Reading mode: Light Dark

10D focus issue real

Go to last post
Being a peon at photography I feel qualified to comment how opinions can be affected. Some people don't realize how their comments can help/hurt others. I'm so tired of people responding "dude, it's an internet forum .. what do you expect?".

I guess I expect intelligent people to act intelligently. This is NOT some forum populated by teens (well, maybe some). It's a very sophisticated crowd and you can expect a certain amount of common sense out of such people.

While you may be a guru of photography you should be smart enough to remember what it was like when you weren't. If you can buy the 2 or 3 dslr whenever they come out, you should be smart enough to realize that some of us can't and this is a huge purchase.

I think gregn's quote below states what I've been trying to for a while. This isn't really aimed at the folks who rage war over the focus issues, it's more aimed at the folks who respond "well, buy one and see which you like better" when someone asks for opinions.

Sorry to use the soapbox.

I guess some of us just want to talk it out with people here before we spend a ton of money, it's not like you can discuss it with other people who know nothing of DSL's let alone digital. You can get a lot of feed back here, and most of the time it's on a polite level. I like to think we can dissagree but still give our points. I mean any pro will admit there are pro's and con's to both Nikon and Canon.

greg n wrote:
 
The image isn't very sharp. It was downsized at first so it was hard to tell exactly, but the 1:1 reveals its not very sharp at all. John's later addition that it was shot a 200mm would certainly explain why the 1:1 crop isn't sharp, and its a very good reason, but then not a good sharpness-sample.

Note the samples below are simply food for thought for anyone interested in honest comparisions (I am), not a sales pitch or a reflection of overall quality in any way.

I think pupils/eyelashes are generally a good test, and the ones from the 1:1 below certainly don't match this, which I think is a good example of sharpness. From experience with the camera, I'd guess that USM would only screw up an image like this and you are probably seeing a result that has not been USM'd at all...

(My first shot with the camera and a $90 lens follows, I find highly typical in retrospect... just to show the level of sharpness a complete novice can achieve with no training and zero experience with the camera)




Jim Radcliffe said:
In my original post I told you it was not an attack on you and the
first thing you respond with is a condescending subject line. Good
for you. Feel better now?

I don't care whether you think the image is sharp or the magazine
loved it and paid you a million dollars for the job. None of that
has anything to do with my question.. My question was to the forum
members.. not you or the magazine.

I have clients that don't know a good picture from a bad one.. if
it's better than something they might take themselves many of them
love it.. some of them have even selected rejects with obvious
flaws in the past... clients want what they want. The fact that a
client likes something is not certification that they are not out
of their minds or have used good judgement in their choice.

I didn't ask you what YOU thought of the image.. the question was
to the rest of the forum. It was not a silly question but a
reasonable one. It was not an attack on you. I don't know you nor
do I have any reason to pick on you or attack you... I will not
insult you. I will not argue with you. I am not interested in
YOUR opinion of the image because you obviously thought it was a
prime example to display.. you even said so in one of your posts.

I did not find the image to be particularly sharp but it has been
reduced and I am looking at it at 72dpi.. but compared to other
images posted here your image is not that sharp.

I did find your image to be attractive and to have good composure.
I never said it was a bad image. On the contrary, it is a good
photo, just not as sharp as I thought it should or could be...
totally subjective and we, even you, are allowed to be subjective
in our opinions.

If you post images on this forum you will get pro and con responses
to what you post. You posted your images as proof of how sharp and
in focus images from your 10D are. I have a 10D myself.. it
produces amazing pictures. There is not argument on that point.

Not everyone in this forum is out to pick a fight, John. Get a
thicker skin and learn to not only read but comprehend what is
being asked. This is not about you, it's about the image. Nothing
more.. you want to take it personally, that's your choice but it
was not my purpose for asking the question. I'm not the one
requiring a reality check here.

Jim
John Fisher said:
Ah, I'm maybe fourty feet away with a zoom lens set at 200 mm and I
can count the girl's eyelashes. I think most people can do the
math. I know the magazine I shot it for was happy.



This has gotten just plain silly.

Fish
--
John Fisher
South Beach, Miami
http://www.johnfisher.com/models.htm
(305) 534-9322
Click to expand...
--
Jim Radcliffe
http://www.image36.com
The ability to 'see' the shot is more important than the gear you
use to take the shot.
Click to expand...
 
I'm crying. Why not Canon invented Foveon???

;)
sg10 said:
Note the samples below are simply food for thought for anyone
interested in honest comparisions (I am), not a sales pitch or a
reflection of overall quality in any way.

I think pupils/eyelashes are generally a good test, and the ones
from the 1:1 below certainly don't match this, which I think is a
good example of sharpness. From experience with the camera, I'd
guess that USM would only screw up an image like this and you are
probably seeing a result that has not been USM'd at all...

(My first shot with the camera and a $90 lens follows, I find
highly typical in retrospect... just to show the level of sharpness
a complete novice can achieve with no training and zero experience
with the camera)




Jim Radcliffe said:
In my original post I told you it was not an attack on you and the
first thing you respond with is a condescending subject line. Good
for you. Feel better now?

I don't care whether you think the image is sharp or the magazine
loved it and paid you a million dollars for the job. None of that
has anything to do with my question.. My question was to the forum
members.. not you or the magazine.

I have clients that don't know a good picture from a bad one.. if
it's better than something they might take themselves many of them
love it.. some of them have even selected rejects with obvious
flaws in the past... clients want what they want. The fact that a
client likes something is not certification that they are not out
of their minds or have used good judgement in their choice.

I didn't ask you what YOU thought of the image.. the question was
to the rest of the forum. It was not a silly question but a
reasonable one. It was not an attack on you. I don't know you nor
do I have any reason to pick on you or attack you... I will not
insult you. I will not argue with you. I am not interested in
YOUR opinion of the image because you obviously thought it was a
prime example to display.. you even said so in one of your posts.

I did not find the image to be particularly sharp but it has been
reduced and I am looking at it at 72dpi.. but compared to other
images posted here your image is not that sharp.

I did find your image to be attractive and to have good composure.
I never said it was a bad image. On the contrary, it is a good
photo, just not as sharp as I thought it should or could be...
totally subjective and we, even you, are allowed to be subjective
in our opinions.

If you post images on this forum you will get pro and con responses
to what you post. You posted your images as proof of how sharp and
in focus images from your 10D are. I have a 10D myself.. it
produces amazing pictures. There is not argument on that point.

Not everyone in this forum is out to pick a fight, John. Get a
thicker skin and learn to not only read but comprehend what is
being asked. This is not about you, it's about the image. Nothing
more.. you want to take it personally, that's your choice but it
was not my purpose for asking the question. I'm not the one
requiring a reality check here.

Jim
John Fisher said:
Ah, I'm maybe fourty feet away with a zoom lens set at 200 mm and I
can count the girl's eyelashes. I think most people can do the
math. I know the magazine I shot it for was happy.



This has gotten just plain silly.

Fish
--
John Fisher
South Beach, Miami
http://www.johnfisher.com/models.htm
(305) 534-9322
Click to expand...
--
Jim Radcliffe
http://www.image36.com
The ability to 'see' the shot is more important than the gear you
use to take the shot.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
Mishkin™
Theoretical Measurbator
 
I went to four camera stores in Toronto, mine is not opened on Sunday. In anycase while my wife shopped in the mall I went to different camera stores to try D100 and 10D cameras. At one store they had a 10D demo. I tried it out on my (scientific blue comb test) and it focused instantly, and perfect. I then found another store that let me demo both cameras on my (scientific blue comb test) and again the 10D focus tack sharp instantly. Very inpressive. I do believe the two 10D's I and the sales rep tried on Saturday had something wrong or missaligned with there AF. In the compare pictures I took today, I noticed both cameras lost a little softness to the high right end of a green pen and the D100 also lost some softness or blurring to the lower keys in the bottom right.

It appears to me that the Canon took a better picture. I do not have online picture availability, but I can email anyone the four pictures if they want. One with flash one with out. anyways now this post is done and I am back to either getting the 10D or hoping the D2H is not more than 3500 and can actually be purchased before November. Thank you to all who gave constructive comments.
Ben Strasser said:
greg n said:
HZA said:
Somebody probably has alread requested this greg, (long message
thread), but since you used your compact flash to do the comb test,
can you post the results from the Nikon D100/Canon 10D that caused
you such headaches?

-hza

----------------
http://hza.pgbco.com
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
What's the rumored price of the D2H?

It'd be curious to go back to the original store and try the "comb test" again, and see if the cameras are bad, or if the salesman simply didn't know to put it in one-shot single-AF point mode.
greg n said:
I went to four camera stores in Toronto, mine is not opened on
Sunday. In anycase while my wife shopped in the mall I went to
different camera stores to try D100 and 10D cameras. At one store
they had a 10D demo. I tried it out on my (scientific blue comb
test) and it focused instantly, and perfect. I then found another
store that let me demo both cameras on my (scientific blue comb
test) and again the 10D focus tack sharp instantly. Very
inpressive. I do believe the two 10D's I and the sales rep tried on
Saturday had something wrong or missaligned with there AF. In the
compare pictures I took today, I noticed both cameras lost a little
softness to the high right end of a green pen and the D100 also
lost some softness or blurring to the lower keys in the bottom
right.

It appears to me that the Canon took a better picture. I do not
have online picture availability, but I can email anyone the four
pictures if they want. One with flash one with out. anyways now
this post is done and I am back to either getting the 10D or hoping
the D2H is not more than 3500 and can actually be purchased before
November. Thank you to all who gave constructive comments.
Click to expand...
--
The Lowest Paid Concert Photographer Around
http://www.neonlightsimaging.com/artshow/final.htm
Photography -- just another word for compromise

'Since we can't keep crime in check, why don't we legalize it and tax it out of business?' -- Will Rogers
 
My sales rep is talking to a Nikon rep next week, but he thinks Phil is pretty close with 3500 list and it will most likely stay that way for a while till demand dies down. I am thinking those cameras may have been sent back cause two sales guys tried to get it to focus.

by the way, you can e-mail for compare pics of (scientific blue comb test) at;

[email protected]
DavidP said:
It'd be curious to go back to the original store and try the "comb
test" again, and see if the cameras are bad, or if the salesman
simply didn't know to put it in one-shot single-AF point mode.
greg n said:
I went to four camera stores in Toronto, mine is not opened on
Sunday. In anycase while my wife shopped in the mall I went to
different camera stores to try D100 and 10D cameras. At one store
they had a 10D demo. I tried it out on my (scientific blue comb
test) and it focused instantly, and perfect. I then found another
store that let me demo both cameras on my (scientific blue comb
test) and again the 10D focus tack sharp instantly. Very
inpressive. I do believe the two 10D's I and the sales rep tried on
Saturday had something wrong or missaligned with there AF. In the
compare pictures I took today, I noticed both cameras lost a little
softness to the high right end of a green pen and the D100 also
lost some softness or blurring to the lower keys in the bottom
right.

It appears to me that the Canon took a better picture. I do not
have online picture availability, but I can email anyone the four
pictures if they want. One with flash one with out. anyways now
this post is done and I am back to either getting the 10D or hoping
the D2H is not more than 3500 and can actually be purchased before
November. Thank you to all who gave constructive comments.
Click to expand...
--
The Lowest Paid Concert Photographer Around
http://www.neonlightsimaging.com/artshow/final.htm
Photography -- just another word for compromise

'Since we can't keep crime in check, why don't we legalize it and
tax it out of business?' -- Will Rogers
Click to expand...
 
Sounds like Nikon will try to be competitive in price with the 1D, then. Makes sense. I'd want to wait to see what Canon brings out to replace the 1D, and what price they bring it in at. Nikon might have to lower its price fairly early (hope, hope).

I don't need to see the pictures.

But when the D2H comes out, I'd love to get one and the 80-200/2.8 with the IS equivalent to test against my 1D and 70-200/2.8 IS in a concert situation. Maybe one of the review sites would let me do a "real world show-down". Hehe. The only real issue would be me getting used to the D2H and how to use it. I've only shot Canon (unless you count a Minolta SRT-101). It'd be hard to get a truly unbiased opinion that way, I guess.
greg n said:
My sales rep is talking to a Nikon rep next week, but he thinks
Phil is pretty close with 3500 list and it will most likely stay
that way for a while till demand dies down. I am thinking those
cameras may have been sent back cause two sales guys tried to get
it to focus.

by the way, you can e-mail for compare pics of (scientific blue
comb test) at;

[email protected]
Click to expand...
--
The Lowest Paid Concert Photographer Around
http://www.neonlightsimaging.com/artshow/final.htm
Photography -- just another word for compromise

'Since we can't keep crime in check, why don't we legalize it and tax it out of business?' -- Will Rogers
 
greg n said:
by the way, you can e-mail for compare pics of (scientific blue
comb test) at;

[email protected]
DavidP said:
It'd be curious to go back to the original store and try the "comb
test" again, and see if the cameras are bad, or if the salesman
simply didn't know to put it in one-shot single-AF point mode.
greg n said:
I went to four camera stores in Toronto, mine is not opened on
Sunday. In anycase while my wife shopped in the mall I went to
different camera stores to try D100 and 10D cameras. At one store
they had a 10D demo. I tried it out on my (scientific blue comb
test) and it focused instantly, and perfect. I then found another
store that let me demo both cameras on my (scientific blue comb
test) and again the 10D focus tack sharp instantly. Very
inpressive. I do believe the two 10D's I and the sales rep tried on
Saturday had something wrong or missaligned with there AF. In the
compare pictures I took today, I noticed both cameras lost a little
softness to the high right end of a green pen and the D100 also
lost some softness or blurring to the lower keys in the bottom
right.

It appears to me that the Canon took a better picture. I do not
have online picture availability, but I can email anyone the four
pictures if they want. One with flash one with out. anyways now
this post is done and I am back to either getting the 10D or hoping
the D2H is not more than 3500 and can actually be purchased before
November. Thank you to all who gave constructive comments.
Click to expand...
--
The Lowest Paid Concert Photographer Around
http://www.neonlightsimaging.com/artshow/final.htm
Photography -- just another word for compromise

'Since we can't keep crime in check, why don't we legalize it and
tax it out of business?' -- Will Rogers
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
As you've probably noticed from your posts here and on the Nikon forum, even the experts can disagree,and quite heatedly , too!
I,and I suspect you,are not experts.

So why not play it simple? As you can see fromyour own tests, results vary from camera to camera and the precise parameters of the trests are very important.

Just take it that some people have had hassles with the 10d fromfocussing, some from their own errors and some from faulty cameras,and most seem pretty happy.

Work out your budget - I saw you were enquiring about the 2Dh, which is a very different camera at a very different price point, and is in competition with the 1D, an awsome camera according to most who have used it.
If you can afford either of those, go for it.
If you can't, shoose whichever feels best to you from the 10D or D100.
i suspect that your first love is the D100- so go for it!
It's a fine camera. They all have their upsides and their downsides.

Just check out what lenses you intend getting,as the price of the Nikon super-telephotos are absurd.
Otherwise, get your Nikon!
And HAVE FUN!
--
Regards,
DaveMart
Please see profile for equipment
 
greg n said:
johnd1 said:
greg n said:
I had my D100 and gear stolen and I have been bouncing back and
forth between the D100 and the 10D, not to mention thinking about
the D2H. I have been reading all the forum info on the 10D and all
the reviews. Every online review has rated the 10D as the better
buy and better camera. So I read all the foums, there was a lot in
the canon forum about problems with focusing, but then a lot of
people saying people didn't know how to use their camera and it was
just a few cameras. I had two well known posters who have both
cameras e-mail me their take, both suggested the Af focusing and
low light abilities of the D100 over the less noise better picture
10d. Well I was still considering the 10D cause all the online
reviews were so pro for it. I took a flash card into the big camera
store in my area, along with some objects to photograph for
comparing the two. One object i took was a blue plastic comb, I
wanted to see just how much better these out of camera 10D pictures
were. We set the cameras to Jpeg fine and auto and the same or as
close to lenses, and everything as equal as possible. Took some
pics with the nikon then put the card in the 10D and took some
pics. I noticed the comb would not focus clearly like the D100 just
did, the teeth just sort of blurred or blended together. The sales
rep looked and noticed the same problem, he said we were using
cheaper lenses so that could be the trouble. He put on the 16-35, a
good lens, and still the same focus trouble. So then he got another
10D and we tried it, still the same thing. The picture was
basically clear but the focus was a little off and very noticeable
difference on the comb teeth from the Nikon. I could tell the sales
person was getting a little frustrated so he said I should just get
the D100 again. So out of two 10D's at this camera store both had
focus trouble. I think that is pretty high numbers. Listening to
some of the people on the Canon forum chastising members who are
concerned about their 10D focus for asking or complaining, well
maybe you should take another look. cause there does seem to be a
problem. If you got a good 10D then good for you, but don't diss
those that didn't. It would seem that Canon, and I am sure Nikon as
well, makes sure they send a good focusing 10d to the reviewers,
but does not take the same care with the ones they sell to the
general public. I know you can send the camera and lens into Nikon
for focus alighnment, but i do not think that is acceptable for a
camera of this value. I am not a troll, I am just a consumer who
wants a good digital DSL. I think it is great that Canon came out
with the better, cheaper, stronger 10D, but I think they should
have been more careful to get it right. Right now I am neither a
Nikon owner or a Canon DSL owner, just a concerned potential
consumer.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
I don't believe you were 40 feet away from either of your subjects in the samples you posted. We all know that sharpness is also relative to distance, focal length, etc.. there's only so much resolving power when you are 40 feet away from your subject as opposed to being 4 feet away from you subject.. this is also apples and oranges comparison.

I hear what you're saying but I don't believe it is quite fair to compare your samples to his because the conditions and equipment are different.

I do however, appreicate your input and your opinion.

Jim
sg10 said:
Note the samples below are simply food for thought for anyone
interested in honest comparisions (I am), not a sales pitch or a
reflection of overall quality in any way.

I think pupils/eyelashes are generally a good test, and the ones
from the 1:1 below certainly don't match this, which I think is a
good example of sharpness. From experience with the camera, I'd
guess that USM would only screw up an image like this and you are
probably seeing a result that has not been USM'd at all...

(My first shot with the camera and a $90 lens follows, I find
highly typical in retrospect... just to show the level of sharpness
a complete novice can achieve with no training and zero experience
with the camera)




Jim Radcliffe said:
In my original post I told you it was not an attack on you and the
first thing you respond with is a condescending subject line. Good
for you. Feel better now?

I don't care whether you think the image is sharp or the magazine
loved it and paid you a million dollars for the job. None of that
has anything to do with my question.. My question was to the forum
members.. not you or the magazine.

I have clients that don't know a good picture from a bad one.. if
it's better than something they might take themselves many of them
love it.. some of them have even selected rejects with obvious
flaws in the past... clients want what they want. The fact that a
client likes something is not certification that they are not out
of their minds or have used good judgement in their choice.

I didn't ask you what YOU thought of the image.. the question was
to the rest of the forum. It was not a silly question but a
reasonable one. It was not an attack on you. I don't know you nor
do I have any reason to pick on you or attack you... I will not
insult you. I will not argue with you. I am not interested in
YOUR opinion of the image because you obviously thought it was a
prime example to display.. you even said so in one of your posts.

I did not find the image to be particularly sharp but it has been
reduced and I am looking at it at 72dpi.. but compared to other
images posted here your image is not that sharp.

I did find your image to be attractive and to have good composure.
I never said it was a bad image. On the contrary, it is a good
photo, just not as sharp as I thought it should or could be...
totally subjective and we, even you, are allowed to be subjective
in our opinions.

If you post images on this forum you will get pro and con responses
to what you post. You posted your images as proof of how sharp and
in focus images from your 10D are. I have a 10D myself.. it
produces amazing pictures. There is not argument on that point.

Not everyone in this forum is out to pick a fight, John. Get a
thicker skin and learn to not only read but comprehend what is
being asked. This is not about you, it's about the image. Nothing
more.. you want to take it personally, that's your choice but it
was not my purpose for asking the question. I'm not the one
requiring a reality check here.

Jim
John Fisher said:
Ah, I'm maybe fourty feet away with a zoom lens set at 200 mm and I
can count the girl's eyelashes. I think most people can do the
math. I know the magazine I shot it for was happy.



This has gotten just plain silly.

Fish
--
John Fisher
South Beach, Miami
http://www.johnfisher.com/models.htm
(305) 534-9322
Click to expand...
--
Jim Radcliffe
http://www.image36.com
The ability to 'see' the shot is more important than the gear you
use to take the shot.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
Jim Radcliffe
http://www.image36.com

The ability to 'see' the shot is more important than the gear you use to take the shot.
 
Jim Radcliffe said:
In my original post I told you it was not an attack on you and the
first thing you respond with is a condescending subject line. Good
for you. Feel better now?

I don't care whether you think the image is sharp or the magazine
loved it and paid you a million dollars for the job. None of that
has anything to do with my question.. My question was to the forum
members.. not you or the magazine.

I have clients that don't know a good picture from a bad one.. if
it's better than something they might take themselves many of them
love it.. some of them have even selected rejects with obvious
flaws in the past... clients want what they want. The fact that a
client likes something is not certification that they are not out
of their minds or have used good judgement in their choice.

I didn't ask you what YOU thought of the image.. the question was
to the rest of the forum. It was not a silly question but a
reasonable one. It was not an attack on you. I don't know you nor
do I have any reason to pick on you or attack you... I will not
insult you. I will not argue with you. I am not interested in
YOUR opinion of the image because you obviously thought it was a
prime example to display.. you even said so in one of your posts.

I did not find the image to be particularly sharp but it has been
reduced and I am looking at it at 72dpi.. but compared to other
images posted here your image is not that sharp.

I did find your image to be attractive and to have good composure.
I never said it was a bad image. On the contrary, it is a good
photo, just not as sharp as I thought it should or could be...
totally subjective and we, even you, are allowed to be subjective
in our opinions.

If you post images on this forum you will get pro and con responses
to what you post. You posted your images as proof of how sharp and
in focus images from your 10D are. I have a 10D myself.. it
produces amazing pictures. There is not argument on that point.

Not everyone in this forum is out to pick a fight, John. Get a
thicker skin and learn to not only read but comprehend what is
being asked. This is not about you, it's about the image. Nothing
more.. you want to take it personally, that's your choice but it
was not my purpose for asking the question. I'm not the one
requiring a reality check here.

Jim
John Fisher said:
Ah, I'm maybe fourty feet away with a zoom lens set at 200 mm and I
can count the girl's eyelashes. I think most people can do the
math. I know the magazine I shot it for was happy.



This has gotten just plain silly.

Fish
--
John Fisher
South Beach, Miami
http://www.johnfisher.com/models.htm
(305) 534-9322
Click to expand...
--
Jim Radcliffe
http://www.image36.com
The ability to 'see' the shot is more important than the gear you
use to take the shot.
Click to expand...
 
I didn't get the impression that he really liked his D100 that much, at least in terms of picture quality when compared to the 10D.

I'm sure he wants a camera NOW. It's too bad his got stolen, because then he could keep what he had and just wait until Canon and Nikon have both interested their new pro bodies.
David Martin said:
As you've probably noticed from your posts here and on the Nikon
forum, even the experts can disagree,and quite heatedly , too!
I,and I suspect you,are not experts.
So why not play it simple? As you can see fromyour own tests,
results vary from camera to camera and the precise parameters of
the trests are very important.
Just take it that some people have had hassles with the 10d
fromfocussing, some from their own errors and some from faulty
cameras,and most seem pretty happy.
Work out your budget - I saw you were enquiring about the 2Dh,
which is a very different camera at a very different price point,
and is in competition with the 1D, an awsome camera according to
most who have used it.
If you can afford either of those, go for it.
If you can't, shoose whichever feels best to you from the 10D or D100.
i suspect that your first love is the D100- so go for it!
It's a fine camera. They all have their upsides and their downsides.
Just check out what lenses you intend getting,as the price of the
Nikon super-telephotos are absurd.
Otherwise, get your Nikon!
And HAVE FUN!
--
Click to expand...
--
The Lowest Paid Concert Photographer Around
http://www.neonlightsimaging.com/artshow/final.htm
Photography -- just another word for compromise

'Since we can't keep crime in check, why don't we legalize it and tax it out of business?' -- Will Rogers
 
Yes, it's only fair to compare images that were subjected to the same magnification.

Higher magnification images should always show more detail.
Jim Radcliffe said:
I don't believe you were 40 feet away from either of your subjects
in the samples you posted. We all know that sharpness is also
relative to distance, focal length, etc.. there's only so much
resolving power when you are 40 feet away from your subject as
opposed to being 4 feet away from you subject.. this is also apples
and oranges comparison.

I hear what you're saying but I don't believe it is quite fair to
compare your samples to his because the conditions and equipment
are different.

I do however, appreicate your input and your opinion.
Click to expand...
--
The Lowest Paid Concert Photographer Around
http://www.neonlightsimaging.com/artshow/final.htm
Photography -- just another word for compromise

'Since we can't keep crime in check, why don't we legalize it and tax it out of business?' -- Will Rogers
 
You wouldn't really want it any sharper, that's correct.

Which is why it isn't the best shot in the world for showing off (or evaluating) sharpness.

--
The Lowest Paid Concert Photographer Around
http://www.neonlightsimaging.com/artshow/final.htm
Photography -- just another word for compromise

'Since we can't keep crime in check, why don't we legalize it and tax it out of business?' -- Will Rogers
 
I did not think that particular picture was sharp in my opinion. The picture was posted as an example of how sharp the 10D can be. My own experience with the 10D and other images posted here taken with the 10D are sharper than this "sample". It's not about "the mood" of the picture. I will give you that this......



...is a good picture. There is nothing wrong with the photo. It is a good shot. I have no negative feelings about the photo but it was placed in this forum as an example of how the 10D can produce sharp and in focus photos and to a degree it does that.. but I have seen sharper and would not hold this image up as the standard of sharpness for a 10D or a D100.

This has nothing to do with the AF issues some have experienced.. and as I said it doesn't matter to me which camera produced the image.. it could have been produced by Canon, Nikon, Fuji.. I don't care which camera it came from. This was strictly a question about the sharpness of the image.. which I don't believe is all that sharp. It's not bad but it's not the best.

My original post is below:
Jack G Heckler said:
Below is the image that John posted.. I don't care if he took it with a > 10D, a D100 or a D1s.. my question is.. Do you guys really think this is a > sharp image?
Click to expand...
You see, I only asked if the rest of the forum members reading this thread thought the image was really that sharp. Nothing more, nothing less.

Jim Radcliffe
http://www.image36.com

The ability to 'see' the shot is more important than the gear you use to take the shot.
 
Well, I think that I answered the question. Though I did throw in other stuff that wasn't asked (as is typical of me - LOL).
Jim Radcliffe said:
You see, I only asked if the rest of the forum members reading this
thread thought the image was really that sharp. Nothing more,
nothing less.
Click to expand...
--
The Lowest Paid Concert Photographer Around
http://www.neonlightsimaging.com/artshow/final.htm
Photography -- just another word for compromise

'Since we can't keep crime in check, why don't we legalize it and tax it out of business?' -- Will Rogers
 
The thread is so long and divergent in several places I doubt I'll get much response and I will not waste my time doing a repost as it is simply not worth the effort and its not important.

Jim Radcliffe
http://www.image36.com

The ability to 'see' the shot is more important than the gear you use to take the shot.
 
I think most were simply afraid of answering it honestly. LOL.

Afraid that too many would read something into the answer.
Jim Radcliffe said:
The thread is so long and divergent in several places I doubt I'll
get much response and I will not waste my time doing a repost as it
is simply not worth the effort and its not important.
Click to expand...
--
The Lowest Paid Concert Photographer Around
http://www.neonlightsimaging.com/artshow/final.htm
Photography -- just another word for compromise

'Since we can't keep crime in check, why don't we legalize it and tax it out of business?' -- Will Rogers
 
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