Horrible IQ, is it my lens or camera?

Pentaxor · 10-04-2009, 11:37 PM

Originally posted by Ash

If you want to take camera shake completely out of the equation, you must be sure the camera is on the tripod with SR off, a 2sec delay engaged for shutter release, and conditions aren't windy or shaky where you are. If windy, bump up the speed to freeze action - at least 1/250sec.

or use mirror-up.

Crepusculum · 10-05-2009, 12:00 AM

Originally posted by Atindra

What I find strange is 1/100 and 1/200 shutter speeds under the bright sun. Which mode you are using? Because in Nikon shot at f/7.1 the shutter speed is at 1/1000 (as the sunlight is very strong in that shot).

Atindra

I shoot in AV unless I need to go full manual for special occasions. Perhaps some of the settings on the Pentax are limiting my shutter speed. The only difference in the shots vs. the Nikon is that with the Pentax I am using a polarizer and the Nikon just had a UV filter. Also the bodies might make a difference in, the Nikon is a D700 which blows away the Pentax ISO performance, but that is expected due to the nature of the Nikon.

Atindra · 10-05-2009, 12:09 AM

Originally posted by Crepusculum

I shoot in AV unless I need to go full manual for special occasions. Perhaps some of the settings on the Pentax are limiting my shutter speed. The only difference in the shots vs. the Nikon is that with the Pentax I am using a polarizer and the Nikon just had a UV filter. Also the bodies might make a difference in, the Nikon is a D700 which blows away the Pentax ISO performance, but that is expected due to the nature of the Nikon.

I dont think D700 would blow away K-7 at base ISO. But I guess the polarizer is playing some role there. I would try two shots with and without polarizer.

Atindra

Crepusculum · 10-05-2009, 12:16 AM

Originally posted by Atindra

I dont think D700 would blow away K-7 at base ISO. But I guess the polarizer is playing some role there. I would try two shots with and without polarizer.

Atindra

What I really meant to say was anything above ISO 200 and the K7 shows more noise then the D700, by ISO 800 the Nikon wins hands down. But it's fair to compare the two because of the full frame and the 2K+ price difference. But nevertheless; I moved on to Pentax and no longer shoot Nikon, so it must have not been that important to me

Crepusculum · 10-05-2009, 12:20 AM

Originally posted by Ash

If you want to take camera shake completely out of the equation, you must be sure the camera is on the tripod with SR off, a 2sec delay engaged for shutter release, and conditions aren't windy or shaky where you are. If windy, bump up the speed to freeze action - at least 1/250sec.

I am definitely going to run more tests. But I honestly discovered what the problem was and it had nothing to do with the lens or camera. It was VERY windy out there today and I completely forgot when I was reviewing the shots. So I feel like a bit of a fool for posting this thread in the first place.

Pentaxor · 10-05-2009, 12:23 AM

Originally posted by Crepusculum

I shoot in AV unless I need to go full manual for special occasions. Perhaps some of the settings on the Pentax are limiting my shutter speed. The only difference in the shots vs. the Nikon is that with the Pentax I am using a polarizer and the Nikon just had a UV filter. Also the bodies might make a difference in, the Nikon is a D700 which blows away the Pentax ISO performance, but that is expected due to the nature of the Nikon.

in lowlight, YES. but in those sunny day conditions, I don't see any point of boosting up your ISO to 3200 or 6400 during that time frame unless you decide to lower your aperture and shutterspeed for whatever unexplainable reason there might be.

besides, your problem is not about HIGH ISO NOISE, but more actually on how to get a decent shot result off your new system.

p.s. just in case you are still having a problem with your lens, I'd be more than happy to accept it whenever you feel generous.

Pentaxor · 10-05-2009, 12:38 AM

Originally posted by Crepusculum

What I really meant to say was anything above ISO 200 and the K7 shows more noise then the D700, by ISO 800 the Nikon wins hands down. But it's fair to compare the two because of the full frame and the 2K+ price difference. But nevertheless; I moved on to Pentax and no longer shoot Nikon, so it must have not been that important to me

as far as I'm concerned, the D700 High ISO noise performance only comes in handy above ISO 1600. starting from 2500 to 6400 under jpeg format directly from the camera. the K-7's ISO noise at 800 to 1600 are still very nice (base ISO to 400 are excellent, IMO) under jpeg format from the camera. the ISO 3200 RAW results are very good/nice also when post-processed outside of the camera, especially when pulled.

and besides, I'm surely am to miss the friendly noise effect for vintage black and white shots. who says noise aren't beneficial?

Crepusculum · 10-05-2009, 12:51 AM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

as far as I'm concerned, the D700 High ISO noise performance only comes in handy above ISO 1600. starting from 2500 to 6400 under jpeg format directly from the camera. the K-7's ISO noise at 800 to 1600 are still very nice (base ISO to 400 are excellent, IMO) under jpeg format from the camera. the ISO 3200 RAW results are very good/nice also when post-processed outside of the camera, especially when pulled.

and besides, I'm surely am to miss the friendly noise effect for vintage black and white shots. who says noise aren't beneficial?

Yes I agree, the K7 is very usable at 800-1600. I don't know if I would want to shoot above 2400 unless I absolutely had too. I shoot band performances sometimes, but I have yet to get a fast prime for the K7, that will be next on the list.

Crepusculum · 10-05-2009, 12:53 AM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

besides, your problem is not about HIGH ISO NOISE, but more actually on how to get a decent shot result off your new system.

True, not sure how we got off course and started talking about ISO performance.

Pentaxor · 10-05-2009, 01:07 AM

Originally posted by Crepusculum

True, not sure how we got off course and started talking about ISO performance.

anyway, hope you get better results next time. the second shot was good actually, if not for the motion blur that appeared when cropped closely.

Ben_Edict · 10-05-2009, 01:47 AM

The first shot, with the lake, looks definitely like camera shake. You can even see the multiple silhouettes. the second looks also very much like camera shake, but I am not quite as definite on this.

It is not a lens or camera problem. You should try to use faster speeds and/or a tripod and your results will be perfect. Obviously you have a good eye and your images deserve the extra effort to get perfect sharpness.

Ben

glasbak · 10-05-2009, 02:12 AM

First, if you suspect a lens, take some controlled test shots.
That is on tripod, without Shake reduction, in good light, without any filters on the lens.
And without filter, I mean also without the (cheap ?) UV or protection filter.
Then post them here.

mickeyobe · 10-05-2009, 02:28 AM

Could it possibly be your computer/monitor and not your camera/lens?

Mickey

Marc Sabatella · 10-05-2009, 08:54 AM

Originally posted by Atindra

What I find strange is 1/100 and 1/200 shutter speeds under the bright sun. Which mode you are using? Because in Nikon shot at f/7.1 the shutter speed is at 1/1000 (as the sunlight is very strong in that shot).

Good point. I wonder how he was getting such slow shutter speeds in full sun at the stated aperture and ISO? Was there perhaps an ND or polarizing filter involved? What kind of quality are talking about?

Anyhow, I agree the tripod shots look "normal", suggesting the lens itself is fine, so it's either camera shake despite SR, or missed focus (I wouldn't guarantee the camera focused exactly where the crops come from) - either of which could be a camera problem but are just as likely user-caused.

EDIT: missed the followup where the OP specifically mentioned the polarizer and wind. That explains the low shutter speeds. Might also explain some of the overall softness if it was not a high quality filter. And the relatively slow shutter speeds combined with the wind explains the rest.

Ben_Edict · 10-05-2009, 11:09 AM

Originally posted by Marc Sabatella

Good point. I wonder how he was getting such slow shutter speeds in full sun at the stated aperture and ISO? Was there perhaps an ND or polarizing filter involved? What kind of quality are talking about?

Anyhow, I agree the tripod shots look "normal", suggesting the lens itself is fine, so it's either camera shake despite SR, or missed focus (I wouldn't guarantee the camera focused exactly where the crops come from) - either of which could be a camera problem but are just as likely user-caused.

EDIT: missed the followup where the OP specifically mentioned the polarizer and wind. That explains the low shutter speeds. Might also explain some of the overall softness if it was not a high quality filter. And the relatively slow shutter speeds combined with the wind explains the rest.

Marc, the TO stated that he used a CPL on the Pentax and just a UV on the Nikon. That is the explanation for the longer shutter speed. He also stated (which I only read after my last reply, that there was a breeze which may account for the camera shake.

Ben

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
some horrible luck here	irishwhite	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	2	09-04-2010 03:34 PM
Horrible Dust on my K-x sensor	gut1kor	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	7	07-24-2010 07:06 PM
So horrible at ISO800	henryjing	Pentax DSLR Discussion	42	04-17-2010 10:26 AM
Detroit's Beautiful, Horrible Decline	deadwolfbones	General Talk	37	09-26-2009 07:54 AM
My horrible LBA...	Vulpix	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	03-07-2007 07:53 AM

10-04-2009, 11:37 PM	#16
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by Ash If you want to take camera shake completely out of the equation, you must be sure the camera is on the tripod with SR off, a 2sec delay engaged for shutter release, and conditions aren't windy or shaky where you are. If windy, bump up the speed to freeze action - at least 1/250sec. or use mirror-up.

10-05-2009, 12:00 AM	#17
Crepusculum Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Tucson, AZ Posts: 46 Original Poster	Originally posted by Atindra What I find strange is 1/100 and 1/200 shutter speeds under the bright sun. Which mode you are using? Because in Nikon shot at f/7.1 the shutter speed is at 1/1000 (as the sunlight is very strong in that shot). Atindra I shoot in AV unless I need to go full manual for special occasions. Perhaps some of the settings on the Pentax are limiting my shutter speed. The only difference in the shots vs. the Nikon is that with the Pentax I am using a polarizer and the Nikon just had a UV filter. Also the bodies might make a difference in, the Nikon is a D700 which blows away the Pentax ISO performance, but that is expected due to the nature of the Nikon.

10-05-2009, 12:09 AM	#18
Atindra Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Bhavnagar (Gujarat),India Photos: Gallery Posts: 375	Originally posted by Crepusculum I shoot in AV unless I need to go full manual for special occasions. Perhaps some of the settings on the Pentax are limiting my shutter speed. The only difference in the shots vs. the Nikon is that with the Pentax I am using a polarizer and the Nikon just had a UV filter. Also the bodies might make a difference in, the Nikon is a D700 which blows away the Pentax ISO performance, but that is expected due to the nature of the Nikon. I dont think D700 would blow away K-7 at base ISO. But I guess the polarizer is playing some role there. I would try two shots with and without polarizer. Atindra

10-05-2009, 12:16 AM	#19
Crepusculum Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Tucson, AZ Posts: 46 Original Poster	Originally posted by Atindra I dont think D700 would blow away K-7 at base ISO. But I guess the polarizer is playing some role there. I would try two shots with and without polarizer. Atindra What I really meant to say was anything above ISO 200 and the K7 shows more noise then the D700, by ISO 800 the Nikon wins hands down. But it's fair to compare the two because of the full frame and the 2K+ price difference. But nevertheless; I moved on to Pentax and no longer shoot Nikon, so it must have not been that important to me

10-05-2009, 12:20 AM	#20
Crepusculum Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Tucson, AZ Posts: 46 Original Poster	Originally posted by Ash If you want to take camera shake completely out of the equation, you must be sure the camera is on the tripod with SR off, a 2sec delay engaged for shutter release, and conditions aren't windy or shaky where you are. If windy, bump up the speed to freeze action - at least 1/250sec. I am definitely going to run more tests. But I honestly discovered what the problem was and it had nothing to do with the lens or camera. It was VERY windy out there today and I completely forgot when I was reviewing the shots. So I feel like a bit of a fool for posting this thread in the first place.

10-05-2009, 12:23 AM	#21
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by Crepusculum I shoot in AV unless I need to go full manual for special occasions. Perhaps some of the settings on the Pentax are limiting my shutter speed. The only difference in the shots vs. the Nikon is that with the Pentax I am using a polarizer and the Nikon just had a UV filter. Also the bodies might make a difference in, the Nikon is a D700 which blows away the Pentax ISO performance, but that is expected due to the nature of the Nikon. in lowlight, YES. but in those sunny day conditions, I don't see any point of boosting up your ISO to 3200 or 6400 during that time frame unless you decide to lower your aperture and shutterspeed for whatever unexplainable reason there might be. besides, your problem is not about HIGH ISO NOISE, but more actually on how to get a decent shot result off your new system. p.s. just in case you are still having a problem with your lens, I'd be more than happy to accept it whenever you feel generous.

10-05-2009, 12:38 AM	#22
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by Crepusculum What I really meant to say was anything above ISO 200 and the K7 shows more noise then the D700, by ISO 800 the Nikon wins hands down. But it's fair to compare the two because of the full frame and the 2K+ price difference. But nevertheless; I moved on to Pentax and no longer shoot Nikon, so it must have not been that important to me as far as I'm concerned, the D700 High ISO noise performance only comes in handy above ISO 1600. starting from 2500 to 6400 under jpeg format directly from the camera. the K-7's ISO noise at 800 to 1600 are still very nice (base ISO to 400 are excellent, IMO) under jpeg format from the camera. the ISO 3200 RAW results are very good/nice also when post-processed outside of the camera, especially when pulled. and besides, I'm surely am to miss the friendly noise effect for vintage black and white shots. who says noise aren't beneficial?

10-05-2009, 12:51 AM	#23
Crepusculum Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Tucson, AZ Posts: 46 Original Poster	Originally posted by Pentaxor as far as I'm concerned, the D700 High ISO noise performance only comes in handy above ISO 1600. starting from 2500 to 6400 under jpeg format directly from the camera. the K-7's ISO noise at 800 to 1600 are still very nice (base ISO to 400 are excellent, IMO) under jpeg format from the camera. the ISO 3200 RAW results are very good/nice also when post-processed outside of the camera, especially when pulled. and besides, I'm surely am to miss the friendly noise effect for vintage black and white shots. who says noise aren't beneficial? Yes I agree, the K7 is very usable at 800-1600. I don't know if I would want to shoot above 2400 unless I absolutely had too. I shoot band performances sometimes, but I have yet to get a fast prime for the K7, that will be next on the list.

10-05-2009, 12:53 AM	#24
Crepusculum Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Tucson, AZ Posts: 46 Original Poster	Originally posted by Pentaxor besides, your problem is not about HIGH ISO NOISE, but more actually on how to get a decent shot result off your new system. True, not sure how we got off course and started talking about ISO performance.

10-05-2009, 01:07 AM	#25
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by Crepusculum True, not sure how we got off course and started talking about ISO performance. anyway, hope you get better results next time. the second shot was good actually, if not for the motion blur that appeared when cropped closely.

10-05-2009, 01:47 AM	#26
Ben_Edict Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: SouthWest "Regio" Photos: Albums Posts: 3,309	The first shot, with the lake, looks definitely like camera shake. You can even see the multiple silhouettes. the second looks also very much like camera shake, but I am not quite as definite on this. It is not a lens or camera problem. You should try to use faster speeds and/or a tripod and your results will be perfect. Obviously you have a good eye and your images deserve the extra effort to get perfect sharpness. Ben

10-05-2009, 02:12 AM	#27
glasbak Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Netherlands Posts: 369	First, if you suspect a lens, take some controlled test shots. That is on tripod, without Shake reduction, in good light, without any filters on the lens. And without filter, I mean also without the (cheap ?) UV or protection filter. Then post them here.

10-05-2009, 02:28 AM	#28
mickeyobe Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,759	Could it possibly be your computer/monitor and not your camera/lens? Mickey

10-05-2009, 08:54 AM	#29
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	Originally posted by Atindra What I find strange is 1/100 and 1/200 shutter speeds under the bright sun. Which mode you are using? Because in Nikon shot at f/7.1 the shutter speed is at 1/1000 (as the sunlight is very strong in that shot). Good point. I wonder how he was getting such slow shutter speeds in full sun at the stated aperture and ISO? Was there perhaps an ND or polarizing filter involved? What kind of quality are talking about? Anyhow, I agree the tripod shots look "normal", suggesting the lens itself is fine, so it's either camera shake despite SR, or missed focus (I wouldn't guarantee the camera focused exactly where the crops come from) - either of which could be a camera problem but are just as likely user-caused. EDIT: missed the followup where the OP specifically mentioned the polarizer and wind. That explains the low shutter speeds. Might also explain some of the overall softness if it was not a high quality filter. And the relatively slow shutter speeds combined with the wind explains the rest.

10-05-2009, 11:09 AM	#30
Ben_Edict Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: SouthWest "Regio" Photos: Albums Posts: 3,309	Originally posted by Marc Sabatella Good point. I wonder how he was getting such slow shutter speeds in full sun at the stated aperture and ISO? Was there perhaps an ND or polarizing filter involved? What kind of quality are talking about? Anyhow, I agree the tripod shots look "normal", suggesting the lens itself is fine, so it's either camera shake despite SR, or missed focus (I wouldn't guarantee the camera focused exactly where the crops come from) - either of which could be a camera problem but are just as likely user-caused. EDIT: missed the followup where the OP specifically mentioned the polarizer and wind. That explains the low shutter speeds. Might also explain some of the overall softness if it was not a high quality filter. And the relatively slow shutter speeds combined with the wind explains the rest. Marc, the TO stated that he used a CPL on the Pentax and just a UV on the Nikon. That is the explanation for the longer shutter speed. He also stated (which I only read after my last reply, that there was a breeze which may account for the camera shake. Ben