Yes, I was on a monopod. The lens is a 150-600 Sigma Pro (weighs about 8 pounds) and I have used it 4 times so far I can pretty much check ear wax on the batter all the way zoomed in. In this shot I was just behind 1st base outside the foul line. I was shooting around 500-800 ISO. On my 70-200 2.8 shooting at 500-800 ISO is not a problem with noise. This is probably the best crop sensor on the market considering Nikon first used it in their D500 Sport camera before filtering it down to the prosumer level the next year (Which is why I love Nikon).
I have not tuned my lenses to the camera. I was really temped to but ran out of time. I have read blogs that say that third party lenses do not do well with on camera calibrating which does not make a whole hell of a lot of sense to me.
Tried playing around with your raw, making it a little warmer, adding a gradient to darken the background and trying to make the black part dark but not “black”, so can still see some details.
@254AllStar.com, you have not said who are your clients. If they are parents of the sportsperson, then you will have to show their ward in good light. If it is the local newspaper, then you will need to bring some human interest angle to it and if it is the team management, then some kind of team spirit or an uplifting moment has to be captured. In short, it is not the post-processing but the captured moment that will impress your client and the definition of what constitutes an interesting moment changes.
In the picture supplied by you, there is no team involvement nor there is a human interest story. So in the version below, I assumed that the client is the parent and then brought out the determination on the face and eyes in focus. To me, it seems very important to get some detail of the eye for this picture to pop.
Oh I agree with you on every aspect talked about. This was just an example of a tight crop where I just could not extrapolate the amount of detail I was hoping I would be able to see from this lens. You are correct, I am shooting for the parents. Still in testing mode with this lens for the most part and just trying to take my game to another level.
Oh, judging from the example, the lens is fine. It has very good local contrast and is extremely sharp. I suspect that you will see only a fractional improvement due to any lens replacement.
If you are shooting for parents then being technically ultra correct is irrelevant. As long as you get their child in good focus with likeable pose, they will be mightily impressed. Trust me. I am a parent too
Mr. McCap, you are very right. The cut4 photographer is very meticulous and well thought out. He puts himself in the best possible scenario to get the images he wants to create. You rarely see him at night events and if he is, the lighting is so good that he does not have to dial up the ISO nearly as much as I would at my football games. He usually shoots championship high school games at night in college stadiums or community stadiums where the lighting is 2 times brighter then me shooting at 6400 ISO at f2.8 in mine.
When I see that kind of photo, I always think of
elsamuko’s National Geographic Script for The Gimp.
I believe that it will give your image much more oompf. https://sites.google.com/site/elsamuko/gimp/ng
I also love Nikon, and shoot them with Sigma primes, which are very sharp as expected. I use Fuji for everyday carry around, but would not give up my Nikons for pro work. The Nikon in camera tuning is relatively useful for primes, but when it comes to zooms, not so much. You can get it bang on at one focal distance and the rest it could be out. Additionally the Sigma dock is available for a reason, both for firmware updates, and the ability to tune exactly to your particular camera is essential.
Is your behemoth a contemporary or sports lens? Does it have OS? I’m guessing it does, so I would probably disable that and test again, especially when shooting such high shutter speeds. I would also maybe test the lens at f8, and no longer than 400mm, and see how the performance is there.
Was it a really hot day?
My opinion is that these images are not very sharp, and that the lens needs to be calibrated. Getting prime like sharpness is not going to happen, but I feel that there is maybe a focusing error here, going by the badge on the front of the boys helmet. It probably just needs a tune. I’ve done a version here and sharpened the image more than I would’ve normally in RT.
The d7500 has no anti-aliasing filter so it should be very sharp. Do you have an image from your 70-200 2.8 Sigma you are happy with we could look at?
And finally, your processing was a little heavy handed with the first image you shared, but I really liked the second one though, although it still feels a little soft to me.
Regarding my 70-200 f2.8 and 50-100 f1.8 art lens (which some claim to be the sharpest “Zoom” lens ever made to date), there is nothing good to compare it too because I shot in Jpg a few weeks ago.
Prior to that most of my shots were on a Football Field or Gym at 4000-6500 ISO because of Fall and Winter Sports.
I shot outdoor sports with this new lens so it is the sport version. I would not feel good with not having weather sealing. My 50-100 art lens is not weather sealed, but that is for gym use to get me an extra stop or so of light in poorly lit gyms.
I definitely agree on the slight soft look.
I know the in camera lens calibration is only good for one focal length. Where as the dock pretty much will allow you to calibrate the entire lens if I understand correctly. Or at least multiple different points with a great deal of precision and accuracy between the points (linearity).
I am on my way to shoot an indoor sports banquet now so I will be out the rest of the night.
You’re shooting at your lowest aperture (f/6.3) on 600 mm, so that’s quite normal. Like @paperdigits said, stop down to f/8.0 or something and give it another go. You have some room to play with your shutter speed and maybe crank up the ISO to 3200 to still get good exposure.
One of the other things I thought about is that helmet is so old and beat up, it may very well be showing wear on the lettering. I thought about that a about two days or so ago. Thank you for your input.
Focus is on the near shoulder. Look at the stitching and fabric in the vest.
That’s flare on the helmet logo and Rawlings name on the side, not just being out of focus. If you’re using a protective filter, try without it. You may need a higher quality filter. Some can induce flare like that. Check the filter and lens to see if either needs cleaning. It looks like whatever is causing the flare is also causing a little general unsharpness.
I’m not familiar with either the camera or the lens, so I can’t speak except in generalities. However, I’ve been shooting since 1968, sometimes professionally, and with many brands and formats, so I’ve seen enough to know what flare looks like.
Stopping down is good advice, but at the cost of less blur softening the background. Test to see if there’s a good compromise between sharpness and depth of field.
Yeah, no filter on the lens. It is 105mm thread so that is a pricey investment for high end filters. So if it is flare? Would a serious amount of Contrast be able to sharpen it just as an experiment?
Adding contrast won’t solve the flare issue. The ‘blooming’ of the white over the black that @Thanatomanic points out is something that contrast adjustment won’t cure, at least not without something really radical that would completely ruin the rest of the photo. Even radical local contrast adjustments would probably look unnatural. Nothing lost in trying it, though, and you could learn something in the process.
Check the lens to see if it’s clean. Look for streaks or smears, which can cause this kind of flare. Check the internals of the lens as well. I have a Canonet GIII that had the same characteristic flare when it reached 40 years old. Disassembly and cleaning of the internal lens surfaces fixed it. That was probably aperture oil that had evaporated and deposited on the internal lens surfaces.
I’ve seen lenses that seem to flare like this consistently, but have no idea if your model is one of them.
If it is brand new and clean, there’s always a remote chance of a manufacturing mistake.
However, my guess on the fuzzyness is still simply the limitations of the lens at the maximum focal length and shooting wide open. Could you try the following: take a shot at 600mm of anything with plenty of detail going on in the entire frame. A tree or a house in full view should do fine. Try that at f/6.3, f/8 and f/13 and upload the results here. I am curious to see the results
