What a difference a day makes!....

I dont know what there seeing but I see plenty of detail and sharpness. Wonderful shot you took.

Pictures straight out of the camera at full size often look fuzzy.
http://www.pbase.com/isabel95/image/78192108
Isabel
--

'Twelve significant photographs in any one year is a significant crop' Ansel Adams
http://www.pbase.com/isabel95
http://www.pbase.com/digipets (not only for pet digital photography!)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digicamvideo/

Initially I was a little disappointed because I set the camera at minus sharpness and wasn't using a low ISO.

Now that I'm using ISO 80 and 100 and Normal sharpening in the camera, I am indeed impressed, and especially love the long reach and moveable lcd for making "fake macros"! My aging knees appreciate my not having to get down on them to get a good flower shot.

Isabel
--

'Twelve significant photographs in any one year is a significant crop' Ansel Adams
http://www.pbase.com/isabel95
http://www.pbase.com/digipets (not only for pet digital photography!)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digicamvideo/

OK, like Kisecker mentioned, my earlier comments don't have anything to do with the composition, I simply gave feedback on the image's general quality, which is why the OP made this thread. Sorry to Digitalmaven if my first reply here was too blunt but how should I have worded it then? I originally considered expanding on my comments in the following way:

On the plus side, the camera sure is packed with features, and the output from the H9 (and assuming same deal with the H7) may not necessarily be bad for some people, but it would really depend on what their purpose in owning the camera is and how big they intend to print... unfortunately I doubt you'll be able to make a medium-sized print without the defects being obvious, even compared to lesser cams (yes, really). Careful post-processing will improve the image but let's be honest, do you actually evaluate a camera's IQ based on the post-processed image and do you really think the H9 was made for the pp crowd who venture beyond those one-click image enhancement programs?

Now there's discussion about a firmware fix... odds are against that happening (or if it does, will IQ really improve just because Sony will implement the 'fine' setting? And I'll sure be pi$$ed since they've merrily ignored the R1 flaws up til now -- a camera that cost 2x-3x as much as the H)... the kicker is that after just 2 weeks or less of the H9 being on the market, some prefer to pray for a firmware fix rather than doing the easy & obvious: 1) if you haven't bought yet, buy a better competing camera, or 2) take the thing back for a refund since this is a faulty model. Simple really, isn't it?

I do own a Sony cam, actually still technically own a P-series too that a friend now uses all the time, but man, it doesn't mean I'm obligated to Sony's bottom line by doing something as silly as strictly buying one of their products & discovering that it's a dud, but keeping it regardless, all the while dreaming of a firmware cure! Take it back, exchange it for another super-zoom model that delivers the goods! IOW really send Sony a message to do better next time instead of assuming that the typical p&s buyer is a dolt

This is why I think the title of this post (and a few others) is misleading... claiming that bumping up sharpening in the camera makes a world of difference. It doesn't at all, and I felt compelled to offer a more realistic POV. But, everyone's free to believe whomever they want.
--
Martin ( http://www.jpgmag.com/people/mschf )
Gear: reverse...

and I rarely print my pictures. Prefer viewing them on the computer screen, or I expect on my HD TV.
Isabel
--

'Twelve significant photographs in any one year is a significant crop' Ansel Adams
http://www.pbase.com/isabel95
http://www.pbase.com/digipets (not only for pet digital photography!)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digicamvideo/

Gee, I didn't know there were white squirrels...never saw one. They are really neat. And you've done a nice job with these pictures.

I wish I had your enthusiasm about the H9. I am more than disappointed with the camera. Love the features - but I think it is in a word -

inconsistent. Occasionally I get a nice sharp, good detail picture - but most look good at a glance but when viewed closely have great loss of detail - do not crop well and do not take pp well. When sharpened the background can look like the frosted glass in a gas station bathroom. I knew it from the very first picture I took. And 3,300 later...I feel even stronger about it.

Maybe I have a bad copy - but as far as image quality - IMHO - H9 doesn't hold a candle to H1, H2, & H5. Wish Sony would have made an H6 instead.

I'm beginning to feel about the H9 much like you felt about the H5 last year. Isn't that funny?

You are a good photographer and I hope you have a long and happy relationship with your H9 - mine is probably going back.

Thanks for your posts, Isabel,

• Barb

--
'He who has never seen a bluebird only half lives.'



http://barbi.smugmug.com/
http://mybirdtales.blogspot.com/

I didn't have as much trouble post processing the images as I'm having with the H9.

I don't sharpen backgrounds because they look lousy sharpened! I' selecting only my main subject for sharpening.

This is not a low light camera UNLESS you can get a decent exposure with areas that don't have to be significantly lightened. The noise is terrible even at ISO 200, requiring heavy noisy reduction, which of course, removes detail.

I do love the long zoom and stabilization. The stabilization in the H9 works better than that of the H5.

I hope I have a good relationship with the H9 because I dont' want to return yet another Sony to B & H.

It'll be interesting to see if Alan comes up with magic settings for it that give us as good results as those that came out of previous H's that for one reason or another made them unsatisfactory for my needs.

I do a lot of bird and animal photography that require long zooms and the H9 will probably be my camera of choice rather than my Canon 20D or XT (which weighs 4 lbs. with my 300mm lens...and still isn't long enough for a lot of bird shots...the H9 can bring me closer. The quality won't be the same, but it'll be more comfortable shooting.

Isabel

Barbyte said:

Gee, I didn't know there were white squirrels...never saw one. They
are really neat. And you've done a nice job with these pictures.

I wish I had your enthusiasm about the H9. I am more than
disappointed with the camera. Love the features - but I think it is
in a word -
inconsistent. Occasionally I get a nice sharp, good detail picture

• but most look good at a glance but when viewed closely have great

loss of detail - do not crop well and do not take pp well. When
sharpened the background can look like the frosted glass in a gas
station bathroom. I knew it from the very first picture I took. And
3,300 later...I feel even stronger about it.
Maybe I have a bad copy - but as far as image quality - IMHO - H9
doesn't hold a candle to H1, H2, & H5. Wish Sony would have made an
H6 instead.

I'm beginning to feel about the H9 much like you felt about the H5
last year. Isn't that funny?

You are a good photographer and I hope you have a long and happy
relationship with your H9 - mine is probably going back.

Thanks for your posts, Isabel,

• Barb

--
'He who has never seen a bluebird only half lives.'



http://barbi.smugmug.com/
http://mybirdtales.blogspot.com/

Click to expand...

--

'Twelve significant photographs in any one year is a significant crop' Ansel Adams
http://www.pbase.com/isabel95
http://www.pbase.com/digipets (not only for pet digital photography!)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digicamvideo/