Sharper when stopped down. For us without "L" len

[toddb]

I know we talked about his before about stopping down your lens to get a sharper image. Let me post you my experiment. I almost always shoot in manual mode now so I can get that little bit more sharper image with my non-L lens. It's a little harder to get the right exposure, but allot of times it's worth doing. Oh, and I was focusing on the cheek, not the tip of the nose.

http://www.toddburke.net/forumpost/softness_test.jpg

[CyberDyneSystems]

Well!

That is convincing!

[scottbergerphoto]

I posted this test a while back:
http://www.pbase.com/scottbergerphoto/50mm_f_14__focus_test
Regards,
Scott

[Belmondo]

It's always heartening to see photography basics reconfirmed in such a convincing manner. Good job.

Tom

[toddb]

Well!

That is convincing!

I knew from my photos it was better, but until I sat down and did this experiment I didn't realize how soft wide open was on this lens. I don't use any of the modes on the camera that don't allow me to shoot RAW. "P" has been my primary selection this past year up until now. I think I owe most of my ability to move to "M" mode is that 550EX flash. It's strong enough to bounce and let me move to a faster shutter speed and smaller apature even though the camera wants to go slower and more open. Shooting like this is all from the hip though, I have to constantly adjust the ISO depending on how far away I am to make sure I get enough exposure.

I really can't wait to get an "L", but at least I'm learning more about photography this way.

[Tom W]

Well!

That is convincing!

I knew from my photos it was better, but until I sat down and did this experiment I didn't realize how soft wide open was on this lens. I don't use any of the modes on the camera that don't allow me to shoot RAW. "P" has been my primary selection this past year up until now. I think I owe most of my ability to move to "M" mode is that 550EX flash. It's strong enough to bounce and let me move to a faster shutter speed and smaller apature even though the camera wants to go slower and more open. Shooting like this is all from the hip though, I have to constantly adjust the ISO depending on how far away I am to make sure I get enough exposure.

I really can't wait to get an "L", but at least I'm learning more about photography this way.

You don't have to be in a hurry to get an "L" - you might want to try the 85/1.8. Its a very nice lens, and priced well compared to some "L" lenses. Plus, it is pretty sharp even wide open. By f/2.8, you'll be very impressed with it.

[toddb]

You don't have to be in a hurry to get an "L" - you might want to try the 85/1.8. Its a very nice lens, and priced well compared to some "L" lenses. Plus, it is pretty sharp even wide open. By f/2.8, you'll be very impressed with it.

I went back and tried my only other lens, the 50mm f1.8 and I was surprised that at F4 it was actually better then my 28-135. In "P" mode with flash, it doesn't go all the way open. What I was looking for in my test of how good the shot was on the quickest setting.

[evilenglishman]

sorry but i dont see how shooting in manual effects the foucus???

do you mean maual focus instead of auto focus?

[polloloco81]

Something to consider when doing experiments is try to keep all settings controled in the most exact circumstances possible to limit variables. I don't know whether you used a tripod or not, but the difference between 1/60s and 1/90s will affect the image. I don't know why you chose to shoot one picture in P mode and the other in M mode with different ISO if the point is to compare the quality of 2 different photographs.

[toddb]

sorry but i dont see how shooting in manual effects the foucus???

do you mean maual focus instead of auto focus?

I'm not talking about focus at all. This is about image softness at certain apertures. I shouldn't have confused the subject by saying manual, I usually use manual mode when I want to stop down and keep the same shutter speed. I know I have one stop difference in the shutter speed, but I went back and didn't see any difference when I had them the same. Probably because I was only 3 feet away with the IS turned on. I changed the ISO to help compensate for the exposure difference when I stopped down.

The only reason I posted this at all because I was talking to someone about getting sharper images. Sometimes that means finding the sweet spot on the lens which in this example it really can make a difference.

[Volatile]

Of course you know that you can still adjust aperture in P mode by spinning the wheel, right?

[scottbergerphoto]

Of course you know that you can still adjust aperture in P mode by spinning the wheel, right?
That will change the aperture as well to give you an equivalent exposure. The only way to change the shutter or aperture without changing the other is in M mode.
Scott

[maderito]

No doubt there is a difference in this lens between f/4.5 and f/8.0 - but the example exaggerates the difference.

At 3 feet:
f/4.5, near DOF=0.96 inches
f/8.0, near DOF=1.8 inches

By "near DOF" I mean distance from nearest point in focus to plane of focus.

Facial portraits always look much sharper when stopped down because the distance from nose to eye is about 2 inches. Thus typically you need f/5.6 to get important facial features in focus when taking head shots.

In the examples shown, it is hard to know exactly where the plane of focus is either shot. Distinguishing lens resolution-related softness from out-of-focus can be tricky.

As a practical matter, the example is probably quite representative of what you get when shooting with this lens at the 2 different apertures. I just wouldn't attribute all the difference to the inherent lens resolution at the different f-stops.

[ohenry]

I agree with Maderito. While this experiment does indeed show the differences between results of the apertures, suggesting that the manual mode has anything to do with it is misleading. Manual mode only allows you to choose both the shutter speed and aperture to arrive at a correct exposure (a key element for sharpeness is a properly exposed shot). The results here would have been the same had he used Av mode and maintained the exposure reciprocity of shutter speed/aperture.

One needs to study the exposure laws, DOF, and other photographic laws. This isn't anything new to the digital world. Perhaps because our cameras have become so automated, we have put less emphasis on the elements of photography that we all had to learn and understand when our cameras relied on the photographer rather than the photographer relying on the camera.

[Mitch]

Maderito hit it right on the head. The DOF for 3 ft and f4.5 is 2.1 inches. To get consistant sharp shots, you have to KNOW what your DOF is for the subject distance, f-stop and focal length. If you accidentally shoot with very narrow DOFs, don't expect to get sharp photos very often because there are many things to make it soft: you can sway forward or backward while you are taking the photo, the subject can sway forward or backward OR sideways while you are shooting with a slow shutter speed. When you shoot with a 2.1 inch or even a 3.8 inch DOF, you or your subject's sway distance with put you outside the DOF almost every time. Result=soft focus.

Did you know that f2.8 @70mm from 7ft to subject for a horizontal head shot has a DOF of only 3.7 inches? You'd better be achored solidly and your subject better be perfectly still, and you will still only get the cheek bones, nose but not the ear in focus, if you are lucky!

Hold on. Did you know that the 10D manufacturing specs only has to be able to focus "anywhere" within the DOF? That means that it is possible that your 10D is in spec and focuses at one end of the DOF. SO, if your cam focuses at the near end of the DOF and you focus on the eye in the above example, only the tip of the nose will be in focus..if you are lucky and neither you nor your subject swayed.

Do you want sharp portrait photos consistantly? Test your lens and camera to determine where your camera lenses focus within the DOF for your specific equipment. Send your equipment to Canon for adjustment if necessary. Study the respective DOFs for given focal lengths, f-stops and subject distances, then set your shots to provide at least 10 inches of DOF for portraits. You know that peoples' heads and bodies are at least 10 inches in depth. I select DOF settings that provide 30% more DOF than 10 inches to account for subject or my swaying and my Camera focus tolerances within the DOF.

My 10D cameras are both at manufacturer specs (after having sent in all my lenses and cameras for adjustment) and both front focus by about 1/2 inch for every 3 ft of subject distance. I can work with that. Do you know where your camera focuses within the DOF? Find out, now.

Another point. It doesn't take much subject movement to soften a portrait photo. Pay attention to your shutter speed, even with a 28-135 IS and make sure you set a shutter speed to compensate for your possible sway and the subjects possible movement. Also, have a friend watch you closely from the side while you take some portrait shots to tell you how much you sway while shooting.

Final point. Shooting wide open with 24-70L or 85 1.8 or 70-200L 2.8 seems to me asking for trouble at a wedding with a 10D or 300D. The vast majority of the shots you would take at wedding are better with sharp focus. Think about it. 96% of my shots at a wedding are with f-stops at and mostly above f5.6. 99% of my shots are sharp. (Did a wedding last week with 573 shots taken, only 5 were a bit soft.) The point here is, I am not so sure that I need L glass. The 28-135 IS USM is a near perfect wedding lens on a 10D. It's light weight, an absolutely fantastic focal range (can't say enough about that), very clear and sharp photos (if you control your DOF), and here's the kicker...IS! The IS helps me keep ISO low and I gain 2 stops of light ( starts to even up the playing field verus the lower light capability of the L glass) while helping stabilize the effects of camera movement and swaying (contributes to sharpness). If you feel that the 28-135 is not as contrasty or saturated as the L glass, go into custom functions and up the saturation and sharpness. BTW, the lighter a lens is on the 10D, the steadier your hands will be throughout a wedding, especially if you use a bracket (and you absolutely should).

Remember, both your cameras and lenses will perform differently when it comes the focus point withing the DOF. Test your new equipment. As a matter of policy, presume that your new equipment is not in spec and test them. Some people will rave about the sharpness of a given lens or camera and another person will say they are mediocre for the same lens and cameras. The problem is all the variable factors that go into getting a sharp photo as mentioned above, not whether the cam or lens is good or bad in general. Control your shot parameters and settings in accordance with the knowledge of your own equipment test results...= sharp photos every time!
Mitch

[timmyquest]

I did a similer test with my 70-300 sigma POS. Now that i have an L lens i have found that at 200mm f/2.8 the L is about as sharp as the sigma at f/22 lol....

But that does not mean i didnt use that sigma stopped down a lot, infact all of the current telephoto shots on my website were taken with the sigma.

[Mitch]

timmyquest, did you test both lenses? Did both lenses focus at the exact same place within the DOF on your camera? If not, (and I would expect not) possibly the reason for having to stop down so much with the Sigma may (to some degree or to a large degree) relate to a focus point differential between the two lenses if you focus at the same spot with differing performing lenses. (?) Just curious.
Mitch

[timmyquest]

timmyquest, did you test both lenses? Did both lenses focus at the exact same place within the DOF on your camera? If not, (and I would expect not) possibly the reason for having to stop down so much with the Sigma may (to some degree or to a large degree) relate to a focus point differential between the two lenses if you focus at the same spot with differing performing lenses. (?) Just curious.
Mitch

Nahh, trust me...you cant expect much with a $150 300mm zoom lens made by sigma ;-)

[toddb]

I agree this has allot to do with DOF and that my sample was not the most scientific approach by any means. My goal in the post was to let other 10D users, like myself, that may not have the photography background as many of you do, do realize that with a few adjustments, you can really get much better shots from your equipment. I think allot of us have come from the Point and Shoot world so even though we under stand DOF, we still don't have a strong grasp on it. I've been trying to get better at determining this for the last year, and I'm getting better.

I think it's harder to get "snap shots" in this respect then with a P&S. Most of us will not have the lighting set up as in a studio, so when we pick up our cameras and point and fire away, the default settings are (in my case) wide open on that aperture. Since 90% of my shooting is done indoors, I was getting allot of softer images do to the fact of either then lens just isn't as sharp there or DOF (and I know sometimes it's for sure DOF, as you say with just the swaying of hand held camera).

I should have said "this is a suggestion for getting more consistent sharper pictures when in close proximity". That would probably have been better and clear post. Sorry about misleading the the initial post.

[Volatile]

Of course you know that you can still adjust aperture in P mode by spinning the wheel, right?
That will change the aperture as well to give you an equivalent exposure. The only way to change the shutter or aperture without changing the other is in M mode.
Scott

Understood. My point is that he need not necessarily be in M mode. By increasing ISO from 100 to 200, and rolling the wheel to bring the aperture to f8 should yield a 1/90 exposure, if I did my photo-math correctly.

For a photo like this, I think aperture is the priority, so I would set that where I want it, and see what kind of exposure I would need at ISO 100. If the exposure is too long, then I would concede ISO first, then get the tripod out, and give up desired aperture last.

The comments about DOF are excellent.

[toddb]

Volatile, this sample was indoor using the flash so I guess all bets are off with being able to just roll the the dial to link the aperture and shutter speed. I do use that allow outdoors and I love it! Makes DOF changes very easy on the fly.

You can't really use aperture mode in this situation because the the shutter speed will be way to low (basically showing the same shutter speed with or without that flash) (also, in this case I'm not using a tripod either so in that case this would probably work). Manual mode shows way under exposed even though the pictures exposure turns out just fine due to the flash firing.

Only in the "P" mode (I don't count any mode that doesn't let me shoot in RAW) does the shutter speed get fixed to either 1/60 or 1/200 depending on how my custom settings are setup. So shooting indoor with a flash, pretty much the only option is to go in manual mode if I want to make sure DOF is sufficient, because the camera doesn't seem to care if my focal length is 80mm and I'm only 4-5feet away, it still will set the aperture at F4.5 which as you can see, leaves an image that is very soft because it's not in the DOF plane. Another thing about "P" mode is that changing the ISO does not seem to register that it's going more exposed or more under exposed when the flash is attached. So 1 stop going from F4 to F8 and the opisite way from ISO 100 to ISO 200 don't come back to center, if you know what I mean.

What would bee cool, in a future camera, is a mode that allows you to pre set how big your DOF plane needs to be, then from calculating your focal length and distance, it will set the appropriate apature....and some how tie the flash and iso to compensate. Now that would be pretty cool.

What I end up doing when I shoot my little two your old running around, is that I'll set it on manual and set the shutter on 1/90sec and the aperture at F8. I bounce the 550EX to make sure I don't get a dark background... I now if she is close (3-4 feet) I have my ISO at 100...when she moves farther away, say 10-15 feet, I roll the ISO to 400. That way I lock on the shutter speed I want and to make sure I will at least get the DOF I need. Is this weird? I guess I could roll the aperture more open as she gets farther away but I'm still not real good with the DOF feel. She moves so darn fast. LOL

[Volatile]

What would bee cool, in a future camera, is a mode that allows you to pre set how big your DOF plane needs to be, then from calculating your focal length and distance, it will set the appropriate apature....and some how tie the flash and iso to compensate. Now that would be pretty cool.

Agreed. I think A-Dep is supposed to do this, but it doesn't adjust ISO. Plus, the camera is guessing what your subjects are.

[djtowle]

What I end up doing when I shoot my little two your old running around, is that I'll set it on manual and set the shutter on 1/90sec and the aperture at F8. I bounce the 550EX to make sure I don't get a dark background... I now if she is close (3-4 feet) I have my ISO at 100...when she moves farther away, say 10-15 feet, I roll the ISO to 400. That way I lock on the shutter speed I want and to make sure I will at least get the DOF I need. Is this weird? I guess I could roll the aperture more open as she gets farther away but I'm still not real good with the DOF feel. She moves so darn fast. LOL

Shooting, Kittens, cats and 2-year olds around here I typically set the camera to AV pick an f stop for DOF usually 8-11, Set CF-whatever to lock shutter at 200 and fire away with 550 EX I use 3 of them, One of the flashes just to bounce the room, a second with a soft box to the side of the subject "area" and a 3rd on the camera for front light. Sometimes I play with the flash ratios,turning down the front light a bit. I'll change the ISO to brighten or darken the room a bit or to get the flashes to cycle faster, ISO 400 (instead of 100) the flashes can keep up for a few rapid shots. I'll also dial in flash exposure compensation as needed for the subject, a white kitten needs a stop or so to keep from blowing out the white fur.

[Cobra351]

Very good info, thanks for posting it.

On a recent picture 'adventure' I did a test with my 300d and Canon 100 2.8 Macro. The camera was set up on a tripod. For most subjects (flowers) I took three pictures, one at f10, f14 and f18. I found for the most part that this combo really prefers to be between f8-f11. Anything outside this range and things get a quite soft.

[Axier]

Good job!
But, are you sure that your model was perfectly perfectly static?? it had been more accurate with a static object.

Thanks

[EXA1a]

Very good info, thanks for posting it.

On a recent picture 'adventure' I did a test with my 300d and Canon 100 2.8 Macro. The camera was set up on a tripod. For most subjects (flowers) I took three pictures, one at f10, f14 and f18. I found for the most part that this combo really prefers to be between f8-f11. Anything outside this range and things get a quite soft.
The CANON 100/2.8 macro lens is NOT soft at f4 or f5.6! Maybe you mix up soft with shallow DOF? On the other end, it's a well-known fact that apertures smaller than f11 will cause softness due to diffraction.

--Jens--

[mrclark321]

Hi toddb

I was trying to follow your settings for learning purposes.
Was this hand held or did you use a tripod? Also what did you change in your custom settings? I am trying to get sharper pictures.

Thanks Dan
I know we talked about his before about stopping down your lens to get a sharper image. Let me post you my experiment. I almost always shoot in manual mode now so I can get that little bit more sharper image with my non-L lens. It's a little harder to get the right exposure, but allot of times it's worth doing. Oh, and I was focusing on the cheek, not the tip of the nose.

http://www.toddburke.net/forumpost/softness_test.jpg

[toddb]

Hi toddb

I was trying to follow your settings for learning purposes.
Was this hand held or did you use a tripod? Also what did you change in your custom settings? I am trying to get sharper pictures.

Thanks Dan

Hand held. That was one of the issues, other then most non-L lens being a bit softer wide open (I think I've read two stops down from wide open is where you can get sharper images), but being hand held and being very close (a few feet) with that narrow of DOF, it's very easy to end up with the focus plane being off from where you wanted it....just breathing you could sway a bit.

I don't think I changed any custom settings for this shot....just stop down the aperture. Just be aware that when you work with flash and your in "P" or one of the other auto modes, you aperture goes wide open. It's better to go to manual mode, set the aperture to what you want and the shutter speed to 1/200 or 1/60 if you can't get enough light and let your flashes ETTL compensate. The camera will read way under exposed, but try it, take a shot and you'll see. Then you start changing ISO more at this point when the flash can't compensate.

[PhotosGuy]

Why focus on the cheek? The eye has more contrast to make focusing easier, & that's what you usually want sharp in the 1st place.

[toddb]

Why focus on the cheek? The eye has more contrast to make focusing easier, & that's what you usually want sharp in the 1st place.

I always try and focus on the eyes, if time allows. This is a 100% crop of the original image, so it's possible that none of the focusing points hit here. I don't have the orginal Canon software installed anymore to go back to check where the focusing point hit. But that was sort of the point, if you want to get more consistent sharper images, increase that DOF plain so you are less likely to miss the eyes. If you in a studio setup or in more ideal situation, then this may not apply. I learned this mainly because my little girl just moves allot, not allot of time to setup up and get that perfect focus. This is probably true for alot of times when you point and shoot.

[PhotosGuy]

I was just going by what you said, "Oh, and I was focusing on the cheek, not the tip of the nose." ;-)

[toddb]

I was just going by what you said, "Oh, and I was focusing on the cheek, not the tip of the nose." ;-)

Doh, your right, I did. Maybe I was thinking that was the center of where my focus plain would be...I don't know. Your right though, I think the eyes would be most important.

[Rob612]

Very good info, thanks for posting it.

On a recent picture 'adventure' I did a test with my 300d and Canon 100 2.8 Macro. The camera was set up on a tripod. For most subjects (flowers) I took three pictures, one at f10, f14 and f18. I found for the most part that this combo really prefers to be between f8-f11. Anything outside this range and things get a quite soft.

I may be wrong, but I remember from past times that usually every lens has its best performance around the middle of its aperture. I mean that you do not get optimal performance @2.8 nor @ 22. Typically, as you said, 8-11 is the sweet spot. Am I getting something wrong here ?

[PhotosGuy]

Change that to read, "usually every lens has its best performance stopped down about 2-1/2 stops from the maximum aperature" & you've got it! ;-)

[napolar]

Does anyone know of a "carry around" DOF cart? Maybe one that can be printed from the Internet. I have seen the DOF calculators on the internet but usually do not have access to a computer when I'm out shooting...

[JusSmith]

www.dofmaster.com/charts.html (http://www.dofmaster.com/charts.html)

[napolar]

JusSmith - Thanks what a wonderful resource. Just what I was looking for.

[tiziano]

Hi Todd,

Thanks for sharing this interesting experiment. I have one question: could it be that the difference in sharpness is due to the fact that you are using two different shutter speeds, 1/60 and 1/90, at a focal lenght of 50mm, with an handheld camera?

[toddb]

I've done other experiments and have seen similar results. I really notice it more now that I have a 17-40L. This lens is very consistent through out the aperture range. I've read many other online resources stating pretty much the same thing about the cheaper lens. It's a combination of the lens not being as sharp and the DOF being too shallow to be controllable (hand held anyway). I have been able to get much more consistent images knowing this.

[cherokee01]

So where is the nifty fifty's sweet spot? f/5?

[apjoseph]

That will change the aperture as well to give you an equivalent exposure. The only way to change the shutter or aperture without changing the other is in M mode.
Scott


Hi, slightly off in a tangent. I have a 400d and I am trying to use the manual mode. I know you can change the shutter speed and aperture independently BUT when I turn the wheel only one changes. How can I for example, turn the wheel, set the aperture I am happy with and then choose the 'shutter speed', independent of the other ? Do I need to press a button for example to ‘set’ it and then it will change the other and vice versa.

Thanks
Arun

[producerism]

could someone explain this to a amateur? i was under the impression that longer exposure time + lower iso = better quality.

why then, would the second image with less exposure time and higher iso look better?

[Jon]

Hi, slightly off in a tangent. I have a 400d and I am trying to use the manual mode. I know you can change the shutter speed and aperture independently BUT when I turn the wheel only one changes. How can I for example, turn the wheel, set the aperture I am happy with and then choose the 'shutter speed', independent of the other ? Do I need to press a button for example to ‘set’ it and then it will change the other and vice versa.

Thanks
ArunIf you turn the wheel, you'll set the shutter speed. If you hold down the Av+/- button while turning you'll set the aperture. p. 71 of the manual.

[Jon]

could someone explain this to a amateur? i was under the impression that longer exposure time + lower iso = better quality.

why then, would the second image with less exposure time and higher iso look better?As the OP was discovering, lenses behave best when stopped down from wide open. Lower ISO may mean less noise, but on a well exposed shot you won't notice the difference in noise between ISO 100 and ISO 200.

[Mortgage101]

Great link...now i have to start finding more accurate definitions and explanations of Circle of Confusion? ( The look on my face and that term have much in common)

[Hermeto]

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

http://www.dofmaster.com/digital_coc.html