A discussion forum - and more - for users of Digital Single Lens Reflex cameras.
Who said it's not sharp?Moderators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators
Forum rules
Please note that image critiquing is a matter of give and take: if you post images for critique, and you then expect to receive criticism, then it is also reasonable, fair and appropriate that, in return, you post your critique of the images of other members here as a matter of courtesy. So please do offer your critique of the images of others; your opinion is important, and will help everyone here enjoy their visit to far greater extent. Also please note that, unless you state something to the contrary, other members might attempt to repost your image with their own post processing applied. We see this as an acceptable form of critique, but should you prefer that others not modify your work, this is perfectly ok, and you should state this, either within your post, or within your signature. Images posted here should conform with the general forum guidelines. Image sizes should not exceed 950 pixels along the largest side (height or width) and typically no more than four images per post or thread. Please also ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.
Previous topic • Next topic
9 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Who said it's not sharp?
Just playing around with a regular visitor. Forgot about ISO 1600 having been set the night before and took this shot of our Yellow-spotted Honeyeater with the 'unsharp' 80-400VR
 Framing is wrong and he looks all bedraggled as he just kept dipping into the pond but pretty sharp all the same!
I love this lens 
[imghttp://www.flickr.com/photos/25671594@N00/?saved=1[/img] Here are the exif details for those interested. Exposure: 1/400 @ f/10 ISO:1600 Focal Length: 400 (600 equivalence @35mm) Lens: 80-400VR VR on and handheld cheers marco Last edited by marcotrov on Mon Jan 02, 2006 11:23 am, edited 2 times in total.
Yeah it is but as i said just mucking around and i was also impressed with noise levels all things being equal.
Also practising with the new host flickr and experimenting with leek's and thaddeus' image link process with thumbnail but am not having much luck.  But hell i'm learning all the time. Even learned about looking at preview rather than posting then editing all the time 
cheers marco
Holy dooly -sharp isn't the word.... you could cut yourself on those feathers !!!!
Dodging and burning are steps to take care of mistakes God made in establishing tonal relationships! -Ansel Adams
http://www.redbubble.com/people/blacknstormy
Marco that is one really good image. It is hard to believe that you accidentally shot it at 1600ISO.
"The good thing about meditation is that it makes doing nothing respectable"
D3 - http://www.oneputtphotographics.com
Very nice Marco. Terrific lens. I have had the pleasure of using Oneputt's 80-400VR at Indy last year and was mightily impressed
Cheers
Mark http://www.photographicaustralia.com
http://www.trekaboutphotography.com He who dies with the most lenses wins...
Nice pic! Seriously sharp. Interesting colours underneath the bird too.
Not sure about the vertical grass stalk (?) on the right, I find it a little distracting - wouldn't mind seeing it cloned out to see how it looks without it. Love taking bird shots myself. The 80-400VR is a great lens for it! Dopeler Effect: The tendency of stupid ideas to seem smarter when they come at you rapidly.
Thank you for the comments. Yeah oneputt couldn't believe it myself. They were very clean images considering the high ISO. I should have added 'Who said the D70 was noisy at high ISO?
cheers marco
Previous topic • Next topic
9 posts
• Page 1 of 1
|
![[imghttp://www.flickr.com/photos/25671594@N00/?saved=1[/img]](http://static.flickr.com/43/80526574_b7dccffbdf_o.jpg){kind=link}