for the reply. Yes, there is no pp at all on these. What curve are you using and how did you upload it?

good question. I never formally tested the Nikkor and I don't have it anymore. I bought this Tamron as people raved about the quality. It's very hard to compare, it's apples to oranges with a new camera. I even had this lens in tamron service immediately after purchase, and they did a full check-up and replaced the mount, re-calibrated it etc., I was very impressed with their doing this under warranty with no questions asked. How do you suggest I test it for sharpness further?

Your picture is sharp.
There is no motion blur that I can appreciate.
The camera's auto sharpening is modest.

You can add some Unsharp mask (USM), I prefer to use this rather than the camer's own sharpening, it would give you more control, I'm quite sure you will be happy with the result.

Regards
-Nabeel.

very slight pp.. just a bit of USM

Lionel P

I don't think the exposures are comparable. The first two are underexposed and very low contrast. The third has much more flash light on the subject. Also, the first two are larger apetures, maybe contributing to some softness. Are the shots all handheld? I can't say from one shot to the next if my handheld shots will be perfect.

Personally, I've found bounced flash will not usually have the sharpness of a direct flash shot, and this effect if more prounounced the higher the bounce surface is from the flash. Of course it will look more pleasing and natural, though. Bouncing is somewhat trial and error, and it may help to use a directional diffuser, like a piece of flexible white foam on the flash. Costs a couple bucks from a hobby or craft store unlike the diffuser domes.

D50, kit lens, sb-28 bounce

GregF said:

Personally, I've found bounced flash will not usually have the
sharpness of a direct flash shot, and this effect if more
prounounced the higher the bounce surface is from the flash.

Click to expand...

Well that's sharp because you've added sharpness to the file, hence the whiskers look all jaggie. As for the OP, there is nothing wrong with the sharpness of your photos. They're not well exposed, but sharpness is not relevant to what makes a great photo.