My 600 arrived yesterday...initially I was in awe, but after some tests I'm beginning to worry
The problem: 9 photos every 10 are SOFT!
Initially I thought that the problem was the tripod (Manfrotto 055, too light for a 600),but then I shooted between 1/2000 and 1/4000, plus image stabilization...I don't have the best tripod of the world, but it is OK to get soft photos at these SS? (I tried even self timer and mirror lock up at 1/4000, but still soft!)?
I tried to place the lens direcly on the ground...the results looked better, but they are very inconsistent...I got a dozen of sharp photos, then again many soft ones.
What really puzzles me is that some (few) photos are sharp...an example is the 100% crop of the moon that I posted in the ESS gallery. The photo was taken at 1/100, with the lens + 1.4x TC on the Manfrotto tripod. There was even wind, but the photo is sharp, while other images taken at 1/4000 are soft.
I tried to turn on and off the IS, AF and MF, but the results are alway inconsistent...sometimes good, many times soft
Some 100% crops (from RAW, Canon 350D, no sharpening):
Hi Juza, welcome to long lens photography. You really won't know if there is a problem with the lens until you can get it mounted to a solid platform and run some controlled tests on a static subject. If you are getting some tack sharp images, then I suspect the rest is technique. Don't give up on this lens until you've evaluated it correctly. Long lens photography is a whole new game, and requires perfect technique, even with IS and fast shutter speeds.
In some situations IS may actually produce blurry images when used on a tripod (not sure where I saw specific information but it may be worth doing some research).
To be certain you may want to support the lens on a beanbag, on a sturdy table, turn IS off, use AF and a large aperture on a detailed subject and fire a few shots and see if you're gettin gconsistent results. If you do, it's probably the tripod or IS that's getting in the way.
The 600mm is desined to work fine with IS and a tripod. There's tons of folks who use this combo and get tack sharp images including Garth, Bob Royse, Brian Small, etc. I use IS with my 500mm on a tripod all the time.
Indeed, I did exactly what Guy suggested...The first four crops that you can see in the link had been taken with the lens on a sturdy table. A couple was taken with IS on, and the other with IS off. I used even self timer and MLU, with a SS of 1/4000!
The 17-85 is kinda apples to oranges. However, have you looked at results from the lens that are stopped down to like 5.6 or 8? Is it getting better or not changing. F4 has got to be a very narrow DOF at 600mm. If the focus is not dead on, you're proabbly going to have some soft images. Just like the 50 1.4 at 1.4 with a close subject.
I find that ISO 800 and 1600 seem to soften shots alot on their own on the XT. The moon shot you posted seemed very sharp, so I don't think the glass is flawed. Worst case scenario, the lens requires calibration.
Hi Mel,
I know that the 17-85 is a very different lens, but I expected the much-much more expensive 600 IS to be at least as sharp
I toke many photos with AF and MF, high and low ISO, and the results are almost always the same
Posted by Kent Staubus on April 7, 2006 at 4:03 PM
My thinking is similar to Mel's. The DOF will be almost like a microscope when shot at a wide aperature. Everytime I get a new lens, I test it for two things: flare and sharpness. To test sharpness I find a brick wall/back of a building and focus on that using a VERY solid tripod during the calm part of the day. I try to keep the plane of the lens parallel to the plane of the brick wall. Try this and take a few shots with manual focus and a few with autofocus. Use a cable release or timer release.
Another thing I'll add is that my own shots with my longest lens (a 400mm) instantly became sharper when I bought a solid tripod (a heavy Berlebach, but same results from the Gitzo 1325) and a first class tripod head. You might not see tripod/head deficiencies at wider lenses but you can certainly see them with ultra long lenses.
Guy--As I recall, Canon lenses sense when they are used on a tripod, and Nikon lenses do not. I have noticed less sharpness on my 80-400mm VR when I used it on a tripod and forgot to turn off VR.
Hi Kent,
I have tried some photos at f/8 and f/11, but I didn't see any difference in terms of sharpness...anyway, tomorrow I'll do further testing at these apertures.
Juza, I just had another thought after looking at your test shots again. Have you tried a subject at close distance, say around 7 to 15 meters? One thing you'll find about long lenses, they don't work real great at very long distances. Atmospheric conditions (humidity, heat waves) may cause the appearance of less than optimal sharpness. Try shooting a small subject that fills the frame (a toy stuffed animal works well), stopped down to f5.6 or f8. Use a rock solid platform for your tests. Use one-shot autofocus, and good light for your test.
A subject I often use when testing for sharpness is a cereal box (or something like it) that has vibrant color, some small text and a nice contrasty area to focus on. I set it beside a yardstick (or tape measure with 3 or 4 feet of the blade visible) which is pointed lengthwise toward the camera with an equal amount of yardstick forward and behind. Shoot the box as large and square on as possible but with the yardstick visible in the photo. This way you can check for sharpness on a willing subject, check for front or back focus problems and get a feel for you new lens' DOF all at the same time.
Hi Juza. Sorry to hear that you are having problems with your 600. I have routienly used my relatively new 500 with the 1.4 TC with IS on both on a tripod hand held and bean bag. Aside from the obvious poor technique resulting from the hand holding all images are very sharp. The 600 is a different lens, but the same class and equal performance should be expected.
FWIW, I would suggest sending it for calibration. I know you bought the lens to use it and want it available right away. However, if you are like me, no matter what test you do you will always question the lens until it is guaranteed to be perfect. About 2 years ago I bought a 100-400 IS. The focusing was noisy and seemed to seek more than I expected. Images seemed pretty good, but I had this nagging feeling that there may be something wrong. After a few weeks I sent the lens to Canon for calibration adjustment. When it came back I was amazed at the focus quality and speed. Many of my images with this lens have been posted here and received kudos for sharpness.
Bottom line is that if you are unsure, you only have some time to lose by assuring the the lens meets Canon's specs by having them inspect and calibrate it.
This morning I did more testing...not the best way to spend the morning :-(, anyway, these are the results:
- the AF is fine. I tried the yardstick test suggested by Mike, and the AF was spot on, right on the subject.
- I tried other photos from the tripod (at minimum height)...nope, more than 100 photo and ZERO sharp images
- I tried other photo with the lens on the ground (I photographed both a flat subject and toy stuffed)....result: 90% of the images are razor sharp, even at f/4.
The results seems to point to the tripod, but I can almost not believe it
I know that it is not great, but after all it is a $300 model, I used it al minimum height, IS and MLU, SS 1/4000...how is it possible to get motion blur at this SS
A Gitzo 1548 with Wimberley is SO steady that it can avoid blur even with the head unlocked, at SS like 1/500 or 1/800 as I often see in the avian gallery?
I know that it sounds like a silly question, but I still don't believe to my eyes seeing soft photos at 1/4000 :-/
I think you may well be seeing the limitations of your tripod. The 055 is a fairly lightweight tripod, and the 3 way head may not be helping things either (it's max load is 6Kg's) ~ you might find that, despite the weight of the equipment, the tripod may be "ringing" with slight vibrations from your hands or any movement that you make. You might like to try removing the 3-way head and just resting the lens on the tripod to see if that helps ~ the 3-way head will have some spring in it too with that sort of weight resting on it ~ ie you might not actually be able to physically lock it down tight enough.
Looking at the tripod specs, you might be close to the weight limit for it too (6-7Kg's), so I would certainly think to upgrade it ASAP. Total up the weight of your 600+biggest camera+whatever else (eg flash kit) that you think you will use and then make sure that you get a tripod capable of taking the load plus a comfy spare margin.
Don't be too disheartened at the minute, it does take a little time to become familiar with your new lens and to work out your own techniques for getting the best results from it. Thinking back to when I bought the 500/4 and first used it, the first few weeks of use where frustrating as I couldn't always get the sharp shots I knew I should be getting. It will get better
Anyway, I did other test, the problem can't be the tripod...I tried to use the lens on a beanbag. I toke various photos at different shutter speed (bare lens, no TC)...all the photos are soft. What amazes me is that the photos taken at 1/4000 are as soft as the ones taken at 1/200...I doubt it is motion blur
I really don't understand this inconsistency of results...the only reason that I can imagine is that it has sharpness problems at long distances, since all the sharp photos were taken near the minumum focusing distance. On the other hand, the photo of the moon was quite sharp
Ok, I tried the lens directly on the tripod...the images are bit shaper, but still quite soft for such lens. Moreover, I still don't understand the cause of the softness - for example, one of the "sharp" photos was taken at 1/125, and some other ones are soft at 1/2000. The AF seems OK, and I tried also MF
You are probably seeing the effect of motion by the lens - either introduced by the mount (tripod/head), or by you.
When shooting at longer focal lengths the lens is very sensitive to the slightest motion ~ the angle of view is very narrow and any movement at the mount is multiplied/exagerated. If there is any spring in your tripod or head, then it will show through. You may also be introducing some slight movement yourself when you fire the shutter. Make sure you gently squeeze the shutter button ~ try and make it as gentle and fluid motion as you can. You could also be slightly twisting the camera/lens when you're firing the shutter without realising it. Also - make sure you're using One-Shot and not AI-Servo focusing. AI can carry on focusing until the shutter actually fires - the end result is sometimes focus doesn't end up where you wanted it!!!!
Hang in there and it will get better
If you check back into the NPN archives you should find a few "long lens technique" articles, you might find it usefull to re-read them to see if they can shed any light!
Posted by Kent Staubus on April 8, 2006 at 11:42 AM
I know it seems counter-intuitive, but I also seem to get more soft images on my 500 f4 at very high shutter speeds. For example, I found that at 1/2500 to 1/4000 second, a lot of my images were soft, whereas at somewhat slower speeds, the percentage went up. I started thinking like an engineer (because I are one ), and wondered if this could be a limitation of the response time of the IS or AF system (motor, lens elements, electronics, etc.) at such a fast shutter speed. Of course, if this was the case, with IS and AF turned off, as long as you know you are spot on with focus, the problem should not be apparent. I never tested close-up with the yardstick as Mike suggested, but did shoot a high contrast object with lots of black text on a yellow background, and convinced myself that I could consistently get razor sharp images under ideal conditions after careful focus with either the IS & AF on and shutter speeds of about 1/1600second or slower, or IS and AF off and shutter speeds faster than that. All tests were on a Gitzo tripod and Wimberley head, using MLU. Would really like to know what a Canon engineer would have to say about this, or if others may have observed the same phenomenon. Now I seldom shoot over about 1/1600 second, work on my technique, and get a lot of sharp images (but also some soft ones). Mostly now I suspect the soft ones are "operator error" .
---
How about wind? Was there any breeze at all?
---
No...with the exception of the image of the moon (that turned out sharp, I still don't understand how), all the test shots were taken from inside my house.
if you are using a less than adequiate tripod, your biggest woory is if that thng topples,,,,you best go on, pull up to the lick log, and get you a adequate stable tripod,,,,for more than just sharp image reasons
Yes, I checked even the filter...it is OK.
I spent all the day doing tests and, honestly, I don't think that the problem is the tecnique...I have read the articles on long lens tecnique, too.
Even if the tripod is crappy, at least the photos taken with the beanbag (at 1/4000+IS!!!)should be sharp....anyway, monday I'll bring it back to the camera shop, if possible I'll ask to do some tests on a rock solid tripod.
Have you tried downloading a focus chart online to see if it's front or back focussing? With this you'd be able to test other lenses as well to determine if it's the lens or your body.
I included both the full (resized) image and a 100% crop. As you can see in the full image, the focus is right where it should be (I used the center AF point). I even tried to shut off the IS, but the results are pretty much identical to the photos taken with IS on.
This one was taken from a sturdy table, not from the tripod.
It seems incredible, but I'm beginning to think that it has a sharpness problem at medium distances...it is very sharp between the minimum focusing distance and 10mt (indeed, many of the photos taken inside my house are sharp), it becomes unacceptably soft with subject more distant than 10mt, and it regains a little of sharpness near infinity (e.g. the shot of the Moon).
I'd still find a focus chart and shoot that. It will give you precise measurements and you can rule out the body that way. Some of your other lenses may have more DOF and you wouldn't notice a focus issue with the body as much. You can get a chart here: http://www.photo.net/learn/focustest/scale45.jpg Be sure to read the whole article on testing. http://www.photo.net/learn/focustest/
Other than that, I tried some shots from the tripod (minimum height+self timer) at short distance...the majority of the photos was sharp, even with SS of 1/10 or slower. The same setup gives soft images at longer distances, at every SS.
BTW - I even thought that the problem could be atmospheric conditions (as Bob suggested in a previous message), but the lens is already soft at 15/20mt. There was not any fog; yesterday it was a sunny, relatively warm day, while today it is a cloudy and cold day...but the results are always the same.
As you're shooting from inside a building, you're not shooting through glass for your longer distance shots are you...?
As you're getting good results from the test charts, as much as I hate to say it...if it was my lens, I'd be looking to find something I was doing wrong, rather than a problem with the lens.
You should be able to repeat some of your tests with the chart at longer distances too, but don't expect the fine edge detail to equal that at very close quarters. Do you have any friends shooting Canon gear? If so, then try with one of their cameras, or try at the shop with another camera too.
Also the problem may have to do with what is called a "back focus" or "front focus" problem with either the camera it's self ot the lens or lenses used.
Even shooting out the window you can easily get distortion from heat. I'd suggest shooting the chart outside in cool temps and around 20'. Maybe see if you can get the camera store to let you shoot some samaples with a 20D, 30D or a Mark II. If it still looks really soft take it back and get a new one.
Hi Juza, I think that you are to good a photographer to be having this much trouble with your new hot toy. Is there a camera shop in your area that has a 600 that you could rent or get the loan of to run a comparison test? Do a quick test lens (A) and lens (B) if the other lens comes out on top by far you know that you have a problem and can call Canon ASAP. Wish you the best of luck with your new baby. Robert Hice
Thanks for all the advices...today I personally brought the lens to the Canon service center of Milan, Italy. They did some calibration adjustments, and they updated the firmware of the camera...tomorrow I'll test again the lens, I hope that everything works well.
Posted by chris hajee on April 11, 2006 at 3:07 AM
Juza, I have no experience with the 600 but with my 500 I,ll have to use a sturdy tripod , I think that if you want to make consistant sharp shots you ,ll have to buy a very sturdy tripod with the wimberly head ( the weight of the 600 is huge) I,ll hope for you the lens will be ok now
I included both the full photo and a 100%, processed crop of the RAW file. The image is a bit noisy because it was taken at ISO 400, but the sharpness look acceptable, on my monitor.
What do you think, in your opinion does it look good?
Posted by Josh Anderson on April 11, 2006 at 7:41 AM
I think it looks fine Juza!!
Posted by Bob Steele on April 11, 2006 at 10:20 AM
Juza, that image certainly looks acceptable. But, that really isn't much of a real world test of a 600mm lens. You should test it on something with fine detail at about 10 - 15 meters. Something with feathers would be good.
Hi Juza, After all that I think you and your 600 just need a bottle of wine cooled in a lake with lots of wildlife near by. Best of luck with your new toy. Good Hunting, Robert Hice
Discussion
42 repliesThe problem: 9 photos every 10 are SOFT!
Initially I thought that the problem was the tripod (Manfrotto 055, too light for a 600),but then I shooted between 1/2000 and 1/4000, plus image stabilization...I don't have the best tripod of the world, but it is OK to get soft photos at these SS? (I tried even self timer and mirror lock up at 1/4000, but still soft!)?
I tried to place the lens direcly on the ground...the results looked better, but they are very inconsistent...I got a dozen of sharp photos, then again many soft ones.
What really puzzles me is that some (few) photos are sharp...an example is the 100% crop of the moon that I posted in the ESS gallery. The photo was taken at 1/100, with the lens + 1.4x TC on the Manfrotto tripod. There was even wind, but the photo is sharp, while other images taken at 1/4000 are soft.
I tried to turn on and off the IS, AF and MF, but the results are alway inconsistent...sometimes good, many times soft
Some 100% crops (from RAW, Canon 350D, no sharpening):
http://www.juzaphoto.com/npn/600-crops.jpg
I'd really appreciate your opinions.
Thanks
To be certain you may want to support the lens on a beanbag, on a sturdy table, turn IS off, use AF and a large aperture on a detailed subject and fire a few shots and see if you're gettin gconsistent results. If you do, it's probably the tripod or IS that's getting in the way.
Guy
The 17-85 is kinda apples to oranges. However, have you looked at results from the lens that are stopped down to like 5.6 or 8? Is it getting better or not changing. F4 has got to be a very narrow DOF at 600mm. If the focus is not dead on, you're proabbly going to have some soft images. Just like the 50 1.4 at 1.4 with a close subject.
I find that ISO 800 and 1600 seem to soften shots alot on their own on the XT. The moon shot you posted seemed very sharp, so I don't think the glass is flawed. Worst case scenario, the lens requires calibration.
Mel-
I know that the 17-85 is a very different lens, but I expected the much-much more expensive 600 IS to be at least as sharp
I toke many photos with AF and MF, high and low ISO, and the results are almost always the same
Another thing I'll add is that my own shots with my longest lens (a 400mm) instantly became sharper when I bought a solid tripod (a heavy Berlebach, but same results from the Gitzo 1325) and a first class tripod head. You might not see tripod/head deficiencies at wider lenses but you can certainly see them with ultra long lenses.
Guy--As I recall, Canon lenses sense when they are used on a tripod, and Nikon lenses do not. I have noticed less sharpness on my 80-400mm VR when I used it on a tripod and forgot to turn off VR.
Kent in SD
I have tried some photos at f/8 and f/11, but I didn't see any difference in terms of sharpness...anyway, tomorrow I'll do further testing at these apertures.
FWIW, I would suggest sending it for calibration. I know you bought the lens to use it and want it available right away. However, if you are like me, no matter what test you do you will always question the lens until it is guaranteed to be perfect. About 2 years ago I bought a 100-400 IS. The focusing was noisy and seemed to seek more than I expected. Images seemed pretty good, but I had this nagging feeling that there may be something wrong. After a few weeks I sent the lens to Canon for calibration adjustment. When it came back I was amazed at the focus quality and speed. Many of my images with this lens have been posted here and received kudos for sharpness.
Bottom line is that if you are unsure, you only have some time to lose by assuring the the lens meets Canon's specs by having them inspect and calibrate it.
Regards,
Ed
This morning I did more testing...not the best way to spend the morning :-(, anyway, these are the results:
- the AF is fine. I tried the yardstick test suggested by Mike, and the AF was spot on, right on the subject.
- I tried other photos from the tripod (at minimum height)...nope, more than 100 photo and ZERO sharp images
- I tried other photo with the lens on the ground (I photographed both a flat subject and toy stuffed)....result: 90% of the images are razor sharp, even at f/4.
The results seems to point to the tripod, but I can almost not believe it
I know that it is not great, but after all it is a $300 model, I used it al minimum height, IS and MLU, SS 1/4000...how is it possible to get motion blur at this SS
A Gitzo 1548 with Wimberley is SO steady that it can avoid blur even with the head unlocked, at SS like 1/500 or 1/800 as I often see in the avian gallery?
I know that it sounds like a silly question, but I still don't believe to my eyes seeing soft photos at 1/4000 :-/
I think you may well be seeing the limitations of your tripod. The 055 is a fairly lightweight tripod, and the 3 way head may not be helping things either (it's max load is 6Kg's) ~ you might find that, despite the weight of the equipment, the tripod may be "ringing" with slight vibrations from your hands or any movement that you make. You might like to try removing the 3-way head and just resting the lens on the tripod to see if that helps ~ the 3-way head will have some spring in it too with that sort of weight resting on it ~ ie you might not actually be able to physically lock it down tight enough.
Looking at the tripod specs, you might be close to the weight limit for it too (6-7Kg's), so I would certainly think to upgrade it ASAP. Total up the weight of your 600+biggest camera+whatever else (eg flash kit) that you think you will use and then make sure that you get a tripod capable of taking the load plus a comfy spare margin.
Don't be too disheartened at the minute, it does take a little time to become familiar with your new lens and to work out your own techniques for getting the best results from it. Thinking back to when I bought the 500/4 and first used it, the first few weeks of use where frustrating as I couldn't always get the sharp shots I knew I should be getting. It will get better
is it mounted on the lense collar?
---
Yes, of course.
Anyway, I did other test, the problem can't be the tripod...I tried to use the lens on a beanbag. I toke various photos at different shutter speed (bare lens, no TC)...all the photos are soft. What amazes me is that the photos taken at 1/4000 are as soft as the ones taken at 1/200...I doubt it is motion blur
I really don't understand this inconsistency of results...the only reason that I can imagine is that it has sharpness problems at long distances, since all the sharp photos were taken near the minumum focusing distance. On the other hand, the photo of the moon was quite sharp
thanks for the suggestion...I'd try to remove the head and mount it direclty on the tripod to see if it improves a bit...
You are probably seeing the effect of motion by the lens - either introduced by the mount (tripod/head), or by you.
When shooting at longer focal lengths the lens is very sensitive to the slightest motion ~ the angle of view is very narrow and any movement at the mount is multiplied/exagerated. If there is any spring in your tripod or head, then it will show through. You may also be introducing some slight movement yourself when you fire the shutter. Make sure you gently squeeze the shutter button ~ try and make it as gentle and fluid motion as you can. You could also be slightly twisting the camera/lens when you're firing the shutter without realising it. Also - make sure you're using One-Shot and not AI-Servo focusing. AI can carry on focusing until the shutter actually fires - the end result is sometimes focus doesn't end up where you wanted it!!!!
Hang in there and it will get better
If you check back into the NPN archives you should find a few "long lens technique" articles, you might find it usefull to re-read them to see if they can shed any light!
How about wind? Was there any breeze at all?
Kent in SD
I know it seems counter-intuitive, but I also seem to get more soft images on my 500 f4 at very high shutter speeds. For example, I found that at 1/2500 to 1/4000 second, a lot of my images were soft, whereas at somewhat slower speeds, the percentage went up. I started thinking like an engineer (because I are one
Charlie
How about wind? Was there any breeze at all?
---
No...with the exception of the image of the moon (that turned out sharp, I still don't understand how), all the test shots were taken from inside my house.
I spent all the day doing tests and, honestly, I don't think that the problem is the tecnique...I have read the articles on long lens tecnique, too.
Even if the tripod is crappy, at least the photos taken with the beanbag (at 1/4000+IS!!!)should be sharp....anyway, monday I'll bring it back to the camera shop, if possible I'll ask to do some tests on a rock solid tripod.
I did many test and the focus is spot on...here is a further example:
http://www.juzaphoto.com/npn/600-crops2.jpg
I included both the full (resized) image and a 100% crop. As you can see in the full image, the focus is right where it should be (I used the center AF point). I even tried to shut off the IS, but the results are pretty much identical to the photos taken with IS on.
This one was taken from a sturdy table, not from the tripod.
It seems incredible, but I'm beginning to think that it has a sharpness problem at medium distances...it is very sharp between the minimum focusing distance and 10mt (indeed, many of the photos taken inside my house are sharp), it becomes unacceptably soft with subject more distant than 10mt, and it regains a little of sharpness near infinity (e.g. the shot of the Moon).
I tried also that test...this is the result:
http://www.juzaphoto.com/npn/600-focus.jpg
It looks pretty accurate IMHO.
Other than that, I tried some shots from the tripod (minimum height+self timer) at short distance...the majority of the photos was sharp, even with SS of 1/10 or slower. The same setup gives soft images at longer distances, at every SS.
BTW - I even thought that the problem could be atmospheric conditions (as Bob suggested in a previous message), but the lens is already soft at 15/20mt. There was not any fog; yesterday it was a sunny, relatively warm day, while today it is a cloudy and cold day...but the results are always the same.
As you're shooting from inside a building, you're not shooting through glass for your longer distance shots are you...?
As you're getting good results from the test charts, as much as I hate to say it...if it was my lens, I'd be looking to find something I was doing wrong, rather than a problem with the lens.
You should be able to repeat some of your tests with the chart at longer distances too, but don't expect the fine edge detail to equal that at very close quarters. Do you have any friends shooting Canon gear? If so, then try with one of their cameras, or try at the shop with another camera too.
Good luck!
of course I shoot through an *open* window, not through glass.
Tomorrow I'll bring it back to the camera shop, hopefully I'll be able to do some more tests with another camera and a professional tripod.
Sometimes it's too easy to overlook the obvious
You seem to have done all your shooting indoors - try taking the lens out in the car and photograph something from the car window using a bean bag.
My 10d and 20d create soft images that then need to be cleaned up and sharpened in PS.
Check out this link:
http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00ETJW&tag=
Also the problem may have to do with what is called a "back focus" or "front focus" problem with either the camera it's self ot the lens or lenses used.
Martin
test: http://www.juzaphoto.com/npn/600ok.jpg
I included both the full photo and a 100%, processed crop of the RAW file. The image is a bit noisy because it was taken at ISO 400, but the sharpness look acceptable, on my monitor.
What do you think, in your opinion does it look good?
Thanks to everyone for your help