HELP not happy with these shots

Looks like you've got it right on the money.
Now see if the birds agree.

Did a few tests earlier today with the peg on a washing line about 25 feet from camera, on tripod ,no movement on the line .Maybe not the best subject but it seemed to prove a point .

i wont bore you with all the results from 0 to -+20 but i have shown 4 results below with a handheld shot at the end

Seems to me that -10 is the sharpest so maybe this has been the problem with other shots ..

let me know what you think..thanks again

Martin..


sss off
A mode
Af-s
f5.6
spot focus
iso 400


1 = 0
[IMG]0 by Martin, on Flickr[/IMG]


2 = -10
[IMG]-10 by Martin, on Flickr[/IMG]

3 = +10
[IMG]+10 by Martin, on Flickr[/IMG]

4 = +15
[IMG]+15 by Martin, on Flickr[/IMG]

5 = set at -10 focus on nose handheld f5.6 iso 800 spot focus Aperture

priorty[IMG]DSC07566 by Martin, on Flickr[/IMG]

linearamp wrote: thought i would post 3 shots that are unedited no crop just converted to jpeg ,see what you guys think

Looks about what I would expect with the bird that small in the frame and with a slight focusing error.
First and last images seem to have the sharpest part in the top of the right most branch.

Go through the testing Syber outlined and see if you can get an improvement.

AF-C on the A77 can sometimes be iffy even on stationary targets and AF-S is sometimes out aswell. For stationary birds I tend to shoot short burst and let up fully from the trigger between shots, even in AF-C it seems to have the camera re think it's focus.
Plus I often let the camera revert back to AF-S with a center press of the joystick or even MF using the AF on/off button to see where the peaking thinks I'm focusing.

That is interesting, I looked at those three shots and I see nothing unexpected or any obvious problems with focus.... although I do suspect front focus I think that is just as likely the camera grabbing the brighter branch - it grabbed it behind in one of the original shots too. What I do see is that you are not close enough for that bird to get good, consistent, sharp results, that the light is not good enough for same given the distance, and that there appears to be some blur from either bird or camera movement. I don't like the fact that the bird isn't as sharp as it should be and it would make me itchy too, but I honestly think there is too much going on here to conclude what the cause is. I never used the A77 but I have had had plenty of results like this over the years, and plenty of much better results with the same cameras too. In weaker light ... well my experience that is why people pay $000s for a camera that will never justify its price in favorable conditions (actually most just because they have the cash, but give some people some credit for sense, eh?)

And some scenes just don't work well very often and this could be one. For what it is worth I think the third shot would have worked well if you'd had a shutter speed well over 1/1000s and the light to allow that.

So yes, I wouldn't be rushing out to buy this combo but there is a lot for you to be working on too and don't necessarily bin it just yet. You can do better.

For a start look at the photos that people are posting and see there are no branches cutting through the bird. The camera knew what it was supposed to focus on. I'd bet bigger bird, smaller branch your results would be much better, and no branch and brighter light, better still.... but how much I don't know.

linearamp wrote: So im still bemused as to what is going on .

Yeah, I remember being "bemused" quite often by my A77.

I think you have a problem getting a good compromise. With IBIS, a steady hand or shelf support is plenty good enough to get rid of camera shake at quite modest shutter speeds - 1/250 or faster. The problem is that with feathers you're looking at very fine detail and even the slightest movement of the bird will blur them, so you need either:-
- a much faster shutter speed, which in low light puts you at full aperture where the lens won;t be as sharp, or high ISO, which gives noise and/or detail softening, or
- a flashgun, which tends to make the birds fly away.

high ISO performance is something which has improved greatly in recent years. My A58, a similar generation to the A77ii gives very good results up to 800ISO and more recent cameras are good to much higher ISO. That won't correct any other focussing or lens softness problems you have, but it will allow you to keep the shutter speed high and the aperture to f8-f9 where the lens is sharper and the DOF is greater.

But I'd recommend getting the other stuff sorted first, and lots of lens testing is a good idea. I download the Koren 2003test chart and print it at A4 or A3. I usually add some big black squares on the rhs to aid focussing. There are plenty of other charts, of course but that will allow an objective test of sharpness. If you get the rhs of the chart dead centre in your VF and the LHS on the LH edge, you should see detail to at least 150.

If you use AF, though, you may find AF simply isn't good enough to show the full lens sharpness, and this is something I believe a lot of photogs don't appreciate. AF is brilliant at getting focus approximately right very quickly, but you can't expect it to get focus exactly right every time, particularly if you have very sharp lenses and crop them 100%. You may want that, but you won't get it (though some cameras are better than others). You should expect a random distribution of focus, so you need the MFA to centre the range in the right place, and then you have to take enough pics to get some sharp.

Or else you use a tripod with focus magnify and MF, assuming the subject stays still long enough ...

kankushok wrote: sybersitizen wrote: I said this: Blackouts and tracking have nothing to do with the type of shooting the OP has shown us. His examples embedded in the thread are all of pretty static subjects and his concerns were about 'the lack of sharpness, contrast everything basically'; the action shots in his Flickr stream might have other issues, but they were not shown to us. The op specifically linked to his flickr referencing the kingfisher shots did he not? op also posted some calibration shots to his flickr without embedding here. Are they irrelevant as well? I'd say they're pretty relevant to this thread. Where did you find any exif info for the shots he posted?   Let the op judge for himself what is useful or relevant advice.

Just to let you know i have been referring to the Kingfisher shots as these are the ones that i know are not sharp using the 70-400G .
I did not post the test results on Dyxum as i did not put up 10 photos, i thought it would be better just to supply the link .
At the moment i am trying get advice regarding the lack of sharpeness / contrast from this combo .
Think you all know that this combo should be producing sharper images .

Again thanks for all the advice its greatly appreciated .Although it doesnt seem like im getting anywhere fast looking at the test results

Martin