10D Sample Pic - HELP Please

[rodbunn]

Help you guys, I can't tell if my camera needs adjusting or am I
looking at the quality all wrong. Here is a sample pic, taken with
the 10D on a tripod, I have the center focus point active and I'm
focusing on the brides face. When I zoom in, her face is out of
focus (I think). Shouldn't I be able to zoom in and see a sharp pic ?

Thanks for any help everyone,

Rod Bunn
Digital Shutter Photography
www.xposeu.com

Sample shot: http://www.xposeu.com/samples/IMG_0981.JPG

Camera setup for this sample shot:

File Name
IMG_0981.JPG
Camera Model Name
Canon EOS 10D
Shooting Date/Time
5/21/2003 4:04:04 PM
Shooting Mode
Manual
Tv( Shutter Speed )
1/60
Av( Aperture Value )
6.7
Metering Mode
Evaluative
ISO Speed
200
Lens
28.0 - 105.0 mm
Focal Length
65.0 mm
Image Size
3072x2048
Image Quality
Fine
Flash
Off
White Balance
Auto
AF Mode
One-Shot AF
Parameters
Contrast Normal
Sharpness Normal
Color saturation Normal
Color tone Normal
Color Space
sRGB
File Size
3488KB
Custom Function
C.Fn:01-0
C.Fn:02-0
C.Fn:03-0
C.Fn:04-0
C.Fn:05-0
C.Fn:06-0
C.Fn:07-0
C.Fn:08-0
C.Fn:09-0
C.Fn:10-0
C.Fn:11-0
C.Fn:12-0
C.Fn:13-0
C.Fn:14-0
C.Fn:15-0
C.Fn:16-0
C.Fn:17-0
Drive Mode
Single-frame shooting

[brunz]

I generally have to sharpen the image right out of the camera. They are soft but after sharpening I can get very sharp enlargements. I shoot fine jpegs and get fantastic 16x20's with my D60. The 10D has the same sensor. You may have a focusing problem and this has been addressed in detail on this forum. See Pekka's comments.

[billsmx]

Thats what the 10D does best. You need to use the sharpen in the camera. Sometimes, even that is not enough. That is the reason I sold my 10D and went straight to the 1D. It was too much work to use a top shelf comsumer 10D digital, so I went to the 1D pro version.

Good luck with your 10D.

[bmccall]

rodbunn wrote:
I have the center focus point active and I'm
focusing on the brides face.

Did you place the center point focus point on her face, focus, hold the focus and then recompose? If not, that may be why the background is slightly more in focus. Also, your camera may be rear focusing. That is a pretty nice photo coming from that lens - it's a nice lens, but not as good as primes and L glass. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying you need a more expensive lens - that should print 8x10's (and a bit larger) just fine. If you are shooting weddings, I'd recommend spending more on lenses.

[mwinog2777]

The picture just neeeds some sharpening. Nothing wrong with it.

[topeju]

rodbunn wrote:
When I zoom in, her face is out of focus (I think). Shouldn't I be able to zoom in and see a sharp pic ?

I don't know if this applies to the 28-105 mm lens you've apparently used, but not all zoom lenses will accurately maintain the focus when you zoom.

[Lazyg]

I've been lurking around here for a few months and that soft look seems to be quite common with the 10D. Although, her face seems to be more than just soft.....???

Most here either shoot with sharpening @ +1 or use software to do the same at a later time and some even do both.

Also, bmccall made a valid point concerning the lense. The D-SLR's tend to exaggerate any shortcomings lesser lenses may have (maybe because of the 1.6x image crop...???).

~Edited~

[mwinog2777]

I had played with the sharpening tool also, but was too lazy to put it on. All the pic needed was sharpening. I do not do this in-camera. I do it with BB RAW conversion, and then, rarely, with PS.

[jduncan]

hi

to my eyes none of it is sharp but the focal point is closer to the background leaves on the left. Her face is definately not in focus as far as i can see.
i dont think this is a sharpening issue, its simply out of focus and the only remedy for that involves a time machine.

try using the focus point closer to the point you want in focus (ie her face)

shutter speed could be a little faster too. you are in camera shake territory with your settings. maybe you could try using a bit of flash if you didnt want to change the aperture.

good luck

james

[defordphoto]

This photo's problems have absolutely nothing to do with in-camera sharpening or any other type of sharpening. Looks like camera shake or a focusing issue. Have you run the focusing test on this camera? Have you had other focusing issues?

If the camera has tested clean for focusing issues then we're looking at shake here. At 1/60 it doesn't take much.

[mrbobco]

i agree with james...only thing that really looks in focus is the leaves to the left...using a tripod or monopod would help (1/60 is definately in camera shake territory)

it is possible the camera isn't focusing properly (i still have doubts about MY 10 d...early serial number and can occasionally take shots that don't need all that much sharpening...but quite rarely...for the most part, they're adequate once they're sharpened) but it's hard to say if you have a problem until you plopped it on a tripod...

i have DOZENS of shots with the same problem...so it's not that uncommon. i'm going to send my 10 d in for a focus calibration and see if it gets any better...if not...i'll just get a newer 10 d and hope for the best...

you may want to try a more scientific method to see if you have a problem (it's detailed here numerous times...just too tired to go looking for the threads with the link to the chart, etc)

bob

[justme_dc]

I downloaded your image had had a good look at it in PShop. It seems to me that there is a zone of relatively sharp focus, it just isn't the bride's face. There is a zone of relatively sharp focus behind and to the right of the bride in the lower third of the image. Take a closer look at the plants from about her hip down to her feet. I also have to agree with the other posters when it comes to camera shake and lens quality. I think you are kinda pushing the edge of the envelope in both regards there.

In further more techincal detail the plane of focus isn't flat, it's tipped at a 10-20 degree angle which means the filmplane (sensorplane in this case) wasn't parallel with the bride which would have caused parts of the bride to be out of the DOF range anyway.

I don't want to hurt your feelings, this is in no way a personal attack, but I have to say frankly, barring you owning one of the few bodies with a true focus problem. This is a case of operator error.

All that being said, I really like the image I think you captured a great expression on the brides face. I also think that the posing is well done. I am kinda on the fence (no pun intended) about the background though.

The things that I would suggest to improve images like this in the future are a higher ISO rating to give you a bit more shutter speed and maybe a smaller aperature for DOF, some fill flash or a reflector to kick a little more sparkle into the subject's eyes and fill out the face a little and a mono pod or tripod to stablize the camera.


I hope that some of these suggestions and critiques will help to improve your future images.

Good luck to you!

[justme_dc]

P.S. I checked out your website and there are some great images there. Also we are practially neighbors I live close to santa clarita and used to work in the santa clarita valley. Small world huh?

[CyberDyneSystems]

Just wanted to say that I have been reading this thread with interest. Justme_dc has some good advice that I myself will take in as a beginner,..

The Flim plane issue in conjunction with an extremely narrow depth of field is something that has never occured to me! Learn something new everyday on this forum.


I do want to point out that Rodbunn did say that he used a tripod for the photo.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Great work on your Website Rod :)

[partialresponse]

justme_dc wrote:

In further more techincal detail the plane of focus isn't flat, it's tipped at a 10-20 degree angle which means the filmplane (sensorplane in this case) wasn't parallel with the bride which would have caused parts of the bride to be out of the DOF range anyway.

justme_dc,

how did you deduce that the sensor plane was at a 10-20 degree angle to the bride? I'm still trying to figure this out?

Kofi

[justme_dc]

partialresponse wrote:
justme_dc,
how did you deduce that the sensor plane was at a 10-20 degree angle to the bride? I'm still trying to figure this out?
Kofi

Download the image and open it in a photo editing application. Enlarge the image to 100%. If you have a large enough monitor with the resolution set high enough you'll see enough of the image to see the area of apparent focus I spoke about above. Once you are looking at that you'll notice that the apparent zone of focus extends from the green leafy annual (likley an iris) to the alyssum but doesn't extend evenly along that plane from the top of the image to the bottom. Also, the woman's feet/dress hem are more in (apparent) focus than the womans face and as she is not leaning back in the image but standing up straight the only logical explaination is that the plane of focus is is tilted slightly. I'll admit I am guessing when I estimate a tilt of 10-20 degrees but I firmly believe that I am not off by much +/-5 degrees maybe.

[DVWarrior]

Once again Canon let us all down...the D60 was soft and now we find the 10D is not much better...sorry the picture offered above of the girl in the white dress is out of focus...those of you who think a good old bit of photoshop sharpening will do must be blind...the fault seems to lie with 2 problems.
1. We are now paying the price for less than accurate cheaper lens technology, with no back focus adjusment some lenses at certain focal points are soft.
2. This is exasserbated by the 1.6 conversion although the centre of a lens is indeed sharper it also needs to be more accurate from the tip to the back lens or you will see bad focus shots, sadly not at all focal lenghts so sometimes the lens will perform depending what focal length & apperture you choose (ZOOM).
Pekka has had his camera fixed at Canon but £1400 for a duff focusing camera seems poor in my books.
Sorry but this problem was noted with the D60 and should not exist with the 10D...Canon should not be selling these cameras and be re-called to fix this inherant problem.
Digital or not if you focus on someones face the image should look in-focus when viewed back...Canon should be ashamed of letting their high standards down...badly.

[martcol]

This one's got me. I read a post and think, "Hmmmm, Camera shake.." Then another and it's, "Oh no! Canon!" Then again, "I deduce a tilted camera Dr Watson of something degrees..." So what is it? The photo and the bride are both lovely btw. And I also thought I could see areas of sharper focus around the feet and the background. If it was camera shake, wouldn't the softness be all over?

Martin

[brunz]

The more I shoot with the 10D, the more I find problems with the focus. I have been doing photography for over 30 years and I have had more focusing problems with this camera body than anything I've ever had. I am sending it in to Canon. Their rep in New jersey said that this is not a problem with the camera but I don't agree. I only use the center sensor box and I still get way too many pictures like the one shown here with what is apparently a back focus problem. I am sending mine in since I do use good lenses(most Canon and some are L's). I do not have these problems with the D60. I really like the 10D but this focusing issue is irritating. My 1n film camera has none of these problems. The 28-105 lens that I use has had a softness problem even on my 1n. I don't use it anymore unless I can shoot at F8 or smaller.

[nucki]

Hi all!

some of you, including the author of this topic mentioned that shutter speed was 1/60s. when I view the EXIF info, it says 1/30s!

I dont know if I have done something wrong, I just saved the image and viewed the EXIF info!

see below, the EXIF info was copied with IrfanView and it looks quite different to the other. what program you use for getting EXIF info?

regards
Peter




Make - Canon
Model - Canon EOS 10D
Orientation - 8 (left bottom)
XResolution - 180
YResolution - 180
ResolutionUnit - 2 (inch)
DateTime - 2003:05:21 16:04:04
YCbCrPositioning - 1 (center of pixel array)
ExifOffset - 196
ExposureTime - 0.0167 seconds
FNumber - 6.7000
ISOSpeedRatings - 200
ExifVersion - 220
DateTimeOriginal - 2003:05:21 16:04:04
DateTimeDigitized - 2003:05:21 16:04:04
ComponentsConfiguration - 1 2 3 (YCbCr)
CompressedBitsPerPixel - 3 (average)


ShutterSpeedValue - 1/30 s


ApertureValue - 5.4883
ExposureBiasValue - 0.0000
MaxApertureValue - 4.0000
MeteringMode - 5 (multi-segment)
Flash - 0 (no flash)
FocalLength - 65 mm
UserComment -
FlashPixVersion - 100
ColorSpace - 1 (sRGB)
ExifImageWidth - 3072
ExifImageHeight - 2048
InteroperabilityOffset - 2330
FocalPlaneXResolution - 3443.9462
FocalPlaneYResolution - 3442.0168
FocalPlaneResolutionUnit - 2
SensingMethod - 2 (other)
FileSource - 3 (digital still camera)

MakerNote: -
Image Type - IMG:EOS 10D JPEG
Firmware Version - Firmware Version 1.0.0
Camera Serial Number - 0D2004523
Image Number - 1090981
Owner Name -

[defordphoto]

martcol wrote:
This one's got me. I read a post and think, "Hmmmm, Camera shake.." Then another and it's, "Oh no! Canon!" Then again, "I deduce a tilted camera Dr Watson of something degrees..." So what is it? The photo and the bride are both lovely btw. And I also thought I could see areas of sharper focus around the feet and the background. If it was camera shake, wouldn't the softness be all over?

Martin

Maybe she moved. We now find that the shot was actually at 1/30. Doesn't take much movement at 1/30 to wipe focus.

His other shots look fine, from what I have seen, so I don't think he has a bad camera. This is simply one shot that didn't come out. That's why, at important one-off events, you always shoot redundant.

[defordphoto]

DVWarrior wrote:
Once again Canon let us all down...

Well, let's not twist this into a Canon-bashing session as not ALL 10D's have focus problems. In fact only a very small percentage of them do. It would suck to have one, but these things happen in the high-pressure business of electronics these days. My wife works for a HUGE electronics firm and wow (!) I could tell you some stories.

Personally, I think Canon is doing a marvelous job of putting out the most outstanding cameras on the planet, and in repairing the ones with problems. All that in spite of the incessant whining we read on all the boards.

I would also be upset if I had received a problem camera, but just send it off to canon, get it fixed, and then enjoy the thing.

It is an awesome camera.

With my D60 it came with a spot on the sensor filter and took two trips to get it fixed. Canon paid for the second one FedEx and then took care of the problem. Yup it sucked, but now my D60 is perfect and the two weeks without the camera are long forgotten and 3,000 shots or so later.