A breakthrough in K-3 images in shade ......

Started Jan 14, 2014 | Discussions thread
mistermejia Veteran Member • Posts: 3,340
Re: EMEM...

emem wrote:

mistermejia wrote:

emem wrote:

mistermejia wrote:

emem wrote:

mistermejia wrote:

emem wrote:

Qwntm wrote:

...Wait a minute! Am i understanding this correctly? Please correct me if i am wrong, but is Qwntm suggesting to you to turn NR OFF, and you are saying that no you don't want to, or you haven't turned NR to OFF and you preffer to set NR to AUTO???

No, you are obviously not understanding correctly. I am saying that I DO NOT THINK THAT NR IS CAUSING OR HAS CONTRIBUTED IN ANY MEANINGFUL WAY TO MY PROBLEM. However at the moment it is just a thought. The image I took here had NR set to Auto - something Qwntm has said is causing blurred images. I did it intentionally to show it has no effect on the image.

LOTS of people have suggested to you already to turn NR to OFF. emem, have you even tried shooting your K3 with NR OFF at all??

Of course I have - I might be stupid but I'm not an idiot!!

From what i understand, NR set to auto DOES degrade your photo's sharpness and detail dramatically. What exactly is going on here sir?

And how did you come by this understanding? Is it from your own tests and trials or have you been reading what Qwntm wrote?

Also may i ask what lenses or lens, you have been using with all these samples you have posted?

I have been using the DA18-135 and DA*60-250.

Now can I ask you a question? Have you read the opening post of mine? It explains quite clearly what my issue was. Nothing, nil, nada, zilch to do with NR settings. I still have much testing and measuring to do, but I'm confident I now have the solution to MY problem (and I suspect a few others had similar problems). I believe the NR "solution" so widely publicised by Ed (Qwntm) is, in fact, a furphy. My problems, I'm almost certain, stem from clipping highlights because of my Custom Image settings, focusing issues, possibly connected to shooting in shade/low light, and excessive noise as a by-product of the other issues.

First: I don't have the camera, so no way to do my own tests. There are explanations and people in youtube videos have confirmed that NR AUTO is very very "aggressive". Up to what ISO, i don't know. Do i believe that? Based on what i have seen i would say yes.

Second: That lens you are using is a kit lens, sir. What do you expect that is going to do on a 24MP sensor?? That lens is for people that only want an "all in one" lens, a "convinient" lens, NOT high performance.

If you want sharp detailed photos you are going to have to get a Sigma 17-50. Trust me, i know what i am telling you. What ever else you do i think is a waste of time. I am telling you this based on experience

There is nothing else to be said here from me. Good bye, good luck, and enjoy your camera

Thank you. I tried a Sigma 17-50 a while back but wasn't particularly impressed. I own a Tamron 17-50 2.8 for my Nikon set up - still not greatly impressed. The 18-135 "kit lens" as you call it produces sharp images on my K-3. I'm aware that it's not the greatest lens made but the focal range is hard to beat and the utter convenience makes it hard to take off the camera.

While my credibility with the issues I've been having may be poor, I'm not a complete novice. I've tried many lens/camera combinations over the years and know the difference between good, bad and indifferent lenses. But the standard of this particular lens has little, if anything, to do with my issues here. In fact, it's perfectly capable of producing extremely pleasing and sharp images on the K-3.

Some shots from the "kit lens 18-135" - look at them at 100% to see the true res (of these resized versions - the originals are pin sharp):-

Nice photos, they are not bad, but at 135mm the horse could be sharper with more detail. My 6MP S5 can give me sharper images of that horse. The baby is not that sharp either. I have used the nikon 18-200 also, very good lens indeed, but it is a "convinience" lens like i said.

The original image of the horse was so sharp I could clearly see the flies on its face (wings legs heads quite distinct) before I cloned them out. You're always welcome to your own opinion, but I am also entitled to not believe you - unless you want to put up some proof.

When you said I "had" the Sigma a while back, does this mean you sold it before getting the K3? It is possible you had a bad copy. That's not uncommon.

I didn't say "I had", I said "I tried" a Sigma lens.

I am going to tell you a secret: I thought my nikon 17-55 2.8 was sharp. This pass weekend my dad lend me his sigma 17-50 and i tried on my S5 PRO. I said to myself "there won't be a difference". I am embarrassed to say that his sigma IS sharper and my photos did come out sharper. My nikon is now for sale

The copy you have may be particularly good - "sample variation" as they say. All mass produced items fall within a range in their specs and performance. If you're lucky enough to get one at the top of the spec sheet you're lucky indeed. But it doesn't always follow that if I bought a similar lens it would be as stellar.

Like i said, your photos don't look bad, but the day i buy this camera, or any other 24MP body i will put the sigma on it. Otherwise to me it would be pointless to buy such cameras.

Is like putting 87 octane gas in a ferrari

I see.  I am not trying to insult you or anything, just encouraging you to put the best possible glass on it.  I do believe you about the sharpness of your photos.  Is all good.

Take care and keep enjoying your camera

 mistermejia's gear list:mistermejia's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro Fujifilm X-E1 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Tamron SP AF 70-200mm F/2.8 Di LD (IF) MACRO Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R +6 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow