I think it's the lens. Lenses with a long zoom range aren't as sharp to begin with and tend to get less sharp the more you zoom in. Those pictures aren't bad. It's a lot of zoom in a point-and-shoot package. Looks about right to me.
Ron, I agree with owner; it does look about right to me. I must tell you though, that when I got my first digital SLR, a Canon 20D, I also bought the 24-70mm ($1,500) lens to go with it. I thought I would be shooting some awesome SHARP pictures, but noooooooo. Right from the start I was so disappointed. I thought that I was just a crappy shooter. More than a year later (after warranty) I was shooting a group shot - 3 people standing right in front of me with the autofocus centered on the person in the middle. The photo came out not great as usual, but what I noticed was that a guy walking behind the three people was sharp as a tack. My lens was back focusing!!! I took the lens (and camera) into the shop, paid about $180 to have them calibrated and have had no problems since. We're lucky to have a Canon service center here (on Ward). If you decide to keep your camera, maybe you should take it in and they can look at it. They would probably do it for free since you just got it.
owner- geez, I'm tossed between whether the lens limitation is good news or bad news. I'm a better photographer than I had thought, for mid-distance photos. However, it's seems that it's technologically impossible to take sharp photos on the level I would want. Unless I buy a $100,000 model.
Jalna- "back focusing"?? I'll have to look into that and definitely take into the Canon service center. Also, my less-expensive camera ($400) has a permanent lens. I felt comfortable with that price range and features for my knowledge level, and later, perhaps, move up and advance to something more better and more expensive. Thankx for the info.
6 comments:
they look pretty good to me
Aloha, Neighbor
Comfort Spiral
Cloudia- not. The girls were yawning by the time I finished focusing the photo.
I think it's the lens. Lenses with a long zoom range aren't as sharp to begin with and tend to get less sharp the more you zoom in. Those pictures aren't bad. It's a lot of zoom in a point-and-shoot package. Looks about right to me.
Ron, I agree with owner; it does look about right to me. I must tell you though, that when I got my first digital SLR, a Canon 20D, I also bought the 24-70mm ($1,500) lens to go with it. I thought I would be shooting some awesome SHARP pictures, but noooooooo. Right from the start I was so disappointed. I thought that I was just a crappy shooter. More than a year later (after warranty) I was shooting a group shot - 3 people standing right in front of me with the autofocus centered on the person in the middle. The photo came out not great as usual, but what I noticed was that a guy walking behind the three people was sharp as a tack. My lens was back focusing!!! I took the lens (and camera) into the shop, paid about $180 to have them calibrated and have had no problems since. We're lucky to have a Canon service center here (on Ward). If you decide to keep your camera, maybe you should take it in and they can look at it. They would probably do it for free since you just got it.
owner- geez, I'm tossed between whether the lens limitation is good news or bad news. I'm a better photographer than I had thought, for mid-distance photos. However, it's seems that it's technologically impossible to take sharp photos on the level I would want. Unless I buy a $100,000 model.
Jalna- "back focusing"?? I'll have to look into that and definitely take into the Canon service center. Also, my less-expensive camera ($400) has a permanent lens. I felt comfortable with that price range and features for my knowledge level, and later, perhaps, move up and advance to something more better and more expensive. Thankx for the info.
Post a Comment