High Shutter Speed Indoors

[creisinger]

He also said acceptably sharp, not award winning sharp. If you pixel peep, yes, you will see how sharp it is. But acceptably sharp, to me, does not require pixel peeping.

Sorry, I'm new here and I have no clue what members on this forum actually consider "sharp". It's a learning curve for me as well.

I have no clue what "award winning sharp" would be anyway.

It has nothing to do that I want "to pixel peep". It's just a way how to see the actual quality of an image.

No disrespect, but "acceptably sharp" gives you a lot of leeway when downsizing from 12MP. As I said, the images look ok at the size posted here.

 

[iolair]

Er...I can get acceptably sharp images at 1/20 with IS, or flash...

Please post one of those acceptably sharp images.

Maybe we have a different interpretation of "sharp".

Meh. Okay. These two are from the first time I used flash indoors to light my subjects. Both shot using a Canon 450D, 580EXII, and 50/1.4 (so effectively 80mm, no IS):

ISO 100, f/2.8, 1/20

ISO 400, f/2.2, 1/30

I've been looking into the 1.4 for just these kind of pictures myself, and you've pretty much sold it to me with these images. Do you have any other samples handy, particularly any that are even wider - closer to or at 1.4? (I'm also thinking of using it to do candlelit portraits).

 

[musicaleCA]

Here you go, iolair.

ISO 400, f/1.4, 1/2000



The bokeh...could be a little smoother. But then again, for a $500 lens it does quite well.

I'm sorry for not mentioning that only a 100% crop actually shows how sharp it is.

Well see, there we have to simply disagree. If I shoot an image with, say, an EF 24-70/2.8 USM (a lens renowned for sharpness) at f/8, 1/250, ISO 100, on a 12MP sensor, it's going to look sharp, barring silly stuff like missing the focus. But, if I shoot that on, say, a similar format sensor but instead of 12MP it's 44MP, well...at that kind of resolution you're likely to see the minute effects of diffraction, even at f/8, as well as aberrations in the lens that would've been covered-up at lower resolutions. Sharpness is a very relative thing, and one should also consider how the final image is going to be displayed. If it needs to be printed at 20x30" and people need to look at it from 2 feet away, then you'll need to get a super-dee-duper sharp image. But if it's just going to be a 4x6 on the wall, well...no one will care if the 100% crop isn't so hot.

But, in the interests of further illustrating the point that sharp images can be taken with a flash at what would normally be absurdly slow shutter speeds, here you go. This is a crop of the first image, where noise wasn't an issue even after a ~1EV push (and the original image on the last page was cropped already pretty heavily):

Crop of the second image. At this level of detail, noise is a definite factor, after a ~1EV push as well. At ISO 400, pushing the image definitely brings-out more noise on the 450D, so understandably, there is some loss of detail from my noise reduction later.

 

[creisinger]

OK, you've made your points.

I'm not trying to play a "what if" game here.

I just asked for a 100% crop. Either you agree to post it or you don't. I'll respect that.

I just wanted to see the full res crop no matter if it was shot with a 6MP or 44MP body.

If it's too much too ask for than I won't do it anymore.

I'm solely interested in the quality of work of others. It's hard to judge by re-sized images to fit this forum.

The sharpness is good so I've got nothing else to complain here.

 

[musicaleCA]

Meh, it's alright to ask, though as you noticed it does give others a chance to voice their opinion on the matter. I'm of the opinion that it's all relative.

 

[creisinger]

... I'm of the opinion that it's all relative.

And that's exactly why I asked for it.