Still Life Appreciate Critique Regarding Sharpness, Please. :)

**Tonytee** · 12-19-2019, 12:32 AM

Focal Length 320mm, Manual Exposure Mode, Used Nikon SB-24 Speedlight With CWA Metering.

I recently received this lens from the Marketplace here on PF. The Auto-Focus functions only between 80~150mm and beyond that, it is Manual Focus.

The only adjustments I made on PPE are resizing and leveling. Had to use a tripod on this big guy. I do not believe it looks too bad, but I am open to other opinions.

Many thanks,

Tonytee

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

08amczb · 12-19-2019, 01:47 AM

I think it's sharp enough, the lens is good. Although it's not on the level of the DA* or the DFA150-450 regarding sharpness and price too. It looks similar to DA55-300 PLM for me.

**Tonytee** · 12-19-2019, 02:51 AM

Originally posted by 08amczb

I think it's sharp enough, the lens is good. Although it's not on the level of the DA* or the DFA150-450 regarding sharpness and price too. It looks similar to DA55-300 PLM for me.

Thank you very much. )

TT

**BigMackCam** · 12-19-2019, 05:14 AM

It looks fine to me, Tony. A little sharpening in post will work wonders if you prefer a sharper result - just keep it to a low radius (0.5 to 1.0 at the very most). Contrast already looks good, but you could tweak the clarity or "local contrast" just a touch too.

**Tonytee** · 12-19-2019, 07:14 AM

Originally posted by BigMackCam

It looks fine to me, Tony. A little sharpening in post will work wonders if you prefer a sharper result - just keep it to a low radius (0.5 to 1.0 at the very most). Contrast already looks good, but you could tweak the clarity or "local contrast" just a touch too.

BigMackCam, your comments are greatly appreciated.

TT

**Apet-Sure** · 12-19-2019, 03:48 PM

The review of this lens here on PF gives it a sharpness rating of 8.3, so not outstanding but not terrible either. One reviewer said they thought it was sharp between 80-240mm. A lot of zooms lose some IQ at their extreme ends. You might try backing off from 320mm and try some other shots at shorter focal lengths to see what results you get. At f18 you may be getting some diffraction softening. At 320mm you need a small aperture to get usable DOF, but you trade off some sharpness. At a shorter focal length you can open up the aperture some and get the same DOF but possibly gain sharpness. You can do some DOF comparisons here:
A Flexible Depth of Field Calculator

My experience with resizing and leveling is that it can degrade sharpness somewhat depending on what software you use. My main jpeg editor is PhotoFiltre, but GIMP does a much better job at keeping things sharp during resizing and leveling. I can't afford commercial software, so I stick with the best free titles.

**Tonytee** · 12-19-2019, 06:25 PM

Originally posted by Apet-Sure

The review of this lens here on PF gives it a sharpness rating of 8.3, so not outstanding but not terrible either. One reviewer said they thought it was sharp between 80-240mm. A lot of zooms lose some IQ at their extreme ends. You might try backing off from 320mm and try some other shots at shorter focal lengths to see what results you get. At f18 you may be getting some diffraction softening. At 320mm you need a small aperture to get usable DOF, but you trade off some sharpness. At a shorter focal length you can open up the aperture some and get the same DOF but possibly gain sharpness. You can do some DOF comparisons here:
A Flexible Depth of Field Calculator

My experience with resizing and leveling is that it can degrade sharpness somewhat depending on what software you use. My main jpeg editor is PhotoFiltre, but GIMP does a much better job at keeping things sharp during resizing and leveling. I can't afford commercial software, so I stick with the best free titles.

Some great advice there, Apet-Sure. My motivation in getting this lens is to bring subjects in closer as we are planning an extended road trip to Mt. Rushmore, SD and I would
like very much to get the four presidents in close. What I will do is to make some sharpness adjustments on the original and this way I will know what to expect in regards to
its performance. I'll post again as I have a feeling the results will be very pleasing. Thanks again, Tony

**Apet-Sure** · 12-20-2019, 12:50 PM

Your lens will have 'sweet spots' of aperture/focal length combinations that give you the best sharpness the lens is capable of. But sharpness isn't always the main goal. Sometimes you need the reach of 320mm. Sometimes you need very shallow or very deep DOF. As BigMackCam said, you can always do some judicious sharpening in PP.

The president's heads at Mt. Rushmore are huge, requiring lots of DOF. Fortunately, the more you focus out toward infinity, the more DOF you get. I assume that where you'll be standing will be hundreds of feet away from the heads. Just for the heck of it, I used the DOF calculator mentioned above and plugged in values of 320mm focal length, f8 aperture, and 500 feet focus distance. These resulted in a total DOF with acceptable sharpness of 267 feet! YMMV.

bygp · 12-25-2019, 08:44 AM

Originally posted by Tonytee

Focal Length 320mm, Manual Exposure Mode, Used Nikon SB-24 Speedlight With CWA Metering.

I recently received this lens from the Marketplace here on PF. The Auto-Focus functions only between 80~150mm and beyond that, it is Manual Focus.

The only adjustments I made on PPE are resizing and leveling. Had to use a tripod on this big guy. I do not believe it looks too bad, but I am open to other opinions.

Many thanks,

Tonytee

Nice but you will have much better sharpness with cheaper FF fixed lenses ! Zooms, even top-edge ones can't be as good as a 24mm or 50mm fixed good lens.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Sharpness, Fine Sharpness, Extra Sharpness	Taviali	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	8	03-31-2012 12:56 PM
k-7 sharpness / fine sharpness / fine sharpness 2	mattdm	Pentax DSLR Discussion	10	12-12-2010 08:10 AM
Would appreciate any critique	claskowski	Photo Critique	6	12-10-2008 06:02 PM

12-19-2019, 01:47 AM	#2
08amczb Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Posts: 796	I think it's sharp enough, the lens is good. Although it's not on the level of the DA* or the DFA150-450 regarding sharpness and price too. It looks similar to DA55-300 PLM for me.

12-19-2019, 02:51 AM	#3
Tonytee Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2012 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 21,461 Original Poster	Originally posted by 08amczb I think it's sharp enough, the lens is good. Although it's not on the level of the DA* or the DFA150-450 regarding sharpness and price too. It looks similar to DA55-300 PLM for me. Thank you very much. ) TT

12-19-2019, 05:14 AM	#4
BigMackCam Digitiser of Film Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: North East of England Posts: 20,670	It looks fine to me, Tony. A little sharpening in post will work wonders if you prefer a sharper result - just keep it to a low radius (0.5 to 1.0 at the very most). Contrast already looks good, but you could tweak the clarity or "local contrast" just a touch too.

12-19-2019, 07:14 AM	#5
Tonytee Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2012 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 21,461 Original Poster	Originally posted by BigMackCam It looks fine to me, Tony. A little sharpening in post will work wonders if you prefer a sharper result - just keep it to a low radius (0.5 to 1.0 at the very most). Contrast already looks good, but you could tweak the clarity or "local contrast" just a touch too. BigMackCam, your comments are greatly appreciated. TT

12-19-2019, 03:48 PM	#6
Apet-Sure Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2015 Location: Goldsboro North Carolina Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,861	The review of this lens here on PF gives it a sharpness rating of 8.3, so not outstanding but not terrible either. One reviewer said they thought it was sharp between 80-240mm. A lot of zooms lose some IQ at their extreme ends. You might try backing off from 320mm and try some other shots at shorter focal lengths to see what results you get. At f18 you may be getting some diffraction softening. At 320mm you need a small aperture to get usable DOF, but you trade off some sharpness. At a shorter focal length you can open up the aperture some and get the same DOF but possibly gain sharpness. You can do some DOF comparisons here: A Flexible Depth of Field Calculator My experience with resizing and leveling is that it can degrade sharpness somewhat depending on what software you use. My main jpeg editor is PhotoFiltre, but GIMP does a much better job at keeping things sharp during resizing and leveling. I can't afford commercial software, so I stick with the best free titles.

12-19-2019, 06:25 PM	#7
Tonytee Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2012 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 21,461 Original Poster	Originally posted by Apet-Sure The review of this lens here on PF gives it a sharpness rating of 8.3, so not outstanding but not terrible either. One reviewer said they thought it was sharp between 80-240mm. A lot of zooms lose some IQ at their extreme ends. You might try backing off from 320mm and try some other shots at shorter focal lengths to see what results you get. At f18 you may be getting some diffraction softening. At 320mm you need a small aperture to get usable DOF, but you trade off some sharpness. At a shorter focal length you can open up the aperture some and get the same DOF but possibly gain sharpness. You can do some DOF comparisons here: A Flexible Depth of Field Calculator My experience with resizing and leveling is that it can degrade sharpness somewhat depending on what software you use. My main jpeg editor is PhotoFiltre, but GIMP does a much better job at keeping things sharp during resizing and leveling. I can't afford commercial software, so I stick with the best free titles. Some great advice there, Apet-Sure. My motivation in getting this lens is to bring subjects in closer as we are planning an extended road trip to Mt. Rushmore, SD and I would like very much to get the four presidents in close. What I will do is to make some sharpness adjustments on the original and this way I will know what to expect in regards to its performance. I'll post again as I have a feeling the results will be very pleasing. Thanks again, Tony

12-20-2019, 12:50 PM	#8
Apet-Sure Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2015 Location: Goldsboro North Carolina Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,861	Your lens will have 'sweet spots' of aperture/focal length combinations that give you the best sharpness the lens is capable of. But sharpness isn't always the main goal. Sometimes you need the reach of 320mm. Sometimes you need very shallow or very deep DOF. As BigMackCam said, you can always do some judicious sharpening in PP. The president's heads at Mt. Rushmore are huge, requiring lots of DOF. Fortunately, the more you focus out toward infinity, the more DOF you get. I assume that where you'll be standing will be hundreds of feet away from the heads. Just for the heck of it, I used the DOF calculator mentioned above and plugged in values of 320mm focal length, f8 aperture, and 500 feet focus distance. These resulted in a total DOF with acceptable sharpness of 267 feet! YMMV.

12-25-2019, 08:44 AM	#9
bygp Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2015 Location: Toulon, South of France Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 357	Originally posted by Tonytee Focal Length 320mm, Manual Exposure Mode, Used Nikon SB-24 Speedlight With CWA Metering. I recently received this lens from the Marketplace here on PF. The Auto-Focus functions only between 80~150mm and beyond that, it is Manual Focus. The only adjustments I made on PPE are resizing and leveling. Had to use a tripod on this big guy. I do not believe it looks too bad, but I am open to other opinions. Many thanks, Tonytee Nice but you will have much better sharpness with cheaper FF fixed lenses ! Zooms, even top-edge ones can't be as good as a 24mm or 50mm fixed good lens.