So you're going the low-cost lens route? ;)

Nice, I still haven't been able to justify an L lens, but I will.

Oh Dave on that picture the shutterspeed was 1/400sec. and ISO 400

I forgot to mention.... In camera sharpening is null when shooting in RAW mode. The in camera sharpening only happens with jpegs.

Sharpening should be under the custom functions in the menu section, I think. At least it is in my XT.

Like I said, the $115 50mm f1.8 is a GREAT lens. The optics are top notch and the aperture can't be beat (unless you buy the much more expensive f1.4 50mm). And, at that price, it's something that every Canon owner should have.

You should be able to get great shots hand held. A tripod is nice unless it's a cheap tripod, but it's not necessary for a sharp shot (most of the time).

As has been stated, take lots of pictures. Even if it's just of a moving ceiling fan. Change a setting, take a shot, review, change a setting, take a shot, review, repeat. It's educational.

Play with aperture mode on the couch. Set the ISO to 200 and then under aperture mode, point the camera at a bright wall, towards a lamp.. Dial the aperture until you get a even shutter speed - like 1/20 for example. Remember where you are pointing, then set the ISO to 400 and point the camera at the same spot. The shutter speed should become 1/40s. 1/20s would be to long to hand hold, so would 1/40s. If you bumped the ISO to 800, the shutter should become 1/80s. With a steady hand, you should be able to get a steady shot. IF the lens has IS, then you could go down to a 1/60th or possibly 1/40. After that, you need a tripod.

Don't forget that the lens / focal length makes a difference. So if you've got a 35mm lens or a zoom set to 35 mm, you might be able to get away with 1/40 or so, but if you zoom that baby out to 80mm, you're going to want something faster than 1/80. You can see where this is going, if you get a 100-300mm lens and zoom all the way out, you need a high shutter speed (1/500 is probably safe).

Is toad coitus allowed on Pelican?
http://i282.photobucket.com/albums/k...l/_MG_0473.jpg

Yeah, I admit it is a pricey, but after using it buying anything less would make me feel really bad. The whole reason I don't have the lens now is because I'm having a hard time justifying the price. Maybe when I get ready to take another vacation I'll have a reason to buy it. :)

I took a few decent lightning photos last night. I'll upload them as soon as I am back on decent Internet

Here are some lightning pictures. They are a little Noisey but I am still perfecting the settings.
http://tinyurl.com/n2hqwl

Great way to get rid of noise is with "noise ninja" a plugin for Photoshop.

Can you record more mundane subjects where you can determine if your images are a result of a trash lens or merely camera settings/technique? For example, place camera on a stable platform (i.e. tripod or equivalent), in front of an house, outside. Adjust camera to the highest jpg resolution, take some photos at various focal lengths, resize them to 800 pixels wide @ 72 dpi with photoshop or equiv., then post them here. If you attempt to post out-of-the camera files directly, this forum may not accept a 4-5 Mb file. BTW, what size were the files you previously uploaded. Your camera might be set at the lowest quality resolution (640x480) not the best to judge lens performance, but telling enough.

Using supplemental software to make each soft photo you take, sharp, is IMHO, not a desireable procedure to take photographs, snapshots or otherwise. But if you're happy with the result, ymmv.

Sherwood

I have the camera set on RAW. Its definitely as high res as it gets.
http://picasaweb.google.com/Johnsonsl944/NewCamera?authkey=Gv1sRgCK_LjJz4iJDOrgE#
Here are a few I just shot. They look good to me...

RAW does not allow for in camera sharpening. Digital is inherently softer than film. As I said before, P&S cameras are built for the masses and usually have enough sharpening built in to please everyone. Again, if the P&S has a RAW mode, then those pix are not sharpened.

RAW allows you to make the most amount of changes to the pic under post processing. RAW can also allow you to fix or salvage a shot that is (for example) underexposed. Under Camera RAW (Photoshop), you can change the pictures exposure from Sunny to Shade or Flash...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raw_image_format

Your camera allows you to take a picture and have it saved as both a jpg and RAW. Under the camera menu, set the sharpening to high (or corresponding value), have it save a jpg image and raw and go out and take a couple of pix. Load them into your favorite editor and compare them side to side. You should see a difference in the softness between the two.

Oh I should add a Thanks to Dave for the tech help last night while taking the lightning photos.

SmileWavy

What slodave said. If you're shooting raw, then the camera is not sharpening the shots, it's expecting you to do it in PS or in the Canon DPP software (which I prefer for editing RAW shots)

Sidney, you are welcome. Next time, spend a few seconds getting the tripod/camera level!

As for the dragonfly pix, they are definitely in focus, they just need to be tweaked a little with post processing. I borrowed one of the pix and quickly tweaked it in PS. Just 'Auto Levels', 'Auto Color' and the 'Unsharp Mask'.
Before
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1248223509.jpg
After
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1248223443.jpg

Since this was already compressed, some of the jpg artifacts around the DF were sharpened as well.

I also noticed that your camera is set to use (probably), the sRGB color space. Change it Adobe RBG (1998). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_RGB_color_space

There is a lot to learn. Go out and have fun. Don't get discouraged!

It is in Adobe RGB. I wonder if Picasa converted it?

I think Picasa got rid of all the exif data. PS saw that there wasn't one and prompted me to assign it. Not a big deal. Just wanted to make sure it was set on your camera.

Hey. I am not an idiot.
That was a horse, not a camera.
I know a horse when I see it, and that was a horse...;-)

p.s. I have a Canon 5D + 17-35 2.8 myself (saving for a 70-200 2.8 right now)..