What a sharp DSLR picture looks like

Ron Parr · Dec 5, 2003

Gregg Humphrey said:
Nice shot, but not that sharp. Check out some of Ron Reznick's D2H
bird shots if you want to see sharp.

I've seen some very nice reduced and sharpened bird shots from Ron's D2H. I haven't seen any full size.

At a certain level, I would question whether it's possible to have genuine optical sharpness that is much greater than what I have shown. I'm saying this not out of hubris, but because I have zoomed in to 800% and found strands of hair that span just 3 pixels, which I think is the best one could hope to do with a Bayer pattern sensor.

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/

JohnK · Dec 5, 2003

Ron Parr said:
This isn't a troll post. I'm not saying that everybody needs to
buy a camera that produces shots like this instead of some other
camera.

--
JohnK

Ted C. · Dec 5, 2003

or just my prejudices, but for me in a forum format where its hard to discern the nuances that make for good communication, I often find your posts somewhat condescending. And, judging from some of the other responses, I may not be the only one. Maybe, if you would try and remember who your audience is here at the STF and adjust your style accordingly, you might recieve a better response from more of us, if you really care. When I read your original post I was quite impressed until I read your last paragraph and once again I realized that you can't seem to help yourself when it comes to the mission of converting the ignorant masses to the superiority of your choice, despite your protest otherwise. Right, wrong, or indifferent, that how it comes across to me as a happy Sony owner. Your last paragraph skewed the entire technical merit of the post to one of amusement for me over "your" needs from the people on the STF to understand the sensor issue. Good grief, you have got to be kidding! That just screams "validation of my choice". Even now I still find that amusing! But, don't give up, just let it be for our needs, not yours, when providing information and I'll certainly be appreciative of what you have to offer me when it comes to understanding the wonderfull world of dslr photography.

Ron Parr said:
I do think that such a post would be greeted with a good number of
unduly rude responses, but this doesn't mean that it was incorrect
to make this point or that the rudeness should be
tolerated/encouraged.

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/

Greg Gebhardt · Dec 5, 2003

Jay Jervey said:
-- Jay

--
Greg Gebhardt in
Jacksonville, Florida

Backdoctor · Dec 5, 2003

use my 50mm f1.8 lens more often. I forget how sharp they are.

Wonderful examples.

Harris

Yves P. · Dec 5, 2003

DRSL's are also a little more expensive. This was also taken with a 50mm 1.8 Nikon (under 100$) and a D-100 Body. Resized and posted.

--
Yves P.
PBASE Supporter

Some pictures I like:
http://www.pbase.com/yp8/root

LanceD · Dec 5, 2003

Yves,
No USM? This is an amazing shot.

Yves P. said:
DRSL's are also a little more expensive. This was also taken with
a 50mm 1.8 Nikon (under 100$) and a D-100 Body. Resized and posted.

--
Yves P.
PBASE Supporter

Some pictures I like:
http://www.pbase.com/yp8/root

--
Lance
http://www.pbase.com/lhphoto

--- Art critic doesn't have to be an artist ----

dpophyte · Dec 5, 2003

--
So you run and you run
to catch up with the sun
but it's sinking; Racing around
to come up behind you again.

Gondor · Dec 5, 2003

beyonce said:
magnu said:

Cheryl Meisel said:

I just click on the CANON forum and get all the info I need right
there. This is Sony so I am really interested here in how we get
the SONY pics as clear as possible, tricks, tips, hints, pics,
assesories, anything SONY. I'm sorry but I'm just not interested
in the canon anything HERE. That's why they have a Canon forum
which is neat also. Maybe they should have a ALL CAMERA forum huh?

Click to expand...

I don't think I am the only one here who is interested in both
Canon and Sony and the others can easily avoid posts like this one
since the subject tells you it's not about Sony. Is it so bad to
post something like this? It helps me and perhaps also others to
decide whether to buy a Sony or e.g. a 300D.

Click to expand...

True. I guess people can come here and tell you "This is what Fuji
color looks like" and "This is how A1's anti-shake works", since
many people want to decide between those cameras and sony's too?
And also true about "others can easily avoid posts like this one
since the subject tells you it's not about Sony". But then, what
do we have those different forums for? And this is a Sony forum,
why is there post "that has nothing to do with Sony". Sorry maybe
I just can't get it. I'm not against that type of posts, but I
think it's better that people who want to write such post just use
"reply" to answer others or give suggestions, not starting with a
post titled "What a sharp DSLR pic looks like"...etc. Sony doesn't
even have DSLR's, and what's the point posting a post with such
title here anyway? If you think people have questions, you reply
them, period. Yeah there's a great amount of info in the post, and
yeah he's been doing a lot for peoeple here over a certain period
of time, but that doesn't make everything he does right or give him
the right to do anything he wants. No offense, I just don't see
why we should have a post titled "What a sharp DSLR pic looks like"
in this forum. At least make the title sony-related man, this is a
Sony forum after all.

Yes I think you have a point but since there's a lot of comparison between 300D and F828 here I still don't think this post is that off topic.

beyonce said:
beyonce said:

beyonce said:

beyonce said:

Actually, there are lots of posts from people who are openly
wondering about the pros and cons of the different approaches and
there is a lot of brand chauvinism and misinformation flying around
too.

In this context, I don't think an example that contradicts some
common misconceptions, along with an explanation of some of the
issues involved in using such a camera is inappropriate.

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/

Click to expand...

--
Cherylm

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Bobby Tan · Dec 5, 2003

This is very nice. A Sony sensor and Nikon lens - what a great combo!

Yves P. said:
DRSL's are also a little more expensive. This was also taken with
a 50mm 1.8 Nikon (under 100$) and a D-100 Body. Resized and posted.

--
Yves P.
PBASE Supporter

Some pictures I like:
http://www.pbase.com/yp8/root

MAC · Dec 5, 2003

For me this action which scales up then sharpens then ssplines down is one of the best low halo sharpening actions in the world.

http://www.shutterfreaks.com/Forum/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Board=PSshare&Number=153303&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1

enjoy,
MAC

Ron Parr said:
This isn't a troll post. I'm not saying that everybody needs to
buy a camera that produces shots like this instead of some other
camera.

What I am doing is showing people here what a sharp shot from a
Canon DSLR looks like. With good lenses, these cameras are capable
of taking very sharp photos that are quite impressive with the
default settings and no additional processing.

This from my D60, shot in RAW with default process except that I
did exposure compensation in RAW conversion. This is necessary
because of the regrettable way the D60 handles flash shots using
Canon's flashes. (The short version is that it tends to
underexpose, unless you do a flash exposure lock, which is
impractical for kids.) The end result is that you will see a
little noise in the background.

This shot was taken with the sub $100 50mm 1.8 lens.

http://www.pbase.com/image/23883902

You'll notice that the DOF is very shallow, but that what's in
focus is extremely sharp. Shots taken with cheap zooms will not be
this sharp.

If this shot looks so good to you that you're willing to get a
largish camera and swap lenses (or buy very big and heavy lenses),
then a digital SLR with a large sensor may be a good choice for
you. If you look at this shot and it doesn't look any better than
what you've seen from an a small sensor camera, then you probably
shouldn't get a digital SLR.

[FWIW: For me, having the ability to get this kind of result is
worth the bother. I'd really like if you understood that there is
a difference between this kind of result and what you get from a
small sensor, but I'll think no less of you if you don't think the
difference is worth the effort.]

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/

--
MAC
http://www.digi-pictures.com

antoine52756 · Dec 5, 2003

Yves P. said:
DRSL's are also a little more expensive. This was also taken with
a 50mm 1.8 Nikon (under 100$) and a D-100 Body. Resized and posted.

The picture is absolutely awesome Yves! It's great to see you around. I'm still getting used to my 300D and all the lenses. I also got the Canon 50mm 1.8 II. I haven't taken a "real" picture with it yet! still testing it around the house!

Yves P. said:
--
Yves P.
PBASE Supporter

Some pictures I like:
http://www.pbase.com/yp8/root

--
Antoine - F717, The Mirror Image
http://www.pbase.com/image/6381098

Antoine - F717, The Mirror Images
http://www.imagestation.com/album/?id=4291244987

Old Ed · Dec 5, 2003

Negative287 · Dec 5, 2003

Ron, I looked at the original and it's kind of soft...

Also, look at the Circle of Confusion on the left side of the image it certainly shows the lens having a pretty poor Bokeh at f/2.8...

Personally though, these are from the 10D and are sharp even though I used a cheap 35 - 80 lens that came with my Rebel X about 7 years ago.

This one came from my D100 using a 70 - 300 ED D and I didn't want the whole thing sharp but I think the eyes are perfect.

This one came from the D100 using the 24 - 120 ED G AFS VR...

Yes I resized them and did some external sharpening but I can get them all equally as sharp processing the larger images as well.

--

'The only real currency in this bankrupt world is what we share with each other when we're being uncool.' -- Cameron Crowe

Ron Parr · Dec 5, 2003

Pete Perry said:
Ron, I looked at the original and it's kind of soft...

I don't agree that it's soft.

Member said:
Also, look at the Circle of Confusion on the left side of the image
it certainly shows the lens having a pretty poor Bokeh at f/2.8...

I'm not familiar with the use of CoC in this context. I usually use this term in references to the smallest tolerable blur producted by a point in a DOF calculation.

In any case, if you are talking about the OOF blob on the top left, then I agree that one of several weaknesses of the 50mm 1.8 is poor bokeh caused by its 5 aperture blades. (Others are the plasticky construction and slow/noisy focusing mechanism.)

Member said:
Yes I resized them and did some external sharpening but I can get
them all equally as sharp processing the larger images as well.

These are very nice pictures.

My point was not to exhibit what can be achieved with sharpening, but to demonstrate genuine optical sharpness.

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/

Negative287 · Dec 5, 2003

Kerry,

I posted this down below but I'll also comment here without the embedded images...

You don't need either L or Prime lenses to get sharp images you just need to find the lenses sweet spot.

Canon 10D with cheap 35 - 80 rebel X kit lens...

http://www.pbase.com/image/21985103

http://www.pbase.com/image/21985103

Nikon D100 with cheap 50mm f/1.8 Prime lens

http://www.pbase.com/image/13001335

http://www.pbase.com/image/12374694

D100 with reasonably inexpensive 85mm f/1.8 prime

http://www.pbase.com/image/14426809

Anyway, the point is that you don't need an expensive lens to get good shots from a DSLR... You can't however just buy any lens because all of the 28 - 300 lenses on the market are junk so be selective if you choose to buy a DSLR.

--

'The only real currency in this bankrupt world is what we share with each other when we're being uncool.' -- Cameron Crowe

Jim Mitchell · Dec 5, 2003

If youwant to see sharp go to the Nikon 5700 forum. I'm not impressed.

--
Mitch

Negative287 · Dec 5, 2003

Oh I have the same lens and it is essential towards verifying that the focus is correct with the Canon Gear!

Personally I think the Canon is better then I previously thought but overall I think it's pretty even with the Nikon stuff...

Still, I notice the same things you're noticing from the DSLR and it's tough to describe but most of the advanced amatuer camera images (with the exception of Macros) aren't as good as the DSLR images that's for sure.

--

'The only real currency in this bankrupt world is what we share with each other when we're being uncool.' -- Cameron Crowe

Dmitry K · Dec 5, 2003

Yves P. said:
DRSL's are also a little more expensive. This was also taken with
a 50mm 1.8 Nikon (under 100$) and a D-100 Body. Resized and posted.

Yves · Dec 5, 2003

I have not seen this terminology used before for a final image out of a camera . How is this defined or measured?

Member said:
My point was not to exhibit what can be achieved with sharpening,
but to demonstrate genuine optical sharpness.

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/

What a sharp DSLR picture looks like

Ron Parr

Guest

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Leading Member

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

Negative287

Guest

Ron Parr

Guest

Negative287

Guest

Well-known member

Negative287

Guest

Senior Member

Leading Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts