Serene as Housewife


Status
Not open for further replies.
16.
DSC00595ees-1.jpg
 

As I mentioned at above, i just bought this lense and not familiar with it yet and still fine-tuning. I didn't blame for A200 but what i mean is A200 is not perfect to handle higher ISO unless so many experience with DSLR.

Erm...every lens needs to be in focus, not just a new lens. Focussing is very basic, if you prefocus then shift your position, at wide open apertures, you will definitely lose focus of the subject.

ISO-400 (image 16) is definitely not considered "high ISO". ISO-800 (images 12-15) yes, it may be considered high but it shouldn't make the image as soft as the ones you've displayed. They're soft simply because they're out of focus.

The A200 handles ISO 800 in the sense that "...the noise reduction is much more heavy-handed resulting in visible smearing of fine detail without really eliminating the noise. You end up with a large amount of fairly unpleasantly intrusive blurred chroma noise blotches." - dpreview but it has nothing to do with the lack of focus.

Just practice more and if you feel that your camera can't handle high ISOs well, then I'd suggest a tripod and shooting at a lower ISO and a slightly lower shutter speed. Some of your shots are ISO-800 but 1/125. You should be able to hand-hold the camera with a 50mm lens with a shutter speed of about 1/60 which means you can roughly go 1 stop lower in ISO (ISO-400).

But the gist of it all is to keep shooting and not find excuses that the camera is not good enough etc...you should master your camera first before saying that it's not good enough.
 

Don't look like OOF to me, seem to be Motion blur (Could you advice the SS) and/or photo underexpose and TS increase the exposure in PP resulting some details to appear grainy or excessive croping in PP (insufficient resolution).... or is ISO 400/800 really a problem , then you may need to send the camera for checking.

Can U provide more EXIF data like
1. SS
2. ISO
3. Apecture
4. Shoot in raw or JPG
5. Original was it under expose (or overexpose) or OK. It will be good if you can post an orginal of say the last photo.
6. Any cropping done.
7. PHoto take with Auto or manual focus and on which point

just for 1 or 2 of the photos

P/S : with OOF, normally another part of the photo should be sharp but this is not in the case with most of those seen here.

Agreed with the advice already given, don't blame the camera (tool), a craftman must understand his tool.

Best regards
 

Last edited:
Don't look like OOF to me, seem to be Motion blur (Could you advice the SS) and/or photo underexpose and TS increase the exposure in PP resulting some details to appear grainy or excessive croping in PP (insufficient resolution).... or is ISO 400/800 really a problem , then you may need to send the camera for checking.

Can U provide more EXIF data like
1. SS
2. ISO
3. Apecture
4. Shoot in raw or JPG
5. Original was it under expose (or overexpose) or OK. It will be good if you can post an orginal of say the last photo.
6. Any cropping done.
7. PHoto take with Auto or manual focus and on which point

just for 1 or 2 of the photos

P/S : with OOF, normally another part of the photo should be sharp but this is not in the case with most of those seen here.

Agreed with the advice already given, don't blame the camera (tool), a craftman must understand his tool.

Best regards


All the exif is attached to the images. No need to look around too much.

Also, in many of the pics, another section IS sharp. For example:

1. Pic 16: Sharp at the lips, but not the eyes. EXIF shows f/1.7; very shallow DOF
2. Pic 13: the back part of the hair is sharp, not the face.
3. Pic 7: scale is sharp, model is not...

It just keeps going on. Basic newbie mistakes of not knowing how to handle large aperture lenses. It's not motion blur.

TS: No need to think of upgrading your body. Any camera, from any brand,will give you these results until you learn how to use the tool properly.
 

All the exif is attached to the images. No need to look around too much.

Also, in many of the pics, another section IS sharp. For example:

1. Pic 16: Sharp at the lips, but not the eyes. EXIF shows f/1.7; very shallow DOF
2. Pic 13: the back part of the hair is sharp, not the face.
3. Pic 7: scale is sharp, model is not...

It just keeps going on. Basic newbie mistakes of not knowing how to handle large aperture lenses. It's not motion blur.

TS: No need to think of upgrading your body. Any camera, from any brand,will give you these results until you learn how to use the tool properly.

THanks Rasnkae, how do you see the EXIF from the photo? mind to share
 

Do a search on here for "how to see EXIF". Google will work too.

hahahaha KENA LA! dun be lazy cs2007 type EXIF data and search for your answer ;)
 

THanks Rasnkae, how do you see the EXIF from the photo? mind to share

If you are using Firefox on XP, try a plugin called FxIF....:)
 

hahahaha KENA LA! dun be lazy cs2007 type EXIF data and search for your answer ;)

Ha ha hah! I did follow his advice and do a search and found the same reply, very surprised that at this age and time there are still ppl who think that whoever asked a question is lazy, can't believe such attitude and mentality exist. Thanks :)
 

Last edited:
Ha ha hah! I did follow his advice and do a search and found the same reply, very surprised that at this age and time there are still ppl who think that whoever asked a question is lazy, can't believe such attitude and mentality exist. Thanks :)

it does in CS hahaha you will realise it soon enuff :confused:
 

Ha ha hah! I did follow his advice and do a search and found the same reply, very surprised that at this age and time there are still ppl who think that whoever asked a question is lazy, can't believe such attitude and mentality exist. Thanks :)

I'm very surprised that at this day and age there are still people who can't search for basic info on their own and depend on other people to spoonfeed them. Can't believe that such mentality still exist.
 

it does in CS hahaha you will realise it soon enuff :confused:
I have to accept it as a fact now, and if I ask some questions again in future I will have to state that certain ppl(who thinks that others are lazy) don't need to answer!;)
 

Last edited:
I have to accept it as a fact now, and if I ask some questions again in future I will have to state that certain ppl(who thinks that others are lazy) don't need to answer!;)

For you, from the Forum Terms of Use (it's in the newbie's corner)

"2. New Posters (newbies) - Use the Search Engine to find out if whatever information you are seeking has been posted before posting a question."
 

For you, from the Forum Terms of Use (it's in the newbie's corner)

"2. New Posters (newbies) - Use the Search Engine to find out if whatever information you are seeking has been posted before posting a question."

Don't need to further discuss, this thread is not for such discussions but to comment and Help the TS if possible.
 

I agree with what some CS members said in this thread.

The theme doesn't really portray a housewife kind of "feel".

The poses suggests that it is just "posing for the photo" and not posing for the theme.

Not pin-pointing the model but housewife may not be a good theme, maybe family lifestyle would be better for these photos?
 

I have but one question.

Why was Serene wearing that rather ungainly back bracelet, that ugly chain wrapped around her wrist, in every picture that we can see her hand?
 

I find that Serene's photo is flooding CS....They are all snapshots of the lady...I shall not comment anymore until I see anything outstanding.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top