I had to play with background as originally photo came tad too dark and had to pull it out. With it, background become too visible( piano and walls)
And yes she wears contact lenses found out same way as you did
I know what you mean saying that it looks over sharpen when small. Image is really big and programs that show it smaller, create all those 'artefacts'
EdinburghGary said:
Hi Pete,
Not sure what you are using it for - and this is pretty useless for most portraits. For still subjects, I would recommend a shutter release cable, shutter delay mode (3 secs) and self timer (2 secs). Like you, hand held results can be scary at 100%
G.
With resolutions like that It's almost compulsory to pixel-peep at full res which is where we'll have to be careful with PP
(I'll await the "I already go to the gym and could hold the mighty Hercules down with just my pinkie" response 
) It's all mathematics I guess: the membership size increases and thus so does the ratio of ring pieces. But then an alternative and nicer way of looking at it is that there's also a higher ratio of good stuff about and any questions are answered pretty damn fast which is very handy sometimes! 
You can see her contact lenses!
These are truly impressive cameras but I think they need very careful setup and very very judicious PP. Gobsmaked is what I am!
but f/9 should be the sharpest point), it could be slightly out of focus with excess sharpening added, or the glass could be out of alignment somewhere 
. Does it look really sharp downsided to 21 or 16MP?More people Gary and some of the old guys have left. Other than that there's still some good stuff here. Like everywhere in life, some people find it hard to be civil.
Anyway back to pixel peeping...
I guess the D800 is doing my photography some good because it is helping me to try and understand the limitations of the pixel resolution.
I am getting some odd results, this photo for example, I have already mentioned was taken at F20 and 1/125 sec at 55mm, hand held
Remember me? by ShawWellPete, on Flickr
100% crop is here
It looks pretty rubbish at 100%, not sure if that is camera shake, I used li-on studio lights and the light would have been mostly from the flash, so I doubt it. Maybe it's the famous diffraction?
Conversely here is a photo shot at F9 using the same lights at 1/250 sec
The McManus' by ShawWellPete, on Flickr
with 100% crop here
That looks ok to me. I guess what I need to do is take a series of photos at different setting under more controlled conditions.
Any other ideas?
But that f/9 shot is not looking like a miracle either. It could be that D800 outresolves it (it's just a zoom
Worth bearing in mind, I should have put the shutter speed up to the sync speed and shot wider.
Actually, it looks far worse on this then when I zoom into 100% on LR. Not sure why?
I cropped in LR and exported full size with some sharpening.
, and some pretty amazing pictures here and in other threads too.
More people Gary and some of the old guys have left. Other than that there's still some good stuff here. Like everywhere in life, some people find it hard to be civil.
Anyway back to pixel peeping...
I guess the D800 is doing my photography some good because it is helping me to try and understand the limitations of the pixel resolution.
I am getting some odd results, this photo for example, I have already mentioned was taken at F20 and 1/125 sec at 55mm, hand held
<snip>
100% crop is here
It looks pretty rubbish at 100%, not sure if that is camera shake, I used li-on studio lights and the light would have been mostly from the flash, so I doubt it. Maybe it's the famous diffraction?
<snip>
