Advice please - sharp focus?

Langtoftlad said:
For my sins I do have a used RX100 iii - a little smaller than the Panny.
I got it for the Northern Lights in Norway as it has the 1" sensor and wider aperture.
It's very limited by the zoom and I found the menu system very complex.
But maybe I should dig it out and have a play with it in proper light.
Click to expand...
I've just unburied it - and realised I hadn't even taken the Norway pix off the card :doh:.
Judging by the exif data... nearly double the file size, double the dpi in about the same image size it could well be a 'better' camera IQ wise.
More playing required... should have taken it to Vietnam!
 
  • Like
Reactions: dna
Your camera is doing the best it can. You're comparing with photos that cheat. Post processing of professional shots. And the amount of processing and digital fakery that goes into phone photography is mind boggling. Phones literally use AI to guess at finer detail, and they are amazingly good at it.
 
Langtoftlad said:
Would you say this image is sharp enough, not to doubt the glass?
Click to expand...
You're shooting at 1/200 and if your handhold technique is bad you'll get a bit of shake. To check if this is the case, set up a test piece and take one shot hand held and then another using a tripod (or a makeshift solid platform) using the timer so you're not touching the camera. Then see if there is a difference.
 
steve69 said:
Surely even the slightest, barely detectable movement of your camera whilst taking the photo will always impact on image sharpness. More so in dim light situations.
Click to expand...
I think this is the answer. ISO 80 so quite slow, f4 large aperture but 1/200 second. Don’t know whether any zoom employed, I think camera shake’s to blame. The first two photos in the first post look pin sharp to me. I’ve never heard of Leica lenses being soft. They’re not on my Leica.
I’d be happy with your photos. Maybe looking at them on a huge screen they’ll look less sharp.
Anyway, good luck and post some more photos. Nice to look at.

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
Looking at any photos on a 50in screen means you need to be stood at least 15 feet away from screen to see definition, otherwise you are looking at the pixel construction of the photo and not the overall shot. 🙀
 
Langtoftlad said:
I've just unburied it - and realised I hadn't even taken the Norway pix off the card :doh:.
Judging by the exif data... nearly double the file size, double the dpi in about the same image size it could well be a 'better' camera IQ wise.
More playing required... should have taken it to Vietnam!
Click to expand...
Definitely worth a try. Even if it comes back into use as a camera you put in a pocket “just in case”.
I confess I didn’t spend a lot of time learning all the features of the camera. It’s probably heresy to a photography enthusiast but auto works very well most of the time 👍
 
Langtoftlad said:
I'm beginning to wonder if I should double jump and get an actual APS-C DSLR and a decent third party zoom lens - aaargh.

I've seen a Canon EOS2000D or an EOS4000D for under £360 including 18-55mm lens coupled with a £250 75-300mm which would probably stay on the camera body... so effectively as 'convenient' as a Bridge camera in the same budget.

Podcast What GIF by Washed Media


Am I getting carried away?
Click to expand...
I like Canon's DSLR - the entry level range.
I first got the EOS350D & then upgraded to the EOS450D.
Later I sold those to family members & bought the EOS760D

Those look like the range below the ones you're considering (EOS2000D or an EOS4000D) - just based on how your two don't have the basic built in flash. 🤔 edit: sorry. one has built in & one doesn't.

Canon have great sensors - especially at low ISO sensitivity (>800).

As said above, the 15-55 & 75-300 mentioned will likely be the kit lenses.
The newest 15-55mm kit lens is quiet good - well, better than the older kit 15-55 ones!

I use a Canon EF-S 15-85MM F/3.5-5.6 IS USM lens and a Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6 APO DG Macro lens.
The Canon lens is a brilliant walkaround lens and is nearly exclusively what I use on holiday.
The Sigma 70-300mm I mostly get out for wildlife trips or fast fun astronomy pics (just the moon and sun then :LOL: ) if I didn't prepare &get the telescope out.

People will always post pics better than you took.
Oh! And nowadays I grab pics with an iPhone or Canon Compact SX620 - leaving the DSLR for trips where capturing the moment is more important (y)

Sorry, I saw your thread when I was watching telly & now I'm rambling.

TL;DR
The Canon range have always been good for me. I've usually only justified upgrading when a family member bought my old canon off me :rofl:
Though the 760D I have now was when Canon 1st added a decent live screen photo taking ability and some "pro" features like a control wheel on the back and a top LCD info screen.
 
My first Canon was the FTBn………many, many years ago…….! ;)
 
kevenh said:
As said above, the 15-55 & 75-300 mentioned will likely be the kit lenses.
Click to expand...
"Kit lenses" means what exactly?

I suspect lenses supplied with the camera body as you can usually by body only.

Are 'kit lenses' somehow inferior?

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
Langtoftlad said:
"Kit lenses" means what exactly?

I suspect lenses supplied with the camera body as you can usually by body only.

Are 'kit lenses' somehow inferior?
Click to expand...
Cheaper than the ‘advanced amateur/Professional L series lenses (Canon) which usually have a red line around the lens or are off white in colour. Generally they are not as water and dust resistant and the lens body is usually made of polycarbonate so don’t bounce as well as the dearer lenses.😜
You suspect correctly kit lenses are sold as boxed with body so you can shoot straight out of the box.
 
Langtoftlad said:
"Kit lenses" means what exactly?

I suspect lenses supplied with the camera body as you can usually by body only.

Are 'kit lenses' somehow inferior?
Click to expand...
You've got it.
Canon box the body and an 18-55mm in a "ready to go" single sale. And there's a kit with the 75-300mm added.
Both are entry level lens.

They will both be easy to beat by faster lens - in two specs: focus speed ability and f stop aperture range but not bad for an entry level. :doh: and of course optical quality ;) )

I used a kit lens for a bit. Then got a second hand 17-85mm lens. When I had used that until it broke I bought a brand new 15-85mm that was ~1.5x the price of the body :eek: (~£500)

edit: I was typing too slow!
Otter Spotter mentioned L lenses - those are the propper jobs. Out of my budget. Looking at shop.canon, is the L series now known as the ES? 🤔
store.canon.co.uk

Camera Lenses

Browse our range of Lenses. Buy direct from Canon UK Store and get Free Delivery on all orders and 2 Year Warranty on selected products.
store.canon.co.uk store.canon.co.uk
 
Every lenses will have a sweet spot and the TZ95 being a superzoom(30x I think) will have some large compromises built in and unlikely to be as sharp as even a good phone camera which are coming with multiple lenses these days. One of my cameras is an old Canon 5D Mk 2 which can be picked up for pittance and when paired to a good lens will product professional quality pics. I have had great results from the cheapest lens I bought - the Canon nifty fifty. Half your budget and great camera but very heavy and large to bring around!! Very rewarding when messing about learning about photography. As an example Canon have 3 50mm lens. one for €100, one for €400 and one for €1400ish. I don't earn my living from it so mine is the cheapest!!
 
Last edited:
AndyPK said:
My first Canon was the FTBn………many, many years ago…….! ;)
Click to expand...
Mine was a sixteen pounder on the old Agamemnon at the Battle of Copenhagen. :p
PS. That was back when we lived in't shoe box in't middle of road.

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
cyberyacht said:
Mine was a sixteen pounder on the old Agamemnon at the Battle of Copenhagen. :p
PS. That was back when we lived in't shoe box in't middle of road.
Click to expand...
You had a shoebox….!?!
We were lucky to have a paper bag back then………..
 
Insider said:
As an example Canon have 3 50mm lens. one for €100, one for €400 and one for €1400ish
Click to expand...
The 50mm focal length prime lense?
Yes, even the cheap model is a worthy addition to a camera bag yy
 
Couldn’t get the tripod set up. So photo’s not as sharp as it could be.🙂
89E4EF9A-C09B-4416-9B97-9FC55D6E3593.jpeg
 
Screenshot_20230127-202037_Photos.jpg

This was one I took with with my 83X ZOOM bridge camera a couple of years ago. Not having the same luck with my newer dslr and telephoto. Might go back to zoom bridge
 
One thing that can (did on my canon 550 dslr) destroy accurate focus is dust/ muck on the autofocus sensor by mirror?) (why no manual focus aids on modern cameras?). Can such a problem exist on compact cameras eg the OPs.
Slightly dissapointing reading about soft focus with the TZ95 as i have been concidering buying one for top pocket.

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
the1andonly said:
One thing that can (did on my canon 550 dslr) destroy accurate focus is dust/ muck on the autofocus sensor by mirror?) (why no manual focus aids on modern cameras?). Can such a problem exist on compact cameras eg the OPs.
Slightly dissapointing reading about soft focus with the TZ95 as i have been concidering buying one for top pocket.
Click to expand...
I suspect it's user error rather than poor equipment... However, jumartoo did have a dust issue with her TZ95

As I've further looked at some of my "disappointing" images, I also wonder if what I attribute soft focus is a lack of "pop".
 
The moon was taken with a Samsung D900. I am currently struggling with a Samsung D610 plus telephoto lens. Mostly on auto focus cos my results on manual....,., well no comment
 
scally said:
The moon was taken with a Samsung D900. I am currently struggling with a Samsung D610 plus telephoto lens. Mostly on auto focus cos my results on manual....,., well no comment
Click to expand...
Of course I meant nikon not samsung. Where that cae from is a mistery. No wo Dr I can't handle manual focus
 
Loads of great advice here, one thing I’d add too. As others have already mentioned, don’t get too hung up about megapixel count on sensors, as many lenses won’t actually be able to fully resolve the megapixel count anyway. Save up and buy the absolute best lens you can - better glass will always make a huge difference to the quality of your photos. Someone added a link to a video by Simon D’Entremont above, definitely go and have a look at his YouTube channel, he’s an expert at putting stuff into plain speak when it comes to cameras, lenses and photography in general.
 
Grocklets said:
as many lenses won’t actually be able to fully resolve the megapixel count anyway
Click to expand...
What do you mean?
The lens is the analogue part that is better than a sampling sensor.
I agree there is too much attention put on how many megas of pixels a camera has instead of the quality of the optics. yy
NB: Around 2005 I was on holiday and a fellow guest was a pro photographer and he had a chunky Canon EOS-1D full frame jobbie. Only ~4Mega pixels but top of the range lenses ;)

On a DSLR where you can swap the lens, you can get better images out of the camera with lenses with a large front part. I mean the "Front element" in this DSLR lens simplified exploded diagram:
0*sDk9rtQOyYG4YPbV.



So always use optical zoom and maybe think about not using or better disabling digital zoom. Digital zoom is just pixel reduction/cropping. You can do that at home with better control of the zoom/crop task - imo

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 

Join us or log in to post a reply.

To join in you must be a member of MotorhomeFun

Join MotorhomeFun

Join us, it quick and easy!

Join us

Log in

Already a member? Log in here.

Latest journal entries

Back
Top