The111 1 #1 September 24, 2006 I've been shooting with my XT and kit lens (18-55) for 6 months now and it's given me no problems. Always same settings: zoomed all the way out, manually focus it in on the ground to include pretty much everything from infinity into just a couple meters. Then I use gaffer's tape to tape down the zoom ring and focus ring, and the jump shots always come out in great focus. Does not seem to be working today. I only have two ways to view the shots here: on the LCD and on a cheap public computer on the dropzone (what I'm using now). I've uploaded one of the shots to my webspace if anybody wants to check it out and give any opinions. http://www.matthoover.com/blurry.jpg - file is 2.75MB, I have not even rotated it since there is no good image editing software here. It is not a great shot but it illustrates my problem... focus looks ok when zoomed out a bit, but viewing at full size it appears slightly blurry. Any ideas would be appreciated - I'm shooting an event this weekend and have one more day to get some good shots. My only guess is that the kit lens is showing its age? I've always known it wasn't the best lens, but it has worked before. Or maybe this monitor I'm looking at just really sucks, and the shots are ok after all.www.WingsuitPhotos.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dragon2 2 #2 September 24, 2006 A couple of guesses: your camera was set at shutter priority 1/250, it may be motion blurr. With good light, I shoot 1/400-1/500. The f/6.3 you ended up with, I tend to aim for f/8 at least. Also, I only got a few jumps (< 10) on a cheap sigma zoom lens, the zoom is cracking up already presumably because of the openings, zoom lenses aren't the best for jumping with... But getting a lens like that checked isn't worth it... ciel bleu, Saskia Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The111 1 #3 September 24, 2006 1/250 has always been fine for me before. I also aim for f/8-f/11, but sometimes I miss by a bit. I don't think that is the cause though. I don't see any cracks, but maybe a rough opening knocked the elements out of alignment or something. Even when focus testing on the ground I can't seem to get a really crisp shot.www.WingsuitPhotos.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bogwarrior 0 #4 September 24, 2006 i dont have an exif viewer so cant see what the ISO that your shooting at is. 18mm on that body is 28mm. This leads to a less than ideal depth of field. While to freeze things like jump suits etc 500th of a second is better i dont think its contributed in this case to a poor focus due to motion blur ( assuming you were holding your head reasonably still ). If you are not familiar with depth of field , google it and read up on it. If you can bump the ISO a bit id do so, shoot on TV priority ( 320 to 500 ) and you will get a better apperture per increase in ISO. Then its down to learning to prefocus for a a good DOF on the ground. Incidentally id look at the light metering mode your using. It looks like your taking a reading from the widest spread possible. Try shooting in centre weighted. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dragon2 2 #5 September 24, 2006 You don't need an exif viewer, just save the pic to your harddrive then check the properties (in win xp anyway). ciel bleu, Saskia Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bogwarrior 0 #6 September 24, 2006 Ok cool. its ISO 100, the XT isnt noisy at 400 ISO , give it a shot at that. The F6.3 is really working against focus giving you a small focal plane. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Laszloimage 0 #7 September 24, 2006 To take a nice "action Shot" with the 18-55mm kit lens is quiet difficult. To set that lens up for manual focus in "Tv" setting (exposure is controlled by apature which effects on depth of field) is nearby impossible. I recommend a better lens, full manual exposure or "Av" for manual focus and RAW. Also as I see the picture was taken over Skydive City, so maybe Tony Hathaway can help you as well. -Laszlo- www.laszloimage.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The111 1 #8 September 24, 2006 Hey Laszlo, we've talked before. The one thing I cannot figure out is that I've done this same thing on all my past pictures, and they have looked fine. Check the gallery in my sig (www.wingsuitphotos.com) and let me know what you think. Who knows, maybe they were always out of focus and I'm just becoming a better photographer now and noticing that they suck. Or maybe I shot TV 320 before and am doing TV 250 now. I used to always get good DOF using these settings (and ISO 100), but now it is resulting in larger apertures. Maybe the light is fading as the seasons change? All the shooting I've ever done has been in the past few months. There were quite a few pictures though that ended up f/11 or so, and still looked like this. www.WingsuitPhotos.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Laszloimage 0 #9 September 25, 2006 Yes, they're deffinetley look better. But I can't tell for 100% 'cause the size (not the full res.) of the images. Remember that 18-55mm kit lens is made out of plastic! So it could have worn out as it's been used over the past few months. Micrscopic scracth on the elements, all the gear inside etc... and as I said all made of plastic. I would try another lens (a good one) -Laszlo- by the way, nice bird-man shots! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bogwarrior 0 #10 September 25, 2006 the sigma 15mm ex is a fab lens imho. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ltdiver 3 #11 September 25, 2006 QuoteI used to always get good DOF using these settings (and ISO 100) Along with what everyone else is contributing, I've found that with my digital camera an ISO of 200 is needed to equal the ISO of 100 with my film camera. Don't know why, but 200 has always worked out better with the digital. Food for thought. ltdiver Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
