OK it's me but WHY< WHY< WHY?

[Bilsen]

Why thanks Sam.

I shoot only in Manual so any mistakes are mine.

I learned to be picky on here getting nagged to death. LOL

[wildmaven]

I was having focusing issues once and it turned out it was because of lens creep after I had set the focus.

[Ed Shapiro]

I hate to live in the past but 35mm cameras, in days of yore, were categorized as “miniature cameras” because of their smaller size, light weight and, simplicity and ease if use. For many years press photographers and event photographers used 4x5 press cameras and some went to medium format models. None of theses were lightweight, compact or all that easy to use. Of course the larger format sizes yielded robust negatives- easy to print and sharp. Meanwhile, back at the camera factories, Licas and Nikons were being manufactured and marketed, grain became acceptable and even desired in photojournalism, developers to push film speed way over the top were formulated and 35mm cameras became the king of the industry especially in news circles. When I was in the army shooting aerial rekonisance, I was handed a Nikon F with a FTN meter prism, a heavy lens, a 100 foot long roll back and a motor drive; that thing was heavier that my old Linhoff 4x5 and it was easier to handle the 10X10 roll film (K-Series) aerial cameras. I was thinking to myself, did the engineers at Nikon ever study physics and simple things like “center of gravity” or did they just create all those heavy components not realizing that they are going to be used all at one on a single camera body? My other gripe was that why do I have to lug around this behemoth of a camera, hang on to it with the door open and worry about not making contact with the airframe or have it swept away by the slipstream and all to end up with a little lousy 24X36mm slide . It seems that Inferred Aerographic Ektachrome was only available in 35mm bulk packages at the time.

The point of all this is that DSLRS are still FAR from “miniature” cameras and that are more the become “professional” and full featured they become, the heaver they become and add a long and heavy lens and you have a deadly weapon. One can sustain a hernia running around with a bag full of that gear. Hanging 3 cameras from you neck will have you seeing an orthopedic surgeon in no time at all- let alone holding such rigs steady in flight, during slightly longer exposures, and remerging to place the spot meter frame and read in the right zone (in the viewfinder) hold the shutter release halfway down and then recompose and shoot! This routine reminds me of a one man oompah band or the proverbial one armed wall paper hanger.

I agree with running all the tests that were suggested in this thread but the first test to make is mounting the camera on a steady tripod, making sure that the lens is well supported too- perhaps by a “Magic Arm” or a smaller second tripod or maybe a monopod and run a series of tests shots at various f/stops and shitter speeds and make sure the results are sharp and consistent. In a portrait, focus on the eyes. If you are in a programmed or automatic mode you may not realize that the shutter speed and aperture that the system selected is not adequate to stop subject or camera movement or create enough depth of field for hand held operation.

Some of the equipment in use nowadays is so sophisticated and automated that we forget all the basics such as using support devices, special grips, supporting the camera on a tree or other vertical structure, a shelf or a park bench if a tripod is not handy, especially in windy conditions or where slow shutter speeds need to be used. Of course, we all need to “rehearse” with a newer camera to get the feeling of the machine, re-learn to squeeze the shutter release rather that poke at it, taking deep breaths just before shooting and all the other old routines that we have taken for granted using out old familiar cameras that have become part of out hands.

The reason I mention all this is that it is fruitless to go through a battery of testing under poorly supported camera positions when it may really be time for the camera doctor to see if there are any misalignments, damages or defects in your system.

If the problem is consistent over many kinds of shooting conditions and I also notice that you posted images look rather underexposed, it may not be your fault as to technique and I suspect that something is rotten in Denmark- or New York City- hmmm- perhaps San Juan, Porto Rico?? Who knows and it can be most likely in your camera- Do check it out!

If I were ever to get back into press work, the Lica rangefinder digital would be my choice. It is a real relatively miniature camera, no mirror slap, quiet shutter, magnificent lenses in including an f/.95 Noctolux and can be hand held, with practice, down to 1/5sec.

Good luck!

Ed

[scoundrel1728]

I agree that a good stout tripod and mirror lockup combined with the delay timer will improve the consistency of your photos. In the photo set in the original post, it is quite possible that the camera failed to achieve focus lock in the first image, for whatever reason, but was able to do so in the second. Perhaps the original focus setting before the first setting was so far off that the autofocus mechanism didn't have time to achieve moer than a very approximate focus, but for the second shot, the first attempt was close enough to allow the camera to successfully focus lock. I don't know; the EXIF data has been stripped from the images, which has hindered the troubleshooting process. The third image has a definite directionality to the blur, a good indication of subject or camera motion. Obviously, the background as a whole isn't moving, nor is the rock on which the model is posing, nor is the model herself moving fast enough to cause this much blur. It is possible that the IS is oscillating, but you would probably be able to hear and feel that happening in the lens and you would have probably told us. The viewfinder would also have shown the blur. In this instance, the camera was probably moving roughly parallel to the model's left calf and right arm: lines running in that direction are relatively sharp, while lines running perpendicular to that are noticeably blurred.

[Bilsen]

Muchas gracias guys.

[Rain Lily]

I've been trying to see your sample images for several days, but they aren't there. Can you reset the link or repost them?

[Don Kondra]

Originally Posted by Rain Lily

I've been trying to see your sample images for several days, but they aren't there. Can you reset the link or repost them?

Just looked and they work for me...

The problem must be on your end.

Cheers, Don

[Rain Lily]

Originally Posted by Don Kondra

Just looked and they work for me...

The problem must be on your end.

Cheers, Don

In the initial post, you can see the images?

I don't know what's wrong on my end - I even tried right-clicking and choosing "open image in new tab" and all I get is something that says "404 - not found"

[Don Kondra]

Yes, at the beginning of the thread there are three images visible

Cheers, Don

[Rain Lily]

Originally Posted by Don Kondra

Yes, at the beginning of the thread there are three images visible

Cheers, Don

Hmm, that's weird. Thanks for mentioning it. I guess I won't see them because I don't know how to fix that.