 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / September 2006Canon Rebel XT & Sharpness
I've noticed that all shots taken with the kit lens and a Tamron 28 - 80mm lens are very soft (lacking sharpness). Is this usual and post processing is needed and if so what is the reasoning behind it? > I've noticed that all shots taken with the kit lens and a Tamron 28 - 80mm > lens are very soft (lacking sharpness). Canon 50/1.8 Canon 85/1.8 Canon 28-135/3.5-5.6 IS Canon 70-300/4-5.6 IS http://digitcamera.tripod.com/#slr >>I've noticed that all shots taken with the kit lens and a Tamron 28 - 80mm >>lens are very soft (lacking sharpness). [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Canon 28-135/3.5-5.6 IS > Canon 70-300/4-5.6 IS What a fabulously unhelpful answer. Greg  Signature"All my time I spent in heaven Revelries of dance and wine Waking to the sound of laughter Up I'd rise and kiss the sky" - The Mekons > I've noticed that all shots taken with the kit lens and a Tamron 28 - 80mm > lens are very soft (lacking sharpness). Is this usual and post processing is > needed and if so what is the reasoning behind it? My guess would be cheap glass rather than the camera. -- Todd H. http://www.toddh.net/ >> I've noticed that all shots taken with the kit lens and a Tamron 28 - 80mm >> lens are very soft (lacking sharpness). Is this usual and post processing is >> needed and if so what is the reasoning behind it? > > My guess would be cheap glass rather than the camera. My guess is it is the photographer ... (no offense, but we need details). SignatureThomas T. Veldhouse Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1 > I've noticed that all shots taken with the kit lens and a Tamron 28 - 80mm > lens are very soft (lacking sharpness). Is this usual and post processing > is needed and if so what is the reasoning behind it? Poor lens, probably a sub-optimal aperture setting, and a little bit of camera/subject movement thrown in as well. Any one of those three, by itself, is capable of cutting your resolution by at least 50% pretty easily. When you combine more than one, things get pretty bad in a hurry. steve SLR's are not oversharpened like P&S cameras, this can look a bit soft in comparison until you have performed ypur Photoshop magic, but as the others point out, there are sharper lenses that fit this camera as well. /per Today, PH made these interesting comments ... > I've noticed that all shots taken with the kit lens and a > Tamron 28 - 80mm lens are very soft (lacking sharpness). Is > this usual and post processing is needed and if so what is the > reasoning behind it? What's the reason behind what? Soft results from cheap glass or your lack of ability to use either the camera or the graphics app you use to post-process you images? It is well-known that Rebel kit lenses are crap; I have one and bought it knowingly because for its size, weight and zoom ratio, it is a bargain for $100. OTOH, I paid $1,250 for just one Canon L-glass lens, assuming it might be 12.5X sharper, it ain't because there's other factors involved, but it sure is better. Doncha think that you got what you paid for? Now, if you want some rational responses, how about telling us what exactly you're doing and what you expect should happen. SignatureHP, aka Jerry Member, Chrysler Employee Motorsport Association (CEMA) http://www.cemaclub.org/default.html >I've noticed that all shots taken with the kit lens and a Tamron 28 - 80mm >lens are very soft (lacking sharpness). Is this usual and post processing is >needed and if so what is the reasoning behind it? Camera shake. KS > I've noticed that all shots taken with the kit lens and a Tamron 28 - 80mm > lens are very soft (lacking sharpness). Is this usual and post processing is > needed and if so what is the reasoning behind it? All digital slr images are soft if you are comparing them with images from point&shoot cameras. P&S or compact cameras use internal sharpening before you even get to see the picture. DSLRs can do this if set up in the menu, but usually image processing and sharpening is better done with software on a computer, far and away more powerful than any processing that can be done in a camera, given the camera's memory and program constraints and the need to process quickly to be ready for the next shot. There is/has been a lot of criticism about Canon's kit lens. I have one, and IMHO the build quality and lightness of the lens invites people to think it is junk. A lens has to be heavy and solid, right? If it isn't, it must be junk, right? Wrong. For the money, it is a very good lens. With readily available software, lens distortion, lateral chromatic aberration and fringing can be corrected to produce stunningly good images from the kit lens. All zoom lenses have distortion to some degree, even the 'L' series, and most show some amount of LCA at the wide end. Post-processing can fix almost all of these problems. Judging the image quality straight out of any dslr is premature. Colin D. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > With readily available software, lens distortion, lateral > chromatic aberration and fringing can be corrected to produce stunningly > good images from the kit lens. If you have to always correct for these issues the lens is junk. SignatureReality-Is finding that perfect picture and never looking back. www.gregblankphoto.com >> With readily available software, lens distortion, lateral >> chromatic aberration and fringing can be corrected to produce stunningly >> good images from the kit lens. > >If you have to always correct for these issues the lens is junk. Given the barrel distortion in the Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 USM L * which needs correcting (unless YOU think barrel distortion is desirable) it must also be junk. * I used this as an example, of course many of the L lenses are also junk in need of correction to remove their barrel distortion. SignatureIan G8ILZ "Greg \"_\"" <grey_egg@greg_photo.com> wrote: >> With readily available software, lens distortion, lateral >> chromatic aberration and fringing can be corrected to produce stunningly >> good images from the kit lens. > > If you have to always correct for these issues the lens is junk. If you can get a good resulting image when using the lens, even if you have to correct some issues occasionally, then it is not junk ... the only real question is it a value for your money. SignatureThomas T. Veldhouse Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1 I have been using a point and shoot, the S3 IS and it does produce very sharp and true to life color photos. With the Rebel XT and kit lens I was a bit dissapointed however I now realize that from your posts that more practice will be needed and getting more acquainted with Photoshop will help. Thanks for all of your suggestions. >> With readily available software, lens distortion, lateral >> chromatic aberration and fringing can be corrected to produce stunningly >> good images from the kit lens. > > If you have to always correct for these issues the lens is junk. I see you have a bit to learn about lenses, Greg. *ALL* camera zoom lenses - and some primes - show some degree of distortion, CA, and other aberrations. Camera lenses are built to a price, albeit sometimes an expensive price, and the design tradeoffs vary with the manufacturer, but tradeoffs there surely are. What's more noticeable in an image? Lack of sharpness and/or definition? Barrel/pincushion distortion? Tonal flatness? Good contrast? These are mutually exclusive problems that the lens designer must balance, and no lens is, or can be, perfect. Also, bear in mind that a lens which sells for, say, $500 at retail, will have made the manufacturer about a quarter or less of that amount, so when people moan about a $500 lens, they are moaning about a lens that cost about $120 to make. What sort of quality do you expect for that sort of money? Modern lenses, including the Canon kit lens, are excellent value for your dollars. A newer trend is appearing with some lenses now. Due to the fact that software correction is becoming viable, lens designers can concentrate on correcting a lens for aberrations that are more difficult to correct with software, and leave the amenable corrections to an appropriate program. Barrel/pincushion effects are easy to correct, as is lateral CA. Longitudinal CA is better corrected in the lens, and so on. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > I've noticed that all shots taken with the kit lens and a Tamron 28 - 80mm > lens are very soft (lacking sharpness). Is this usual and post processing > is needed and if so what is the reasoning behind it? Two words: cheap lenses. The kit lensis known to be soft, and theTamron you bought is even softer. If you want sharp images,you must buy quality optics (not the cheap stuff). Bobby > I've noticed that all shots taken with the kit lens and a Tamron 28 - 80mm > lens are very soft (lacking sharpness). Is this usual and post processing is > needed and if so what is the reasoning behind it? Unsteady hand? Give us some specifics. What apeture, shutter speed, and ISO? Did you use a tripod? Example pictures? SignatureThomas T. Veldhouse Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1 I delivered it to Canon Service and they repaired it. A part was replaced and it solved the problem. Thanks for the help. >> I've noticed that all shots taken with the kit lens and a Tamron 28 - >> 80mm [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > use a > tripod? Example pictures? |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.