Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-26-2013, 10:17 PM   #46
Site Supporter
altopiet's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: The Great Karoo, South Africa
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,927
QuoteOriginally posted by dmazimoto Quote
Thanks man. I adjusted that. I've never seen this it's like the picture has brush strokes (referring to my original sample image). I'm taking my camera in for check up next.
You're right, it might be best to let them check it out and make sure that you don't have a faulty camera

07-04-2013, 01:04 PM   #47
Junior Member




Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 45
Original Poster
Sorry for the delay between responses, but here is the latest.

Seems like stopping down (way down) the lens(es) solves it. I really don't have any expensive lenses but the ones I have need to be around F8 to be sharp (my kit WR 18-55 and my FA 50mm 1.7). Below is a sample taken at F/8 ISO-200 1/500 sec JPEG super fine, spot center auto focus. First full pic, then 100% crop and 200% crop just for giggles. I'm ok with the quality of this shot but I can't imagine shooting at F8 all the time, specially when I like shallower DOF. Any good zoom's anyone can recommend with fixed 2.8 apertures?

Also, can anyone tell me judging from the pic if I should still get my camera checked (I can't say I've shot at F8 ever so I'm not sure how sharp things should be at that aperture)? I have not had time to take it in. There is only one place here in town that will touch my Pentax and they're far from me Help is truly appreciated and to everyone that's given advice already, I thank you!
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-30  Photo     

Last edited by dmazimoto; 07-04-2013 at 01:07 PM. Reason: Image Attachments
07-04-2013, 02:34 PM   #48
Pentaxian
Na Horuk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Slovenia, probably
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,863
I dunno, the FA should be sharp pretty much from wide open onward. The kit lens does have its sweet spot around f8, though, so that makes sense.
But if the aperture solves it, its probably not the camera's fault. Maybe you just have a slightly bad copy of the FA and the kit lens works normally, which overall gave you the impression the camera is bad.
07-04-2013, 05:08 PM   #49
Site Supporter
JimJohnson's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Lake Superior - Michigan
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,270
Test your camera for the possibility of back (or front focus). I suggested one such test that doesn't take more than 20-30 minutes if you read the directions slowly. Others have suggested other tests. Surely such a test would take far less time than driving to the camera shop you mentioned? You might not even need to go to the shop if the test comes out fine. Most of these tests involve nothing more than taking a picture of a test target in the manner indicated and evaluating the results.

There are a number of photographers in this Forum who regularly practice "f/8 and be there". They use aperture priority exposure, setting the camera at f/8, letting the camera decide shutter and ISO. f/8 has a sufficiently deep depth of field to cover a whole lot of focusing issues.

07-10-2013, 12:09 PM   #50
Junior Member




Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 45
Original Poster
Solved the focusing issue (front focus) but as you can see the samples, the image quality is still less than desirable. Shot this outside, ISO 100 1/200 sec (on a tripod using a remote) F2.8, is this how images are to look when viewing at 100%?
Attached Images
   
07-10-2013, 12:47 PM   #51
Site Supporter
JimJohnson's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Lake Superior - Michigan
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,270
Without specific lens information, I am guessing f/2.8 is wide open? Many lens are less sharp at their widest aperture. Most start getting sharper a couple stops from wide open with a 'sweet spot' near the center of the range. That said, some lenses perform better than others across their entire range which is a big reason for the huge price difference between lenses. For some idea of how your specific lenses perform, I recommend looking them up here in the Forum reviews. Up in the top menu bar there is a link for lenses. While not every Pentax compatible lens is there, the odds are good that you will find a listing for each of yours.
07-10-2013, 12:54 PM   #52
Pentaxian
JinDesu's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: New York City
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,626
I think he is still using the 50 F1.7. My M50 F1.7 is sharp at F2.8. My Sigma 50 F1.4 is sharp sharp at F2.8.

@Dmazimoto - can you shoot a subject that is not so angled? The chromatic aberrations due to OOF rendering makes it difficult for me to judge a few things. I suggest taking a picture of a wood post (has fine irregular features) or something similar in sunlight. Manually focus, of course - for perfect focus. The image you have above, the metal piece isn't that "bad". But I see jpeg compression artifact, plus it is a little dark to judge the details. Shooting a nice bright detailed subject, manually focused, will allow us to fully judge the image.

For me, I prefer shooting RAW and processing the jpeg so there I can control the jpeg compression. I am not as familiar with in-camera jpegs.
07-10-2013, 01:04 PM   #53
Junior Member




Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 45
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by JimJohnson Quote
Without specific lens information, I am guessing f/2.8 is wide open? Many lens are less sharp at their widest aperture. Most start getting sharper a couple stops from wide open with a 'sweet spot' near the center of the range. That said, some lenses perform better than others across their entire range which is a big reason for the huge price difference between lenses. For some idea of how your specific lenses perform, I recommend looking them up here in the Forum reviews. Up in the top menu bar there is a link for lenses. While not every Pentax compatible lens is there, the odds are good that you will find a listing for each of yours.
Sorry it's my FA 50mm f1.7

07-10-2013, 01:06 PM   #54
Junior Member




Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 45
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by JinDesu Quote
I think he is still using the 50 F1.7. My M50 F1.7 is sharp at F2.8. My Sigma 50 F1.4 is sharp sharp at F2.8.

@Dmazimoto - can you shoot a subject that is not so angled? The chromatic aberrations due to OOF rendering makes it difficult for me to judge a few things. I suggest taking a picture of a wood post (has fine irregular features) or something similar in sunlight. Manually focus, of course - for perfect focus. The image you have above, the metal piece isn't that "bad". But I see jpeg compression artifact, plus it is a little dark to judge the details. Shooting a nice bright detailed subject, manually focused, will allow us to fully judge the image.

For me, I prefer shooting RAW and processing the jpeg so there I can control the jpeg compression. I am not as familiar with in-camera jpegs.
I don't have any software to process RAW other than Irfanview. This image was originally in RAW. I'll step outside right now and shoot like you said.
07-10-2013, 01:07 PM   #55
Pentaxian
JinDesu's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: New York City
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,626
QuoteOriginally posted by dmazimoto Quote
I don't have any software to process RAW other than Irfanview. This image was originally in RAW. I'll step outside right now and shoot like you said.
Ok that's fine. If you can (and hopefully you see this) - shoot a RAW image and e-mail to me. This is only because I only work with RAW from my k-x, and I haven't ever used in-camera jpeg.

But if not, that's fine. I'll do what I can to assist.
07-10-2013, 01:25 PM   #56
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Huntsville, Alabama
Posts: 422
I take it you are not using a hood with the FA 50mm 1.7 lens.

I would personally use a hood. It should help contrast/sharpness a decent amount.

If that doesn't help, it could be that you just got a really poor copy of the lens. It really should be sharper then what is showing up.

As for jpg vs RAW. RAW always comes out a decent amount better then jpg. And to top it off, extracting the jpg from the RAW on your computer will also give you better quality then the in camera jpg.

There are a few free RAW processing programs out there.

RawTherapee Blog - I have not used this one.

you can also use Ufraw along with Gimp for photo processing:
UFRaw - Home
GIMP - The GNU Image Manipulation Program
07-10-2013, 02:35 PM   #57
Junior Member




Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 45
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by JinDesu Quote
Ok that's fine. If you can (and hopefully you see this) - shoot a RAW image and e-mail to me. This is only because I only work with RAW from my k-x, and I haven't ever used in-camera jpeg.

But if not, that's fine. I'll do what I can to assist.
Thank you! Sending over now.
07-10-2013, 02:36 PM   #58
Junior Member




Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 45
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by cyclone3d Quote
I take it you are not using a hood with the FA 50mm 1.7 lens.

I would personally use a hood. It should help contrast/sharpness a decent amount.

If that doesn't help, it could be that you just got a really poor copy of the lens. It really should be sharper then what is showing up.

As for jpg vs RAW. RAW always comes out a decent amount better then jpg. And to top it off, extracting the jpg from the RAW on your computer will also give you better quality then the in camera jpg.

There are a few free RAW processing programs out there.

RawTherapee Blog - I have not used this one.

you can also use Ufraw along with Gimp for photo processing:
UFRaw - Home
GIMP - The GNU Image Manipulation Program
Thank you for the links! No I am not using a hood, the lens is very recessed but if getting a hood helps I'll do that.
07-10-2013, 02:56 PM   #59
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Slovenia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,180
I'd just like to elbow in a vote for Rawtherapee.
07-10-2013, 10:59 PM   #60
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Huntsville, Alabama
Posts: 422
QuoteOriginally posted by dmazimoto Quote
Thank you for the links! No I am not using a hood, the lens is very recessed but if getting a hood helps I'll do that.
I would defintely try with a hood. I never used to use a hood except on my 18-55 and then I got a few older lenses that came with hoods and it was night/day with the hoods on vs off.

Now I use hoods on every lense I have except for my 55mm macro since the lens basically has a built in hood because the lense is so recessed.

From my experience if the front lens element is not being shaded, it is not giving out near as good of IQ as it can.

You can always try using a piece of dark paper or something else to shade it and test before actually buying a hood.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
50mm, auto, camera, images, k30, lens, pentax help, photography, results
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Need Help Shooting Spider Webs (Sample Photos Attached) Heie Photographic Technique 11 05-29-2013 05:15 AM
Sample images from imaging resource: K30 vs K5IIs kesong Pentax DSLR Discussion 15 11-05-2012 01:34 PM
Pentax K30 vs Sony SLT-a57 sample Images robwill Pentax K-30 & K-50 5 07-12-2012 05:50 PM
K7 fuzzy images bisjack Pentax DSLR Discussion 11 10-28-2009 01:27 PM
manual shooting help: fuzzy images: 200mm 41ants Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 16 10-28-2009 04:45 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:19 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top