lets compare the zillions of lense out there

[redonnemoi]

so i received the camera plus lens
i will serve up some photos soon :thumbsup:

[redonnemoi]

O_O

why does everything the camera take look like a Photoshop outer glow effect has been applied to the photo? is this because of the lens? xaxaxaxaxa

[EOSThree]

Please post an example, it's hard to diagnose with your description.

[redonnemoi]

the text looks likes its soft focus or something
my old nikon coolpix 5700 never had this problem

[SmartWombat]

Looks like your camera is not perfectly parallel to the paper.
The bottom looks softer than the top.

What camera, what lens?
Your photo editor took the EXIF data out of the photo so I can't tell

[redonnemoi]

IMG 0017

3888x2592
72 dpi
24 bit depth
Canon Digital Rebel XTI, Tamron 28-80 mm aspherical
sRGB
1/125, F7.1
Focal length 49mm

[redonnemoi]

by the way yes i noticed the camera is slightly off parallel, its tilted up ever so slightly because the lens is butting the tripod

now is there a free way, with readily available materials, that I can extend the camera a bit away from the tripod? Like about 50 cm? that way the camera would not but against the tripod.

[EOSThree]

A DSLR's output is pretty un-processed, whereas a P&S such as your Nikon adds quite a bit of post processing in camera. You can set the parameters in camera for a photo nearer to what you are expecting by boosting the sharpness, contrast, and saturation. The DSLR's output is quite neutral because it give you the most latitude in producing the output you want, it puts you in charge instead of the camera.

I added some unsharp mask to your photo, because of the small size here and the jpeg format it introduced quite a few halos and artifacts, but you get the idea. The first image is the sharpened version and the second one is the original.

[SmartWombat]

It doesn't look as if the focus was correct, it doesn't seem as sharp as I would expect at f/7 and it doesn't look like camera shake. I assume at 1/125 you used a tripod for this, not hand held?

First thought, did you sharpen the image?
Typically a P&S like the coolpix will by default add a lot of sharpening, compared to the XTi.
Lightroom will by default sharpen at 25% on all my Canon DSLR images.

What JPEG image size did you choose?
I can see a lot of blocky JPEG artefacts if I enhance edges, it doesn't look like you used the finest setting.
Compare that to the same image taken in RAW mode and converted with Digital Photo Profeessional.

You can use DPP to sharpen your image at a factor of 50 before edge artefacts show up, that will give a great improvement.

[EOSThree]

Oh and I forgot, some of the problem is that notoriously soft Tamron lens you got bundled with your camera.

[redonnemoi]

yeh hehehe sure i know by now the lens is bad xD

now, i used the remote control to take this picture to avoid moving the camera when i pressed down the shutter. Remember I don't have my Nikon anymore, I traded it in for exchange with the Rebel XTI.

So I should take pics with the raw setting to get the most possible sharpness? I already picked the highest resolution, I can't pick any higher... its L with a smooth quarter circle.

[Frog]

Sometimes its something simple like,"how close was the lens to the paper?" and was that within the lenses focal distance and not too close?

[redonnemoi]

i just measured it, min focal distance: 70cm

distance to paper: ~80cm

[SmartWombat]

So it's within focal range of the lens, you used remote release, good.
Was the camera on a tripod too ?
Did you use manual focus or AF ?


I'd like to see RAW for comparison.
When you process it in DPP to convert the RAW to JPEG you have more control over how the image ends up.


Personally, I always shoot in RAW because it's much better for editing.
By going to JPEG it's a lossy compression, so a little image quality is lost.

But it's slower overall because you have to work on the image when you get home.
And you can't just stick the memory card into a printer and print off an image.
There's no such thing as a free lunch.

JPEG is all ready to print direct form the memory card.
But some quality has been lost by compressing it.

RAW preserves the original image (think of it as your negative).
But the files are much bigger and you can't print them directly.


Under a tight deadline, I'd shoot RAW+JPEG so that I had both files.
I could submit the JPEG unprocessed immediately, and then process the RAW and submit bigger better images at leisure.

[redonnemoi]

yeh the camera is on a tripod, and i used remote release. I used Autofocus, because the page position may potentially change (im trying to scan a book for my own records) by a few millimetres. I don't wanna manual focus every page, so I do this:

light up the place with several 100W (equivalent) fluorescent light bulbs
place the book under two heavy sheets of clear plastic
flip to the right page
click the remote release, with camera on full auto no flash
repeat

this goes incredibly fast, faster than a scanner :lol:

i really don't wanna go to manual focus

[Frog]

If the book is at the same distance for every shot, you'd only have to manual focus once.
Using a smaller aperture might help for minor differences for dof.

[freygr]

There is a big difference between the PS DOF and the DOF of a SLR lense at the same angle of view. The PS lens is a SHORTER lens and has much more DOF. My old Olympus C-3030 the 135mm Equivalent was only 32mm!!

[redonnemoi]

i dug up my old Canon SLR camera. it had a EOS 28-70 mm EF-S lens, so I am using that now

should I buy extension tubes for this lens if I want to use macro? also, I noticed that the thread for the filters sinks beneath the edge of the lens upon zooming, so how on earth will a filter fit onto this lens?

thanks again

[redonnemoi]

note: this lens does not have a Ø on it

[redonnemoi]

does anybody know the answer to my question?
thanks again

[freygr]

The OD of the filter is smaller than to OD of the lens unless you install a setup ring and some polarizing filters may be larger OD.

[redonnemoi]

the lens says: 52mm filtres accepted. do you know of any accessory that can extend the 52mm filtre thread, so it will go further out from the lens?

[redonnemoi]

is this what i need?

http://www.acephotodigital.com/sc/re...date=3_21_2008

[freygr]

I'm sorry but you should try the filters you have first before purchasing more stuff. A filter extension ring may cause optical problems like vignetting.

[redonnemoi]

i have no filtres no nothing, just a camera and a 28-70 mm canonlens
i just bought one, so its on the way. i predict that will be a problem since most lenses these days do not have the lens barrel sink below the surface of the lens when they zoom, so i was attempting to be a forward thinker