Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

On this focus thing

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

lemmy
lemmy  71762 forum posts United Kingdom
26 Jul 2013 - 2:43 PM


Quote: Is it really that more accurate than using the viewfinder in manual or auto focus?

It is the actal image direct from the sensor. If this is sharp, then your image must be sharp because that is the image. With the viewfinder. you are seeing a viewfinder optical image which can show a different result from the captured image. With MFT cameras, the EVF image is the image from the sensor too, of course.

MFT cameras don't have any means pof adjusting focus point simply because they cannot be inaccurate. For example, if you bashed your camera and the sensor was knocked slightly out of alignment, your DSLR VF would continue to function as before and you would have a skewed focal plane across your image. The live sensor will show you the image as it will be, skewed focal plane and all.

If you focus carefully with the DSLR VF and then check the live view, if it not sharp you need to adjust the lens focus until it matches the live view.

I don't think the live view can use that much juice. My GH3 Panasonic will take over 600 shots on one charge and that has no means of viewing other than live views.

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
26 Jul 2013 - 2:43 PM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Mozzytheboy
Mozzytheboy e2 Member 3550 forum postsMozzytheboy vcard United Kingdom3 Constructive Critique Points
26 Jul 2013 - 3:44 PM

Thank you both. Much to experiment with here.

Mozzy

Mozzytheboy
Mozzytheboy e2 Member 3550 forum postsMozzytheboy vcard United Kingdom3 Constructive Critique Points
26 Jul 2013 - 4:34 PM

I did as you all suggested; I used live view in RAW then cleaned up for jpeg image. Slight crop and reduced for uploading on this thread.

I think it looks OK ish. What do you feel?

Mozzybarcode.jpg

lemmy
lemmy  71762 forum posts United Kingdom
26 Jul 2013 - 5:13 PM

OK ish? Looks smack on to me Smile

llareggub
llareggub  3656 forum posts United Kingdom
26 Jul 2013 - 7:12 PM

Looks pretty sharp to me, however shrink any file from 4,000+ px wide down to only 600 it will always look sharp... If you are after checking whether the lens and body are producing as sharp a picture as it should then you need to pixel peep, just don't do it too much when you are shooting actual pictures Wink


Quote:

I don't think the live view can use that much juice. My GH3 Panasonic will take over 600 shots on one charge and that has no means of viewing other than live views.

Live view on a DSLR is a juice drinker, the camera uses power to keep the mirror lifted, if the power dies the mirror drops... A definite advantage that the mirrorless 'revolution' has in its favour Smile

Mozzytheboy
Mozzytheboy e2 Member 3550 forum postsMozzytheboy vcard United Kingdom3 Constructive Critique Points
26 Jul 2013 - 8:06 PM

I must confess I could get nothing like 600 images and I use a double battery pack addition on the 500D.

Mozzy

Gundog
Gundog  1624 forum posts Scotland
26 Jul 2013 - 8:38 PM


Quote: Mozzy,

I am guessing that this is not a focus problem at all but, perhaps, just an attempt to make a very small subject large by over-cropping.

Wee test - if you view the entire frame (without cropping) so that it fills or almost fills your PC monitor, do you still think it lacks sharpness?

No it would seem fine even putting my nose to the screen. Is it therefore me?

It's not you - it's what you're doing.

If you take a portion of the original frame - let's say a portion that measures 400x300 pixels - and then try to enlarge it to fill your screen, it is always going to look horrible.

You had another thread about macro photography. Some good advice in that about the steps you might take if you want to photograph small stuff.

Mozzytheboy
Mozzytheboy e2 Member 3550 forum postsMozzytheboy vcard United Kingdom3 Constructive Critique Points
27 Jul 2013 - 10:22 AM

I cropped 'Mrs Tiggy' just slightly making 'her' head the focal point. Yes I tweaked slightly in PSE as it was a RAW image originally. Hand held, with the 24-105 L series. Also my new Gary Fong type diffuser on the external flash. I wanted to try handheld as I do find it difficult at times with a pod. I'm definitely going to order a monopod though as soon as my Sigma 150-500 sells; which I hope it does.

I put everything almost into this shot that has been suggested, other than a tripod. For the first time I feel I have created a crisp image. I hope you agree.

It has been your help that got me over a barrier. I tried all tests that have been suggested.tiggy-nowfb.jpg

Gundog
Gundog  1624 forum posts Scotland
27 Jul 2013 - 10:28 AM

Well done.

Now you can rest easy in the knowledge that it is not your camera or lens that was the problem.

lemmy
lemmy  71762 forum posts United Kingdom
27 Jul 2013 - 11:00 AM


Quote: Live view on a DSLR is a juice drinker, the camera uses power to keep the mirror lifted, if the power dies the mirror drops

Live and learn - thanks!

MichaelMelb_AU
27 Jul 2013 - 12:39 PM

Congratulations! I like the result you achieved.

Jestertheclown
27 Jul 2013 - 1:27 PM

Hi Mike,

Good to see that you're still around and I'm glad to see that you've cracked it!

Frustrating isn't it, when you can see that there's something wrong but you just can't put your finger on it?
It's not quite the same thing but I suffered for ages with getting the sharpening right in software. I knew where I was going wring but I just couldn't nail it. Willie, from the CG, came to my rescue in the end and the problem's now pretty much gone.
Anyway!
The reason that I'm posting this has to do with monopods. They vary in price quite dramatically and while it may be true to say that you get what you pay for and therefore and expensive one will be a better one, I'm not sure that it will pay you to spend lots of cash on a top end model.
A friend of mine has a seriously posh one (with a camera to match) which I once borrowed and although it did a god job, I couldn't see that it was worth the money he'd paid for it.
The one I have came from Amazon and it's a basic, telescopic, aluminium affair with a very basic head, which cost me about £8.00 but it does everything that I need it to.
Now that really is the cheapskate version and I'm sure that you'd want/need one with a more functional head which will obviously cost a bit more but make sure that you look at a few before you settle upon one.
At the end of the day, it's only a stick on which you're going to balance your camera to support its weight.

Good luck!

Bren.

Mozzytheboy
Mozzytheboy e2 Member 3550 forum postsMozzytheboy vcard United Kingdom3 Constructive Critique Points
27 Jul 2013 - 1:41 PM

Thanks Bren. Yes been very poorly for some months and with operations it has taken it out of me for sure. Anyway not too bad for now although I've just been granted a Blue Badge which will help a lot for getting around. I absopositively refuse to give in.

That was great info on m'pods; I've been looking at yes wow they vary. I just need to be certain it has the weight right for mine. Probably 2 kilos ish.

Mike

Jestertheclown
27 Jul 2013 - 1:54 PM


Quote: I just need to be certain it has the weight right for mine.

Yes and err on the side of judgement.

For what it's worth, my D3100, 55-300 and (over-the-top) flash weigh in at just over 2.5 kilos and my monopod copes with that well enough in general use.

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.