Need help with 150-450 focusing issue

**jatrax** · 02-08-2018, 01:07 PM

Originally posted by motorhead9999

I'll give a try to turning off SR and see if that helps out. I understand why turning off SR would in theory help, but I don't think that was my issue. If I could get a tack sharp focus with the ring, sure I could attribute any blurriness to a SR issue...but the fact that given my setup I couldn't even get the ring to give a focus leads me to believe it's not that setting. I could be wrong.

SR has nothing to do with auto focus / manual focus. It should be off if you are on a tripod. I've seen folks argue it made no difference in particular situations but it does. I have a series of images part hand held and part on a tripod. The tripod ones are blurry and the hand held ones tack sharp, all with the same camera settings
.
However, I suspect there is more than one issue here:
1) There is definite heat haze which is not helping and may be the primary issue.
2) The tripod and head you are using is marginal at best for that lens. You even mention you could see movement. It might be the wind but that will translate to camera shake. I have one of the MeFoto tripods and I use it when traveling but never with anything as big as the 150-450. Yes it will hold it up but it is not going to be steady.
3) The SR being on, if it was, would also contribute to the motion blur.

**AstroDave** · 02-08-2018, 01:25 PM

Originally posted by jatrax

However, I suspect there is more than one issue here:
1) There is definite heat haze which is not helping and may be the primary issue.
2) The tripod and head you are using is marginal at best for that lens. You even mention you could see movement. It might be the wind but that will translate to camera shake. I have one of the MeFoto tripods and I use it when traveling but never with anything as big as the 150-450. Yes it will hold it up but it is not going to be steady.
3) The SR being on, if it was, would also contribute to the motion blur.

Anything other than heat shimmer as the cause is mostly a red herring for this image!

As I noted earlier, out of focus will NOT create those shimmery, wiggly lines.

Neither will camera shake (due to whatever: too slow shutter speed, wind shake, unstable tripod, mirror slap, ....) nor shake reduction. ALL these effects move a significant part (if not all) of the sensor in the same way - so all (at least) nearby pixels will show the same distortion - again not wiggly shimmer on a small scale.

All those effects may well have affected the rocket image, but the OPs chief problem is the shimmer, as others have noted as well. I'll bet a close comparison of his buddies' shots will show the same effect (at least for comparable focal lengths).

Faster shutter speed won't help either - it just freezes in what ever the shimmer is at the moment of exposure.

**Ron Boggs** · 02-08-2018, 02:46 PM

Time to go chimping on buddies' computers! If their images are tack sharp (at 450mm 3 miles away in the afternoon heat) then it can't be heat shimmer and the red herrings can't be red herrings...no matter what the screen images look like.

I suspect that nobody standing beside you got anything any sharper than you got at that focal length and distance.

Ah, and firmware version predating your lens and not being "tuned" to your lens/focal length would affect both focusing and shake reduction which probably impacts your images both with and without heat shimmer!

**pentageek** · 02-08-2018, 02:51 PM

Originally posted by Ron Boggs

Time to go chimping on buddies' computers!

You made my day! Thanks for reminding us that it's about photography, not firmware and other stuff like this

derekkite · 02-08-2018, 03:55 PM

Remember too that a softer image will make the harsh distortions look better. I find that this lens and the DA*300 can get very harsh and choppy images in some situations.

Paul the Sunman · 02-08-2018, 07:32 PM

At 1/2500 sec exposure, I doubt camera shake would be an issue. My bet is on atmospheric distortion.

**UncleVanya** · 02-08-2018, 10:29 PM

For everyone saying atmospheric distortion, I agree in principle. Perhaps the OP could get a friend's shot to show the differences? If they are in fact clear we have a conundrum.

motorhead9999 · 02-12-2018, 12:14 PM - **1 Like**

So just to give everyone an update on this:

Finally had a chance to sit down and compare my picture to my friends in detail. For the shots on the launch pad, we both actually have the same level of sharpness, and the same issues with the distortions, which do appear to be heat issues, so that seems to be ok.

For the in flight shots, it looks to be a case of operator error on my part. Figuring that the rocket rising would be at the same infinity focal length as being on the pad, I left my camera on the manual focus I used on the pad. Clearly the same focus setting was not valid for the entire ascent, and I should have either altered my manual focus, or switched the camera back to autofocus once it cleared the pad and I took it off the tripod.

Tl;Dr: The lens is a really nice lens, I really enjoy it, and I just need to be a better photographer

**UncleVanya** · 02-12-2018, 12:32 PM

Originally posted by motorhead9999

So just to give everyone an update on this:

Finally had a chance to sit down and compare my picture to my friends in detail. For the shots on the launch pad, we both actually have the same level of sharpness, and the same issues with the distortions, which do appear to be heat issues, so that seems to be ok.

For the in flight shots, it looks to be a case of operator error on my part. Figuring that the rocket rising would be at the same infinity focal length as being on the pad, I left my camera on the manual focus I used on the pad. Clearly the same focus setting was not valid for the entire ascent, and I should have either altered my manual focus, or switched the camera back to autofocus once it cleared the pad and I took it off the tripod.

Tl;Dr: The lens is a really nice lens, I really enjoy it, and I just need to be a better photographer

This makes sense! Good to know and glad you found out.

For those who insisted it was heat distortion Kudos for sticking to your guns and not being distracted by the slight misinformation.

**BigMackCam** · 02-12-2018, 01:21 PM

Originally posted by motorhead9999

So just to give everyone an update on this:

Finally had a chance to sit down and compare my picture to my friends in detail. For the shots on the launch pad, we both actually have the same level of sharpness, and the same issues with the distortions, which do appear to be heat issues, so that seems to be ok.

For the in flight shots, it looks to be a case of operator error on my part. Figuring that the rocket rising would be at the same infinity focal length as being on the pad, I left my camera on the manual focus I used on the pad. Clearly the same focus setting was not valid for the entire ascent, and I should have either altered my manual focus, or switched the camera back to autofocus once it cleared the pad and I took it off the tripod.

Tl;Dr: The lens is a really nice lens, I really enjoy it, and I just need to be a better photographer

Very glad to hear it! And thanks for coming back to let us know the outcome

Enjoy that fine lens

jaybird01 · 02-12-2018, 02:09 PM

I don't own a K1 but I assume things like focusing are similar to my K3II. Were you using AF.C? Select or Spot? It could be that your focus point on the white rocket did not provide enough contrast to focus. Moving the focus point to a place with more contrast might have helped.

I live on the "Space Coast". Recently the winds have been 15 - 20 mph+ after 9 or 10 AM. At the beach, the wind velocity is greater and that could be the culprit despite having your camera on a tripod.

Also, did you shoot with a button press? Another possible culprit.

motorhead9999 · 02-13-2018, 04:31 AM

Originally posted by jaybird01

I don't own a K1 but I assume things like focusing are similar to my K3II. Were you using AF.C? Select or Spot? It could be that your focus point on the white rocket did not provide enough contrast to focus. Moving the focus point to a place with more contrast might have helped.

I live on the "Space Coast". Recently the winds have been 15 - 20 mph+ after 9 or 10 AM. At the beach, the wind velocity is greater and that could be the culprit despite having your camera on a tripod.

Also, did you shoot with a button press? Another possible culprit.

I did af.c. While the rocket was on the pad, I was using a shutter release button, and then switched to handholding once I took it off the tripod. While it was airborne, I was still on manual focus though, so the autofocus wasn't doing anything at that point.

02-12-2018, 02:09 PM	#41
jaybird01 New Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 15	I don't own a K1 but I assume things like focusing are similar to my K3II. Were you using AF.C? Select or Spot? It could be that your focus point on the white rocket did not provide enough contrast to focus. Moving the focus point to a place with more contrast might have helped. I live on the "Space Coast". Recently the winds have been 15 - 20 mph+ after 9 or 10 AM. At the beach, the wind velocity is greater and that could be the culprit despite having your camera on a tripod. Also, did you shoot with a button press? Another possible culprit. Last edited by jaybird01; 02-12-2018 at 02:23 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax 150-450 vs Sigma 150-500 questions	stemked	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	18	05-28-2018 09:38 AM
DFA 150-450 vs Sigma 150-500	gerax	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	26	05-21-2018 09:24 PM
Simple lens shootout Pentax HD DFA 150-450 vs Canon 100-400 II vs Sigma 150-600 C	beholder3	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	46	07-25-2016 12:33 AM
150-450 v 150-500 v 300 + 1.4TC	FreeSpirit9	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	62	05-17-2016 02:35 PM
Nikon D7200+ Sigma 150-600 S vs Pentax DFA 150-450	Shanti	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	43	12-13-2015 09:02 AM

02-08-2018, 01:07 PM	#31
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Originally posted by motorhead9999 I'll give a try to turning off SR and see if that helps out. I understand why turning off SR would in theory help, but I don't think that was my issue. If I could get a tack sharp focus with the ring, sure I could attribute any blurriness to a SR issue...but the fact that given my setup I couldn't even get the ring to give a focus leads me to believe it's not that setting. I could be wrong. SR has nothing to do with auto focus / manual focus. It should be off if you are on a tripod. I've seen folks argue it made no difference in particular situations but it does. I have a series of images part hand held and part on a tripod. The tripod ones are blurry and the hand held ones tack sharp, all with the same camera settings . However, I suspect there is more than one issue here: 1) There is definite heat haze which is not helping and may be the primary issue. 2) The tripod and head you are using is marginal at best for that lens. You even mention you could see movement. It might be the wind but that will translate to camera shake. I have one of the MeFoto tripods and I use it when traveling but never with anything as big as the 150-450. Yes it will hold it up but it is not going to be steady. 3) The SR being on, if it was, would also contribute to the motion blur.

02-08-2018, 01:25 PM	#32
AstroDave Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: May 2007 Location: Flagstaff, Arizona Posts: 1,637	Originally posted by jatrax However, I suspect there is more than one issue here: 1) There is definite heat haze which is not helping and may be the primary issue. 2) The tripod and head you are using is marginal at best for that lens. You even mention you could see movement. It might be the wind but that will translate to camera shake. I have one of the MeFoto tripods and I use it when traveling but never with anything as big as the 150-450. Yes it will hold it up but it is not going to be steady. 3) The SR being on, if it was, would also contribute to the motion blur. Anything other than heat shimmer as the cause is mostly a red herring for this image! As I noted earlier, out of focus will NOT create those shimmery, wiggly lines. Neither will camera shake (due to whatever: too slow shutter speed, wind shake, unstable tripod, mirror slap, ....) nor shake reduction. ALL these effects move a significant part (if not all) of the sensor in the same way - so all (at least) nearby pixels will show the same distortion - again not wiggly shimmer on a small scale. All those effects may well have affected the rocket image, but the OPs chief problem is the shimmer, as others have noted as well. I'll bet a close comparison of his buddies' shots will show the same effect (at least for comparable focal lengths). Faster shutter speed won't help either - it just freezes in what ever the shimmer is at the moment of exposure.

02-08-2018, 02:46 PM	#33
Ron Boggs Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: MT Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,349	Time to go chimping on buddies' computers! If their images are tack sharp (at 450mm 3 miles away in the afternoon heat) then it can't be heat shimmer and the red herrings can't be red herrings...no matter what the screen images look like. I suspect that nobody standing beside you got anything any sharper than you got at that focal length and distance. Ah, and firmware version predating your lens and not being "tuned" to your lens/focal length would affect both focusing and shake reduction which probably impacts your images both with and without heat shimmer!

02-08-2018, 02:51 PM	#34
pentageek Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2016 Posts: 420	Originally posted by Ron Boggs Time to go chimping on buddies' computers! You made my day! Thanks for reminding us that it's about photography, not firmware and other stuff like this

02-08-2018, 03:55 PM	#35
derekkite Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Nelson B.C. Posts: 3,782	Remember too that a softer image will make the harsh distortions look better. I find that this lens and the DA*300 can get very harsh and choppy images in some situations.

02-08-2018, 07:32 PM	#36
Paul the Sunman Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Melbourne Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,843	At 1/2500 sec exposure, I doubt camera shake would be an issue. My bet is on atmospheric distortion.

02-08-2018, 10:29 PM	#37
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,404	For everyone saying atmospheric distortion, I agree in principle. Perhaps the OP could get a friend's shot to show the differences? If they are in fact clear we have a conundrum.

02-12-2018, 12:14 PM - 1 Like	#38
motorhead9999 Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2017 Photos: Albums Posts: 114 Original Poster	So just to give everyone an update on this: Finally had a chance to sit down and compare my picture to my friends in detail. For the shots on the launch pad, we both actually have the same level of sharpness, and the same issues with the distortions, which do appear to be heat issues, so that seems to be ok. For the in flight shots, it looks to be a case of operator error on my part. Figuring that the rocket rising would be at the same infinity focal length as being on the pad, I left my camera on the manual focus I used on the pad. Clearly the same focus setting was not valid for the entire ascent, and I should have either altered my manual focus, or switched the camera back to autofocus once it cleared the pad and I took it off the tripod. Tl;Dr: The lens is a really nice lens, I really enjoy it, and I just need to be a better photographer

02-12-2018, 12:32 PM	#39
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,404	Originally posted by motorhead9999 So just to give everyone an update on this: Finally had a chance to sit down and compare my picture to my friends in detail. For the shots on the launch pad, we both actually have the same level of sharpness, and the same issues with the distortions, which do appear to be heat issues, so that seems to be ok. For the in flight shots, it looks to be a case of operator error on my part. Figuring that the rocket rising would be at the same infinity focal length as being on the pad, I left my camera on the manual focus I used on the pad. Clearly the same focus setting was not valid for the entire ascent, and I should have either altered my manual focus, or switched the camera back to autofocus once it cleared the pad and I took it off the tripod. Tl;Dr: The lens is a really nice lens, I really enjoy it, and I just need to be a better photographer This makes sense! Good to know and glad you found out. For those who insisted it was heat distortion Kudos for sticking to your guns and not being distracted by the slight misinformation.

02-12-2018, 01:21 PM	#40
BigMackCam Digitiser of Film Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: North East of England Posts: 20,674	Originally posted by motorhead9999 So just to give everyone an update on this: Finally had a chance to sit down and compare my picture to my friends in detail. For the shots on the launch pad, we both actually have the same level of sharpness, and the same issues with the distortions, which do appear to be heat issues, so that seems to be ok. For the in flight shots, it looks to be a case of operator error on my part. Figuring that the rocket rising would be at the same infinity focal length as being on the pad, I left my camera on the manual focus I used on the pad. Clearly the same focus setting was not valid for the entire ascent, and I should have either altered my manual focus, or switched the camera back to autofocus once it cleared the pad and I took it off the tripod. Tl;Dr: The lens is a really nice lens, I really enjoy it, and I just need to be a better photographer Very glad to hear it! And thanks for coming back to let us know the outcome Enjoy that fine lens

02-13-2018, 04:31 AM	#42
motorhead9999 Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2017 Photos: Albums Posts: 114 Original Poster	Originally posted by jaybird01 I don't own a K1 but I assume things like focusing are similar to my K3II. Were you using AF.C? Select or Spot? It could be that your focus point on the white rocket did not provide enough contrast to focus. Moving the focus point to a place with more contrast might have helped. I live on the "Space Coast". Recently the winds have been 15 - 20 mph+ after 9 or 10 AM. At the beach, the wind velocity is greater and that could be the culprit despite having your camera on a tripod. Also, did you shoot with a button press? Another possible culprit. I did af.c. While the rocket was on the pad, I was using a shutter release button, and then switched to handholding once I took it off the tripod. While it was airborne, I was still on manual focus though, so the autofocus wasn't doing anything at that point.