Which of these looks sharper/better to you?

Started 3 months ago | Polls
tbcass
tbcass Forum Pro • Posts: 43,223
Which of these looks sharper/better to you?

Trying to settle an argument. Ignore the color difference

MOON ONE

MOON TWO

 tbcass's gear list:tbcass's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX10 IV Sony a99 II Sony DT 35mm F1.8 SAM Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro +10 more
POLL
MOON ONE
15.4% 10  votes
MOON TWO
73.8% 48  votes
They are equal
10.8% 7  votes
  Show results
Marek M Contributing Member • Posts: 960
Re: Which of these looks sharper/better to you?

tbcass wrote:

Trying to settle an argument. Ignore the color difference

MOON ONE

MOON TWO

Probably the correct answer is : the one taken with a cellphone.

Bobthearch
Bobthearch Veteran Member • Posts: 8,259
Re: Which of these looks sharper/better to you?
1

The first photo seems slightly more detailed, maybe because the features are simply larger because it's zoomed in closer?

Also, I like the composition of the first photo better, a traditional moon shape. The second photo, due to the shadow, looks like a giant egg.

Also, the 'best' features are right at the edge of the shadow, and with deep shade in the craters.  This provides a point of interest for the viewers' eyes.

-- hide signature --

Personal non-commercial websites with no ads or tracking:
Local photography: http://ratonphotos.com/
Travel and photography: http://placesandpics.com/
Special-interest photos: http://ghosttowns.placesandpics.com/

 Bobthearch's gear list:Bobthearch's gear list
Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S DX Micro-Nikkor 85mm f/3.5G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G VR +2 more
Chris R-UK Forum Pro • Posts: 19,599
Re: Which of these looks sharper/better to you?
8

Only a small portion of the first shot is in sharp focus and the most of the detail has gone in the out of focus areas.

The second shot has a much larger area in acceptable focus and shows much more detail.

-- hide signature --

Chris R

 Chris R-UK's gear list:Chris R-UK's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Olympus E-M1 II Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 Pro +4 more
Jonsi
Jonsi Senior Member • Posts: 4,130
Re: Which of these looks sharper/better to you?
2

Too small to see a definitive difference.

The brightness makes #2 look sharper though.

I guess..

tbcass
OP tbcass Forum Pro • Posts: 43,223
Re: Which of these looks sharper/better to you?

Bobthearch wrote:

The first photo seems slightly more detailed, maybe because the features are simply larger because it's zoomed in closer?

Also, I like the composition of the first photo better, a traditional moon shape. The second photo, due to the shadow, looks like a giant egg.

Also, the 'best' features are right at the edge of the shadow, and with deep shade in the craters. This provides a point of interest for the viewers' eyes.

They are both random crops from a larger photo. The question isn't about composition or points of interest but the technical quality. It's a comparison between 2 different lenses, one a Sony 70-400 with a 1.4 TC mounted on a 42mp FF camera and the other a Tamron 150-600 mounted on a 24mp APS-C camera. The Sony is nearly 3 times the cost of the Tamron.

-- hide signature --

Tom

 tbcass's gear list:tbcass's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX10 IV Sony a99 II Sony DT 35mm F1.8 SAM Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro +10 more
New Day Rising
New Day Rising Senior Member • Posts: 2,688
Re: Which of these looks sharper/better to you?
1

tbcass wrote:

Bobthearch wrote:

The first photo seems slightly more detailed, maybe because the features are simply larger because it's zoomed in closer?

Also, I like the composition of the first photo better, a traditional moon shape. The second photo, due to the shadow, looks like a giant egg.

Also, the 'best' features are right at the edge of the shadow, and with deep shade in the craters. This provides a point of interest for the viewers' eyes.

They are both random crops from a larger photo. The question isn't about composition or points of interest but the technical quality. It's a comparison between 2 different lenses, one a Sony 70-400 with a 1.4 TC mounted on a 42mp FF camera and the other a Tamron 150-600 mounted on a 24mp APS-C camera. The Sony is nearly 3 times the cost of the Tamron.

The second looks better to me, but there's not a lot in it. Certainly neither is three times better than the other.

 New Day Rising's gear list:New Day Rising's gear list
Nikon D50 Fujifilm FinePix S1 Pro Fujifilm X-T1 Canon EOS 500D Olympus OM-D E-M5 +5 more
TheSonyEnthusiast
TheSonyEnthusiast Regular Member • Posts: 267
Re: Which of these looks sharper/better to you?
2

Chris R-UK wrote:

Only a small portion of the first shot is in sharp focus and the most of the detail has gone in the out of focus areas.

The second shot has a much larger area in acceptable focus and shows much more detail.

Hi Chris,

The first shot is mine and I think the reason the first photo has the moon periphery out of focus is because teleconverter shrinks the already narrow depth of field of the 70-400. That isn't necessarily a bad thing though because it illustrates depth, where as the second photo appears flat because everything is equally in focus on a spherical object. Also, I feel the edges of the craters, particularly with shadows accentuating them, are softer by comparison to some of the craters on the first photo. The central peaks within the major craters (the little mounds) appear more defined in the first photo than the second.

tbcass frames it as an "argument to settle" when it isn't, it's simply a difference of opinion: an OP in a previous thread was debating between the two lenses and noted the softness of the Tamron beyond 500mm. I provided a sample photo taken where I manually focused using a teleconverter, saying if the focal limitation to 400mm with the Sony lens is an issue use the 1.4TC, noting I would be surprised if the Tamron were as sharp as the first photo.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/62797739

tbcass subsequently responded with his own photo and asked if I was convinced the Tamron were better than I originally thought. I said not really, and I believe his photo validated the OP's statement because the edges of the craters themselves appear softer than the first.  His argument is details relative to cost, mine is simply the details at a near equivalent focal length with a teleconverter.

The Tamron lens isn't bad, but it simply isn't as sharp as the Sony with the teleconverter.  I even noted that perhaps the photo could be made a smidge sharper if the lens were microadjusted (I don't know if it is or not) and if manually focused to get that sweet spot that may require a slight nudge of focus one way or another.

Other than crater edges as the only real means to compare, this is apples to oranges anyways.  It's manual focus vs autofocus, full frame vs APSC, 560mm vs 900mm (600 with 1.5 crop), ND8 filter vs none, one moon phase vs another, the list goes on.

-- hide signature --

I make my own repairs at home.

 TheSonyEnthusiast's gear list:TheSonyEnthusiast's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H3 Sony Alpha DSLR-A850 Sony a99 II Sony SLT-A55 Sony SLT-A35 +30 more
kiwi2
kiwi2 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,542
Re: Which of these looks sharper/better to you?

TheSonyEnthusiast wrote:

The first shot is mine and I think the reason the first photo has the moon periphery out of focus is because teleconverter shrinks the already narrow depth of field of the 70-400.

I don't think you'd be having a DoF issue with something 400,000 kilometres away. It looks more like motion blur. Don't forget the moon is constantly moving across the frame unless you are tracking it on a EQ mount.

With the TC the f-ratio become slower and it exaggerates lens softness. What was the ISO and shutter speed?

-- hide signature --
 kiwi2's gear list:kiwi2's gear list
Fujifilm X-T2 Fujifilm X-T100 Samyang 12mm F2.0 NCS CS Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR Fujifilm XF 35mm F2 R WR +4 more
TheSonyEnthusiast
TheSonyEnthusiast Regular Member • Posts: 267
Re: Which of these looks sharper/better to you?

kiwi2 wrote:

TheSonyEnthusiast wrote:

The first shot is mine and I think the reason the first photo has the moon periphery out of focus is because teleconverter shrinks the already narrow depth of field of the 70-400.

I don't think you'd be having a DoF issue with something 400,000 kilometres away. It looks more like motion blur. Don't forget the moon is constantly moving across the frame unless you are tracking it on a EQ mount.

With the TC the f-ratio become slower and it exaggerates lens softness. What was the ISO and shutter speed?

While I will admit the shot was at 1/20 of a second, if it were motion blur it would affect the sharpness across the entire image.  The reason I think it may be depth of field is due to the preciseness necessary in manually focusing; I took a series of shots barely nudging the focus each time toward infinity, and a fraction of a millimeter either way resulted in less resolved craters.

-- hide signature --

I make my own repairs at home.

 TheSonyEnthusiast's gear list:TheSonyEnthusiast's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H3 Sony Alpha DSLR-A850 Sony a99 II Sony SLT-A55 Sony SLT-A35 +30 more
kiwi2
kiwi2 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,542
Re: Which of these looks sharper/better to you?

TheSonyEnthusiast wrote:

kiwi2 wrote:

TheSonyEnthusiast wrote:

The first shot is mine and I think the reason the first photo has the moon periphery out of focus is because teleconverter shrinks the already narrow depth of field of the 70-400.

I don't think you'd be having a DoF issue with something 400,000 kilometres away. It looks more like motion blur. Don't forget the moon is constantly moving across the frame unless you are tracking it on a EQ mount.

With the TC the f-ratio become slower and it exaggerates lens softness. What was the ISO and shutter speed?

While I will admit the shot was at 1/20 of a second, if it were motion blur it would affect the sharpness across the entire image. The reason I think it may be depth of field is due to the preciseness necessary in manually focusing; I took a series of shots barely nudging the focus each time toward infinity, and a fraction of a millimeter either way resulted in less resolved craters.

Yes I thought it was a slow shutter speed as it has the look of slight motion blur.

Upping the ISO would have been your only other option.

-- hide signature --
 kiwi2's gear list:kiwi2's gear list
Fujifilm X-T2 Fujifilm X-T100 Samyang 12mm F2.0 NCS CS Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR Fujifilm XF 35mm F2 R WR +4 more
kiwi2
kiwi2 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,542
Re: Which of these looks sharper/better to you?
2

TheSonyEnthusiast wrote:

The reason I think it may be depth of field is due to the preciseness necessary in manually focusing; I took a series of shots barely nudging the focus each time toward infinity, and a fraction of a millimeter either way resulted in less resolved craters.

The entire disc of the moon is capable of being in focus at the same time.

-- hide signature --
 kiwi2's gear list:kiwi2's gear list
Fujifilm X-T2 Fujifilm X-T100 Samyang 12mm F2.0 NCS CS Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR Fujifilm XF 35mm F2 R WR +4 more
TheSonyEnthusiast
TheSonyEnthusiast Regular Member • Posts: 267
Re: Which of these looks sharper/better to you?

kiwi2 wrote:

TheSonyEnthusiast wrote:

The reason I think it may be depth of field is due to the preciseness necessary in manually focusing; I took a series of shots barely nudging the focus each time toward infinity, and a fraction of a millimeter either way resulted in less resolved craters.

The entire disc of the moon is capable of being in focus at the same time.

I never said it couldn't be, what I said is the 70-400 with a teleconverter may have an extremely narrow depth of field, as noted by the fact that I was adjusting the focus by fractions of a millimeter and taking shots.  Everything was set on a 10 second delay to minimize motion blur, but a slight turn of the barrel one way or another resulted in the middle of the moon being out of focus, which was my focus (no pun intended) given the major craters along the shadow.  I will try and dig through my camera to see if the periphery became in focus with preceeding or subsequent shots.  If not, then motion blur may be more likely.

-- hide signature --

I make my own repairs at home.

 TheSonyEnthusiast's gear list:TheSonyEnthusiast's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H3 Sony Alpha DSLR-A850 Sony a99 II Sony SLT-A55 Sony SLT-A35 +30 more
kiwi2
kiwi2 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,542
Re: Which of these looks sharper/better to you?
1

TheSonyEnthusiast wrote:

Everything was set on a 10 second delay to minimize motion blur

Don't forget about the motion of the moon across the sky/frame.

At longer focal lengths, slower shutter speeds start to become problematic.

-- hide signature --
 kiwi2's gear list:kiwi2's gear list
Fujifilm X-T2 Fujifilm X-T100 Samyang 12mm F2.0 NCS CS Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR Fujifilm XF 35mm F2 R WR +4 more
Fregoli
Fregoli Regular Member • Posts: 195
Re: Which of these looks sharper/better to you?
2

Looking at the replies, the technique (SS and focusing) + color balance could be working against the first shot, which could be capable of higher sharpness.

MAking it B&W already improves it. It could well be sharper than the Tamron, controlling for other factors.

-- hide signature --

Try harder?

Lensmate
Lensmate Veteran Member • Posts: 3,881
Re: Which of these looks sharper/better to you?
3

kiwi2 wrote:

TheSonyEnthusiast wrote:

Everything was set on a 10 second delay to minimize motion blur

Don't forget about the motion of the moon across the sky/frame.

At longer focal lengths, slower shutter speeds start to become problematic.

Atmospheric ' Seeing ' plays such a major role in all this [when all the photographic technique is covered correctly] that moment to moment conditions can render a capture blurry without any warning.

-Martin P

https://www.flickr.com/photos/photosauraus_rex/

 Lensmate's gear list:Lensmate's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX100 VII Sony a99 II Sony 500mm F4 G SSM
Lensmate
Lensmate Veteran Member • Posts: 3,881
Re: Which of these looks sharper/better to you?

Fregoli wrote:

Looking at the replies, the technique (SS and focusing) + color balance could be working against the first shot, which could be capable of higher sharpness.

MAking it B&W already improves it. It could well be sharper than the Tamron, controlling for other factors.

I agree...

-Martin P

https://www.flickr.com/photos/photosauraus_rex/

 Lensmate's gear list:Lensmate's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX100 VII Sony a99 II Sony 500mm F4 G SSM
drj3 Veteran Member • Posts: 9,082
Re: Which of these looks sharper/better to you?
8

Unless the two images were taken at the same time from the same location, any comparison of sharpness based on moon photographs is rather meaningless.  The sharpness of a moon photo has far more to do with the atmosphere than the camera/lens.  If you want to know which camera/lens provides more detail, then compare them on something that actually has fine detail.  However, the comparison still must be  done with exactly the same conditions for each camera/lens.

-- hide signature --

drj3

 drj3's gear list:drj3's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Olympus E-510 Olympus E-5 Olympus OM-D E-M10 Olympus E-M1 II +7 more
StefanD Regular Member • Posts: 290
Re: Which of these looks sharper/better to you?
1

TheSonyEnthusiast wrote:

kiwi2 wrote:

TheSonyEnthusiast wrote:

The first shot is mine and I think the reason the first photo has the moon periphery out of focus is because teleconverter shrinks the already narrow depth of field of the 70-400.

I don't think you'd be having a DoF issue with something 400,000 kilometres away. It looks more like motion blur. Don't forget the moon is constantly moving across the frame unless you are tracking it on a EQ mount.

With the TC the f-ratio become slower and it exaggerates lens softness. What was the ISO and shutter speed?

While I will admit the shot was at 1/20 of a second, if it were motion blur it would affect the sharpness across the entire image. The reason I think it may be depth of field is due to the preciseness necessary in manually focusing; I took a series of shots barely nudging the focus each time toward infinity, and a fraction of a millimeter either way resulted in less resolved craters.

According to this DoF calculator, the DoF of a 600mm lens at f/8 focussed at the moon (384402000m) ranges from 1500m to infinity. That should be enough to have the whole moon in focus.

Jonsi
Jonsi Senior Member • Posts: 4,130
Re: Which of these looks sharper/better to you?
1

TheSonyEnthusiast wrote:

this is apples to oranges anyways. It's manual focus vs autofocus, full frame vs APSC, 560mm vs 900mm (600 with 1.5 crop), ND8 filter vs none, one moon phase vs another, the list goes on.

I agree that it wasn't a valid comparison, now that we know what these are.  But I wouldn't be surprised at all if the Tamron is sharper in a straight-up side-by-side.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads