10D focus issue real

[Theo Lumens]

Ownership does not an expert make (nt)

Apart from the fact that I personally don't care for NO TEXT 'answers', what is this one supposse to mean?

How can you even remotely access my knowledge or expertise?

If you don't have anything to say then simply don't say anything. At least you don't make a nuisance of yourself that way.

Theo

 

[greg n]

It's a long story, was my Dad's flash as my gear was stolen, thats why i am looking at 10D in first place. There have been a lot of suggestions on how to do the test again, I will take that info and go back and try again, and then (heaven forbid) post the results. thank you both for your input

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

 

[Ben Strasser]

were not really thinking about the "focus issue" but the only thing you brought with you or photographed was a comb. Do you photograph combs for a living? I would have thought pictures of people in or out of the camera store would have been a better comparison.

We have seen a lot of focus issue posts on this forum and a large number have been from people not familure with the camera. Sure there have been defective cameras and misaligned lenses but many were user issues. Here you take a pro camera (yes, I call it a pro) with out having used one before and are willing to base your decisions (good or bad) on photographing a comb.

There are many reasons why your comb shots didn't turn out the way you expected. Product photography is difficult, I know, I do. You seem to be impressed with what "Clint" had to say about the 10D and you know what the D100 can do from your experience. The question is if you are willing to spend the time and effort to learn the camera.

The focus problem with two 10D's in a row made me feel pretty let
down. I don't even know if that is the main focus problem that
people have been talking about.Though as one poster mentioned, I
should have had the sales person make sure it was on center focus.
I just asked him to make all the settings as close as possible.

To answer your question, I guess I was glad to have read all the
info on the forum, I do think you get a different type of review
than the pro online reviews. I think those guys are hard pressed to
give any high-end Nikon or Canon a great review. All of the top end
DSL's from Nikon and Canon get the same top marks. Maybe they do
deserve them, I am not in the know enough to know. But when you
read user reviews, they don't always get the same top marks and
that is when you average out those reviews. So in that case i
sometimes think you very useful info from the forums as well.
Though you should check the source at times and not go by just
anyones personal loyalty or dissloyalty. I am going off topic in
any case.

Jim you are right, I think this was more of a response to my
dissapointment this afternoon, I was pretty well set to get the
10d. I personally believe Nikon and Canon both make excellent
products, both have different lenses some better some not. I was
just looking forward to the 10D, had been following the forum
discussion went to get one and then just got let down. so now I am
back at the start.

I appriciate your comments though and Smith above. 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.

In any case I just look forward to getting back to taking pictures.
My sister is getting married in six weeks so i have to get another
system set up.

--
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]

I am sorry you were insulted, I do not understand why this post has become so bitter and full of personal insults, actually it is only a few, most have given fair comments for or against. I thank you for input though. I think individuals who have actually owned a number of systems have a much more rounded experience of input into the forums. The other side is I think some people take brand loyalty too far.

Ownership does not an expert make (nt)

Apart from the fact that I personally don't care for NO TEXT
'answers', what is this one supposse to mean?

How can you even remotely access my knowledge or expertise?

If you don't have anything to say then simply don't say anything.
At least you don't make a nuisance of yourself that way.

Theo

 

[greg n]

No I brought the comb cause it was bright blue, I also brought a green battery, a red glue tube and a bright orange magic marker. I wanted to see how much picture and colour difference there was between the two cameras. But I could not get the teeth on the comb to focus right, they kept looking blurry or very very soft. In anycase I will try the test again. Truth is I've wanted to buy the 10D, and I wanted the great colour and picture quality to blow away the D100 so i would committ to it. I still think the 10D takes the better picture, I just thought these two cameras, that I tried, were bad. I got frustrated and down about it, cause i had read so much about the focus issue on this forum the last two weeks, but I was really going by all the highly reccommended online reviews. You are right about people or other pictures being of more use, I just wanted to see the great colours (I have read about and seen on this forum) for my self. thank you for your comments.

The focus problem with two 10D's in a row made me feel pretty let
down. I don't even know if that is the main focus problem that
people have been talking about.Though as one poster mentioned, I
should have had the sales person make sure it was on center focus.
I just asked him to make all the settings as close as possible.

To answer your question, I guess I was glad to have read all the
info on the forum, I do think you get a different type of review
than the pro online reviews. I think those guys are hard pressed to
give any high-end Nikon or Canon a great review. All of the top end
DSL's from Nikon and Canon get the same top marks. Maybe they do
deserve them, I am not in the know enough to know. But when you
read user reviews, they don't always get the same top marks and
that is when you average out those reviews. So in that case i
sometimes think you very useful info from the forums as well.
Though you should check the source at times and not go by just
anyones personal loyalty or dissloyalty. I am going off topic in
any case.

Jim you are right, I think this was more of a response to my
dissapointment this afternoon, I was pretty well set to get the
10d. I personally believe Nikon and Canon both make excellent
products, both have different lenses some better some not. I was
just looking forward to the 10D, had been following the forum
discussion went to get one and then just got let down. so now I am
back at the start.

I appriciate your comments though and Smith above. 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.

In any case I just look forward to getting back to taking pictures.
My sister is getting married in six weeks so i have to get another
system set up.

--
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

 

[John Fisher]

Practice, practice, practice!

Anyway, with that bad joke out of the way here's what I do. Surprisingly enough to many, I actually focus on the eye(s)! What a concept! Also, I do not use the center point most of the time. I select a focus point which would normally be on or around the eye which greatly reduces camera swing when I'm recomposing the shot. (How I love the improved focus system of the 10D, I shot with a D30 to learn the digital work flow and it was..... challenging.) I do use the center point when I'm shooting a moving subject using servo focus mode. Other than that, I am in one shot focus, I select a focus point on or near the area of critical importance, and I listen for the beep. (I'm near blind now, Stevie Wonder would do a better job of manually focusing than I would!)

Eyes are easy, they have a lot of contrast particularly because the eyelashes provide verticals while the eye lid provids horizontal lines of contrast. I also pick one, not the center of the face so I am actually focusing on the eye. Note in this picture one eye has hair in front of it, I didn't choose that eye. Another thing I want to point out is that as I have used this camera I have become more aware of how important shutter speed is if you want crisp pictures. This picture was shot with a 70-200 2.8L zoom set at 200 mm, on a tripod at 1/180 of a second. I try not to hand hold this lens any more at shutter speeds below 1/350 of a second. I was using a studio strobe (outside) with a soft box attached so I had the luxury of f13 when shooting, still the strobe I use for location work is an Alien Bee 800 (hate dragging my Speedo's around) which only uses a 100w standard household light bulb as a focusing lamp. Even in this low light the EOS 10D focusing system was up to the task.



Yes, depth of field helps, particularly if you have selected your focus point correctly in the first place. I do a lot of shooting at f4 or lower with long lenses (it is the nature of my work, I don't want the backgrounds to compete with the subject). I have posted this shot before, but here it is again shot with the 70-200 2.8 zoom (Non IS) at f4, hand held at 1/500 of a second. And at f4 with a lens this long there is a difference in the sharpness of the eye on the left (where I focused) compared to the eye on the right.



Technique counts, these are extremely complex electronic systems which are capable of incredible accuracy quickly(far better than most of us on full manual), but you have to learn how to use them. In closing the 10D is an amazing product for the price. It has given me and a lot of other pro's the luxury of walking away from film. I'm in the process of getting a 1Ds, but I could not wait to buy the 10D because it was obvious from the moment it was announced that Canon had given us a tool which we could put in our bag and not feel embarressed when we pulled it out. I only pray that the Nikon D2x arrives soon and is a great camera so that there is some pressure on Canon to drop the price of the 1Ds.

Fish
--
John Fisher
South Beach, Miami
http://www.johnfisher.com/models.htm
(305) 534-9322

 

[Jim Radcliffe]

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?

Sorry, and this has nothing to do with the 10D AF issues at all... I'm not even going there.. I (personally) don't think this image is sharp.. am I the only one? And John, don't take this is an attack on you.. it's not. It's a question regarding the sharpness (some may say focus) of this image and it has nothing to do with you or the camera you used to take the image.



--
Jim Radcliffe
http://www.image36.com

The ability to 'see' the shot is more important than the gear you use to take the shot.

 

[AYuan]

Same here. Shot a wedding yesterday with hundreds pictures and at least 10% of them are out of focus. I was very careful about the focus, whenever I suspect a misfocus, I refocus or manually focus to see if there's difference. It seems that only my Canon lense has focus problem. my Sigma lens focus very slow but accurately. Probably the canaon lense focus too fast?

I realized that the hundreds of misfocused shots I deleted were not
user errors.

I cannot comment on others' cameras. I don't know if it's design
flaw or random QC issue. But my camera does randomly misfocus.

I have hundreds of tack-sharp pictures taken with my 10D.

But I don't have hundreds of blurry sub-1MP-quality pictures taken
with my 10D. I have been deleting them and blaming myself.

--
Mishkin™
Theoretical Measurbator

 

[sg10]

You can get the exact same silky smoothness in low light (at ISO-800 which requires an EV push) if you use NR software. The only difference is one is instant gratification, the other is a two step process. Problem is, you lose a little sharpness once you do that, and the main advantage of the SD-9 fades.

Here is the SD-9's ISO 800 after NR is applied (it's still a little underexposed after +2 EV to the ISO 200 RAW file--the flash didn't fire). As you can see it is unusably soft, but noise is reasonably well controlled for ISO 800...

http://www2.pbase.com/image/19303953/large

In fact, I think a key reason there is a perceived overly-soft feel to 10D images is aggressive NR in-camera. The SD-9 will produce images that are overly soft too after NR is applied. This casual shot is a good example of that, it is so soft you'd never guess an SD-9 took it, in fact the details all but dissappeared when I Neat-Imaged it. In this case there was no visible noise at all, but I liked the overly soft, china doll look NR routines give to this particular shot. The skin is so smooth and the focus so soft it looks like a 10D could've snapped it...

http://www.pbase.com/image/19918049/original

Time will tell if the Foveon chip can ever get as clean as the
Canon CMOS chips.

I want SD9, with Canon on it, with Canon mount.

--
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

 

[DavidP #28649]

I didn't realize that almost ALL of your gear had been stolen. That totally sucks. Though it does give you the freedom to make a choice, I guess.

My D100 was stolen with my Lowepro pack and most of my gear, so
right now I have no investment committment to either Nikon or
Canon. That is why I have so stuck on trying the 10D. Anyone
thinking of trying the prosumer DSL's would be hard pressed to
avoid reading all the shining reviews of the 10D, You have to
consider it. So I am in similar boat, only difference is I have
owned the D100, which I thought was a great camera. However like I
said seeing all the great reviews of the 10D, well it's only
natural to be interested. I was surprised to find out how many D100
people own both, and in that case you need two whole systems. I
will try to get the pictures again.

--
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

 

[DavidP #28649]

As shown, it's not what I'd call sharp. But it's probably been processed to some degree, I'd assume. It's certainly been downsized.

The only way I'd want to judge sharpness would be with a full-sized image that had been converted from RAW without sharpening. Then one could make an informed analysis of sharpness.

I've become so spoiled, though, with the 1D and it's weak AA-filter that an unprocessed 10D shot will probably look soft to me until I've done some work on it.

Do you think the focus plane is significantly off? I'd say it's near the eyes. The image appears to be in focus (close enough for gov't work, anyway), and the overall image is simply a bit soft (whether due to lens, technique (shooting and/or processing), or intent).

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?

Sorry, and this has nothing to do with the 10D AF issues at all...
I'm not even going there.. I (personally) don't think this image is
sharp.. am I the only one? And John, don't take this is an attack
on you.. it's not. It's a question regarding the sharpness (some
may say focus) of this image and it has nothing to do with you or
the camera you used to take the image.

--
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

 

[DavidP #28649]

But I can get that without the processing on the 1D.

And since I rarely shot below ISO 800, it wouldn't make any sense to go with a Foveon sensor at this time (for me).

You can get the exact same silky smoothness in low light (at
ISO-800 which requires an EV push) if you use NR software. The
only difference is one is instant gratification, the other is a two
step process. Problem is, you lose a little sharpness once you do
that, and the main advantage of the SD-9 fades.

--
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

 

[Ben Strasser]

feelings with the Canon people on this forum. They either love it or love it and hate it at the same time. Very proud people with high expectations and when dissappointed are noticably so. When the camera meets or exceeds their expectations they get very defencive when someone says there is a "global" issue with the camera.

I think the difference between Nikon and Canon people is that Nikon people tend to rely on the name Nikon for quality and performance. Canon people on the other hand always have to prove their Canon equipment is better. It seems to me Canon has set the standard in DSLRs but it is a tough road. Every Canon and Nikon camera I have seen over the past 30 years has been excellent. Some features are better than others but they are excellent tools.

I love my 10D but I had my doubts at first. Can you imagine, 30 years in the business and having to learn how to use a camera? After I did, I wouldn't have anything else (except for a 1Ds and only for the 11MP and weatherstripping).

The fact that you were a D100 user and are considering a 10D says a lot. There are features you cannot ignore when comparing the two. Give it another test and I wish you the best with your final decision.

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

 

[John Fisher]

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

 

[Jim Radcliffe]

As shown, it's not what I'd call sharp. But it's probably been
processed to some degree, I'd assume. It's certainly been
downsized.

Yes, I agree.. it's hard to judge the sharpness of anything when you're looking at 72dpi monitors.. then there's the whole downsizing thing... the only way you can really tell is with a good size print or possibly by looking at the original file full size..

Do you think the focus plane is significantly off? I'd say it's
near the eyes. The image appears to be in focus (close enough for
gov't work, anyway), and the overall image is simply a bit soft
(whether due to lens, technique (shooting and/or processing), or
intent).

No, I would be guessing at any rate.. the image is sharp enough for govt work but it is not as sharp as I would like it... if the lack of sharpness is by design or "artistic" preference then fine... othewise it's not nearly as sharp as some of the images I have seen posted here.

My thoughts were that if people believe this to be a sharp image then a little education might be in order.

Jim Radcliffe
http://www.image36.com

The ability to 'see' the shot is more important than the gear you use to take the shot.

 

[sg10]

But I can get that without the processing on the 1D.

And since I rarely shot below ISO 800, it wouldn't make any sense
to go with a Foveon sensor at this time (for me).

Once you get into the ISO 800 range, the NR requirement (one in camera; one out) really does largely level the playing field, IMO.

The SD-9 also lacks a usable in-camera preview if you are shooting say, ISO 200 w/-2EV to get an ISO 800 equivalent. If you always shoot in low light, its clearly not the camera of choice. Then again, if you shoot in good light...

You can get the exact same silky smoothness in low light (at
ISO-800 which requires an EV push) if you use NR software. The
only difference is one is instant gratification, the other is a two
step process. Problem is, you lose a little sharpness once you do
that, and the main advantage of the SD-9 fades.

--
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

 

[Jim Radcliffe]

John,

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

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

--
Jim Radcliffe
http://www.image36.com

The ability to 'see' the shot is more important than the gear you use to take the shot.

 

[DavidP #28649]

The real problem with a downsized image is that the sharpness is HIGHLY dependent on what sharpnening is used.

If I just do a simple downsizing, the images will often look very soft.

But if I use Fred Miranda's actions, it will sharpen appropriately for different sized images. It works quite well.

On some images, I've been aghast at just how much difference it can make.

That's why I wouldn't really judge sharpness on that image. The focus is probably fine, though.

No, I would be guessing at any rate.. the image is sharp enough for
govt work but it is not as sharp as I would like it... if the lack
of sharpness is by design or "artistic" preference then fine...
othewise it's not nearly as sharp as some of the images I have seen
posted here.

My thoughts were that if people believe this to be a sharp image
then a little education might be in order.

--
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

 

[Mishkin™]

you're basically saying, "point the center AF square on the eye and wait for the beep".

I know that.

I also know about misfocus hiding capabilities of f/13.

About that shot at f/4 with one eye in focus - yes, some of the shots do turn really sharp (sharp eyelashes, eye pupil).

However, there IS a serious problem due to large 10D's sensors. You can download the center point overlay to see the real size of AF sensors in your pictures (assuming resolution 3072x2048): http://www.canondslr.com/af/AF-Center.psd

The problems is consistency. Some time AF sensor chooses the eye, another time eyebrow. If you move farther from the model, AF can choose nose or hair.

That was my question. How do you deal with this cumbersome AF limitation? I'm talking about shallow DOF when tack-sharp eyebrow or nose or hair look disturbing compared to blurred eye pupil.

BTW, is Tatyana Russian? I would love to shoot her. I would appreciate if you can send her coordinates to my email (it's moremoremorejunk at hotmail, but I do check it once a couple of days).

Thanks.

Practice, practice, practice!

Anyway, with that bad joke out of the way here's what I do.
Surprisingly enough to many, I actually focus on the eye(s)! What a
concept! Also, I do not use the center point most of the time. I
select a focus point which would normally be on or around the eye
which greatly reduces camera swing when I'm recomposing the shot.
(How I love the improved focus system of the 10D, I shot with a D30
to learn the digital work flow and it was..... challenging.) I do
use the center point when I'm shooting a moving subject using servo
focus mode. Other than that, I am in one shot focus, I select a
focus point on or near the area of critical importance, and I
listen for the beep. (I'm near blind now, Stevie Wonder would do a
better job of manually focusing than I would!)

Eyes are easy, they have a lot of contrast particularly because the
eyelashes provide verticals while the eye lid provids horizontal
lines of contrast. I also pick one, not the center of the face so I
am actually focusing on the eye. Note in this picture one eye has
hair in front of it, I didn't choose that eye. Another thing I want
to point out is that as I have used this camera I have become more
aware of how important shutter speed is if you want crisp pictures.
This picture was shot with a 70-200 2.8L zoom set at 200 mm, on a
tripod at 1/180 of a second. I try not to hand hold this lens any
more at shutter speeds below 1/350 of a second. I was using a
studio strobe (outside) with a soft box attached so I had the
luxury of f13 when shooting, still the strobe I use for location
work is an Alien Bee 800 (hate dragging my Speedo's around) which
only uses a 100w standard household light bulb as a focusing lamp.
Even in this low light the EOS 10D focusing system was up to the
task.



Yes, depth of field helps, particularly if you have selected your
focus point correctly in the first place. I do a lot of shooting at
f4 or lower with long lenses (it is the nature of my work, I don't
want the backgrounds to compete with the subject). I have posted
this shot before, but here it is again shot with the 70-200 2.8
zoom (Non IS) at f4, hand held at 1/500 of a second. And at f4
with a lens this long there is a difference in the sharpness of the
eye on the left (where I focused) compared to the eye on the right.



Technique counts, these are extremely complex electronic systems
which are capable of incredible accuracy quickly(far better than
most of us on full manual), but you have to learn how to use them.
In closing the 10D is an amazing product for the price. It has
given me and a lot of other pro's the luxury of walking away from
film. I'm in the process of getting a 1Ds, but I could not wait to
buy the 10D because it was obvious from the moment it was announced
that Canon had given us a tool which we could put in our bag and
not feel embarressed when we pulled it out. I only pray that the
Nikon D2x arrives soon and is a great camera so that there is some
pressure on Canon to drop the price of the 1Ds.

Fish
--
John Fisher
South Beach, Miami
http://www.johnfisher.com/models.htm
(305) 534-9322

--
Mishkin™
Theoretical Measurbator

 

[Jim Radcliffe]

The real problem with a downsized image is that the sharpness is
HIGHLY dependent on what sharpnening is used.

Been there.. no what you mean..

If I just do a simple downsizing, the images will often look very
soft.

Yep.. I've run into the same issue when downsizing for client websites..

But if I use Fred Miranda's actions, it will sharpen appropriately
for different sized images. It works quite well.

Have not bought them yet but I think I will probably spring for the action.. I often have to upload 40 or 50 images from events and simply do not have the time to manually process each and every one of them....

On some images, I've been aghast at just how much difference it can
make.

That's why I wouldn't really judge sharpness on that image. The
focus is probably fine, though.

I was not questioning his focus... I just wanted to know if other forum members thought the image was as sharp as it could be.. we all know what a difference the size/sharpening procedure can make.

My observation and question was based on other full size images that have been downsized for display on this forum that appeared much sharper than the one in question... it's no big deal.. just a question.. not the beginning of trench warfare or sniping regarding his abilities as a photographer, his camera or his composition. :^)

I've posted images here that brought positive and negative comments.. but I don't take the negative ones as a personal attack on my abilities..just observations from others than have lead me to try different techniques and methods for achieving a sharper, better image... and I am better for it.

Jim Radcliffe
http://www.image36.com

The ability to 'see' the shot is more important than the gear you use to take the shot.