Hand held v Tripod

I was interested in the difference between the above, so took a couple of sample shots to just see how shaky my hands are. These are by use of Nikon 70-300mm lens with 1.4 TC attached. Lens at 300mm- VR set on normal.
Photo of our chimney stack on bungalow

First with tripod and second without. MM length around 450 mark (exif data)

Shows up better if looking full size




Yes I know its a bit pointless it would appear, but I was getting a bit worried about how sharp my photos were getting without editing, except for increasing saturation.. Definately think its about time I used a tripod more

Bazza

Quite a difference in sharpness there Bazza - might be (like me) time to cut down a bit LOL

Sharpness aside - the images do look a bit different but the only difference I see in the exif is the ISO.

1/800sec @ f5.6, 300mm / 35mm Film = 450mm (ISO 2200 for the first and ISO 1800 for the second)

I always use a tripod and remote shutter for landscapes as typically I'm using smaller apertures and longer shutter speeds. I also find it slows me down and makes me think more about composition.

For general shots I just hand hold.

For birds I tend to use a beanbag or something. Generally speaking as soon as the light fades to the point that I have to push the ISO too far and the subsequent shutter speeds drops to the point that I can't hand hold - then it's too slow for the birds anyway.

Yep Phil its really the sharpness I am not over happy with doing large mm range , not quite so bad in the "normal" say 50-120mm length, its a question of keeping the hands still enough really without using any support. No problem in getting the pictures sharp in Photoshop obviously but my aim is to try and get it spot on with the camera.

Something else that raises some thought is fine tuning.

OK my camera can autofocus as the example shows with the tripod picture.However I do have the Spyderlenscal to use as a target to fine tune against, but what I can't seem to find is any advice on the distance the target should be set at.

There doesn't seem to be any guidelines on the subject.

This is the kind of set up to fine tune with auto focus

Camera on a tripod with remote shutter release to stop camera shake,using for example a 24-120mm lens and auto focus

SpyderlensCal on another tripod set at a parallel height on another tripod as the target.

The question is how far apart should the camera lens be away from the target to get a correct settings/best readings for focus, and at what focal length to use on the lens. Also would the lens mm setting have any affect on the results

This would also mean say on a 12-24mm lens making the distance between them different again and so forth for every lens.

If you have any ideas Phil or anyone, then I would be interested

SpyderlensCal showing front focus out a bit using a 12-24mm lens set to 24mm at 44 inches from target ( Heavily cropped ) see lower part of scale

Recalibrated to -8 in camera menu does it make a huge difference ?

And thats on a lens costing between £700/1000 or is it the camera?????

Just set up again just changing lenses only using my 24-120mm lens at 24mm and its spot on which proves the other lens was out. Lens cost £450

Incase anyone is wondering about all this I have a bug in my bonnet at the moment about sharpness and focus so please bare with me.

Bazza

In actual fact to me at least its shows a more expensive lens focus wise may not be as good as a lens at half the price.

For members information doing this kind of calibration it does need the right bit of gear. There are some examples on the internet which says this can be done by downloading a scale and photographing it at right angles. This has been proved to not be that accurate. I did a lot of research on the subject and read expert papers about it. The above SpyderlensCal I find is easy to set up and comes with a spirit level bubble it ensure it is balanced correctly. The slider rule is also at the correct angle which clips into place as well so there can be no error. I have no financial interest in the product so my findings are purely for my own satisfaction.

Bazza

These things are best with with fixed focal length primes but for zoom lenses you should be testing them using the longest focal length as this gives you the shallowest depth of field and the best view of the target scale.

If having fixed front/back focussing at the longest focal length it appears fine at shorter focal lengths then happy days.

If having fixed front/back focussing at your longest focal length it's still giving you problems at shorter focal lengths then it's a case of 'compromise' and you will have to test longest, shortest and middle and find a setting that best suits the zoom range of the lens.

If there's a place in your focal range that you nearly always use for example the 400mm end of a 100-400 zoom then it makes sense to have it set to be spot on at 400mm.

In terms of setting up the test - Canon say test at a distance 50x the focal length, LensAlign recommends 25x but according to SpyderLensCal the recommended distance to set up your camera from their target is 5-10 times the focal length that your testing OR test the lens at the distance equal to that which you most often shoot.

In theory once you've calibrated your camera lens combination and adjusted it accordingly then you can asume that if it's right at 6 feet it should be right at 18 feet but it seems this isn't always the case. This is why some people will suggest doing the test and making the adjustment at the distance that you most often use. Take a Caanon 100mm F2.8 macro lens for example, you wouldn't test it at 100mm x 50 = 5m away if close up macro is your thing.

Thanks Phil I will have a go at those distances tomorrow,

just edited my post after a bit of swotting up Bazza.

best read in yonks ,dont think I will tell you how I set up my lens to my D300 but it does seem to have worked

Best read

The 'technical' stuff can be a bore - I'd rather be out taking pictures but I think there's a place for this kind of thing.

There's no end of money spent so why not try to make the most of it.

I for one would like to see more of this kind of thing.

Another consideration is the size of the target, which could account for the different distances mentioned above. Seems there are so many variables for setting up this test it is very much hit and miss.

Bazza