SMALL - espritmodel.com SMALL - Telemetry SMALL - Radio
Reply
Thread Tools
Old Nov 22, 2005, 09:28 AM
HeliAP'er!
Hogster's Avatar
Surrey, UK
Joined Aug 2003
8,221 Posts
Rant
Would you describe this as a fuzzy-edges shot?

Hi all,

This is probably the highest my Casio EX-Z750 has been so far ... the 4th floor of one of my Uni's buildings!

Anyway, would you say the edges of this photo are fuzzy? They look distinctly fuzzy to me, and unless there's something screwy going on with the software, I'd say this was the dreaded Pentax fuzzy lens syndrome. Right royal pain in the rear .....

http://hogster.rchomepage.com/CIMG4208.JPG


David (saddened)
Hogster is online now Find More Posts by Hogster
Reply With Quote
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Nov 22, 2005, 09:54 AM
S.C.R.A.P.S Member
chargenut's Avatar
Haslemere, Surrey.
Joined Nov 2003
1,325 Posts
Hi David,

Have to say that, that image looks a little fuzzy to me... What mode were you in when you took the shot? Do you have a sport mode on the camera?

I have just started using an Olympus FE-100 (4 mpix - see the "First attempt at video. Guildford, England." thread) and noticed that some of my AP shots were very fuzzy whereas others looked really quite clear, think it's down to conditions, speed, vibration and shutter speed. If you had a bit of camera shake on taking that photo it might give you a fuzzy look like you seem to be getting. Try a sport mode (forces faster shutter speeds) and try again. Conditions for your shot didn't look ideal, as most of the subject matter appears to be in shadow.

Just as another point, my Olympus has no sport mode and therefore doesn't really lend itself to AP it's also not high enough Mpix for the sort of prints I wanted to make (A3), I think I brought the wrong camera .

Oh well... It's not bad... just not as good as I'd hoped.
chargenut is online now Find More Posts by chargenut
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 22, 2005, 10:01 AM
WHOHH..You See That??
qualcity's Avatar
Aurora, Colorado
Joined Jan 2005
1,761 Posts
Casio Crop

Hey David,

I cut a couple of clips from your shot. The top 2 are from the left and right side of the shot at the skyline. The bottom 2 are from the tree near the center of the shot (on left), and the tree at the bottom right of your shot. I did a little photoshopping on them to bring out the edges a little bit more. Overall in my opinion, it's not too bad. Lighting will affect the shot alot, and the sun is coming from the right. Try another one with the sun at your back with some good subject material on both sides and the center to compare (like a building with alot of detail), and we can take a look at that one as well.

Regards,

Qual
qualcity is offline Find More Posts by qualcity
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 22, 2005, 10:35 AM
Registered User
Terry S's Avatar
Bridgwater, UK
Joined May 2003
673 Posts
Just my thoughts but the shot looks under exposed and a little shaky. Try a bright day with the camera on a tripod and see what you get. I would be keen to see the result as Im looking at getting the same camera.

Terry
Terry S is offline Find More Posts by Terry S
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 22, 2005, 10:56 AM
I AP'd myself again......
aviatordave's Avatar
Yawn....Iowa
Joined Mar 2005
2,500 Posts
David,

You must of been up late last night.....you posted the same thing in the Albuquerque Video thread. You college guys like to burn the midnight oil, huh...

hope you figure it out on the camera, I'm sure it was not cheap!

-Dave
aviatordave is offline Find More Posts by aviatordave
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 22, 2005, 11:22 AM
Registered User
Frl, The Netherlands
Joined Oct 2004
105 Posts
Quote:
camera on a tripod
???

It should be in a model aeroplane

I´m very sorry to say, but the picture seems just not sharp. And you know it, otherwise you wouldn´t have posted it. Sorry again, just trying to feedback.

I had the same thing with my Pentax. Just never seemed to be able to shoot crisp sharp pictures. I hope you solve the problem, but I´m afraid, especially because you were not even flying with it yet, that faster shutterspeeds will not be able to solve the fuzzy edges.

Kind regards.
Eelco is offline Find More Posts by Eelco
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 22, 2005, 11:33 AM
HeliAP'er!
Hogster's Avatar
Surrey, UK
Joined Aug 2003
8,221 Posts
I think it is the camera and that wretched Pentax lens. That shot was taken at 1/200s and as you can see from the globe thing in the middle, there is no camera shake present. It might have something to do with the light levels but I don't see why it should ....

It's the right camera for me as a fiddler (love all the options ) but the wrong camera for AP. If I had my choice again (or if money was no option so I could buy another camera now) I would go for a Nikon of some sort .... 7900 or the Canon SD500.

Hogster is online now Find More Posts by Hogster
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 22, 2005, 01:49 PM
Smile & wave
Gray's Avatar
Lancing West Sussex
Joined Jun 2005
3,440 Posts
I see that at 1/200 the F stop was at 2.8. Try experimenting with a slower speed to gain a higher f, stop number. I know, I know, that’s not what you want for AP but humour me?

Gray
Gray is offline Find More Posts by Gray
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 22, 2005, 04:30 PM
Registered User
OceancityMD's Avatar
Joined Mar 2004
507 Posts
Did you take tons of shots? at the same angle my Cannon sometimes gives me the same results. Auto focus reads it wrong and a little movement and POOF there you go. Take several of the same subject in the same mode then try other modes then compare. So many things have to happen at the same time ,to get that great pic. Post some more
OceancityMD is offline Find More Posts by OceancityMD
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 22, 2005, 06:29 PM
Registered User
dreslism's Avatar
Rochester Hills, Michigan, United States
Joined Oct 2003
1,882 Posts
Right on Grey. If your aperture was wide open(which it was at 2.8 on that camera), then your depth of field is non existant. I have noticed that sports mode for me does not always give me the best picture as it forces a more open aperture to get the higher shutter speed. Now granted taking a picture as far away as you have, everthing should be at theoretical infinity to the camera, but I noticed that my pentax does not get the focus perfect sometimes.

--Scott
dreslism is offline Find More Posts by dreslism
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 22, 2005, 06:40 PM
Just some bloke
Phil R's Avatar
Up north, UK
Joined Mar 2005
436 Posts
Try this...

Set the camera to manual focus

Take a series of shots, altering only the focus distance. Start at infinity and work back in small steps.

Compare the results.

I found that my Canon works best for distance shots when the focus scale shows between 5ft and 10ft. At this setting, photos are superb... Any closer to infinity and the corners start to go out of focus.
Phil R is offline Find More Posts by Phil R
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 22, 2005, 06:43 PM
Registered User
Cedar Rapids, IA
Joined Mar 2005
327 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hogster
I think it is the camera and that wretched Pentax lens. That shot was taken at 1/200s and as you can see from the globe thing in the middle, there is no camera shake present. It might have something to do with the light levels but I don't see why it should ....

It's the right camera for me as a fiddler (love all the options ) but the wrong camera for AP. If I had my choice again (or if money was no option so I could buy another camera now) I would go for a Nikon of some sort .... 7900 or the Canon SD500.

I did some tests with the SD550 similar to what I did with the Casio. 3/4 throttle fairly low at both 9am and 11am on a bright day. I posted a few of them in this forum a week or so ago.
Good color and seemed pretty clear when the shutter speed was decent.
Dumping the EXIF data here's what the shutter speeds looked like on the test pictures.
9 Images: Exposure time: 0.0080 s (1/125)
10 Images: Exposure time: 0.0063 s (1/160)
14 Images: Exposure time: 0.0050 s (1/200)
9 Images: Exposure time: 0.0040 s (1/250)
1 Image: Exposure time: 0.0031 s (1/320)
3 Images: Exposure time: 0.0025 s (1/400)
3 Images: Exposure time: 0.0020 s (1/500)
22 Images: Exposure time: 0.0016 s (1/640)

A few of the 1/200s were usable but most were pretty slow for AP.
sniderea is offline Find More Posts by sniderea
Last edited by sniderea; Nov 22, 2005 at 06:50 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 22, 2005, 06:43 PM
Just some bloke
Phil R's Avatar
Up north, UK
Joined Mar 2005
436 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by dreslism
Right on Grey. If your aperture was wide open(which it was at 2.8 on that camera), then your depth of field is non existant.
On the cameras we use, with their tiny sensors and short focal length lenses, at f2.8, the depth of field is huge...

Try it yourself at http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

I rarely use an aperture smaller than f2.8 when Apping.
Phil R is offline Find More Posts by Phil R
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 22, 2005, 07:03 PM
HeliAP'er!
Hogster's Avatar
Surrey, UK
Joined Aug 2003
8,221 Posts
Thanks for all your suggestions guys! I shall try it out the next time I have the time and a suitable photo subject!
Hogster is online now Find More Posts by Hogster
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 22, 2005, 07:49 PM
Registered User
Joined Apr 2004
262 Posts
how about just trying out the infinity focus, or is that too close for ground (4th lvl) shots?
I was hoping to use the same cam for AP this winter...
Hope all turns out well!
danielsjang is offline Find More Posts by danielsjang
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Would you let this pilot fly your model? LuckyArmpit Foamies (Kits) 20 Dec 29, 2004 11:27 AM
What would you call this plane? Martin Hunter Electric Plane Talk 18 Jun 02, 2002 12:37 AM
Brushless Voyager, would you expect this.. DaveRC Electric Heli Talk 2 Mar 25, 2002 04:48 AM
What would you guys recommend as a good CHEAP electric... f2racer Electric Plane Talk 2 Nov 10, 2001 07:44 AM