Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 22 Feb 2016 (Monday) 11:35
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

17-50 2.8 lens - too blurry

 
1ton
Mostly Lurking
16 posts
Joined Mar 2015
     
Feb 22, 2016 11:35 |  #1

I love this lens when the focus is on one person. As soon as I use the lens for a group shot or even 3 people, the focus is way off. Can anyone recommend a lens that will still blur the background but focus better on people? I am thinking about renting a lens for a wedding I am going to (I am not the photographer for it), just a family member and wanted to get some good photos. Any help is appreciated.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
King ­ of ­ Canada
Senior Member
Avatar
267 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Halifax,Nova Scotia
     
Feb 22, 2016 11:46 |  #2

Can you provide a sample shot? You may not be stopping down enough to have a depth of field deep enough for a whole group to be in focus. A group of people and blurred background may not be the easiest to achieve in this case.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PineBomb
I have many notable flaws
Avatar
2,470 posts
Gallery: 92 photos
Likes: 1185
Joined Apr 2014
Location: Austin, Texas
Post edited over 3 years ago by PineBomb.
     
Feb 22, 2016 11:48 |  #3

This first raises questions about (1) your technique and (2) the copy of whichever lens you're using, because I would think any of the 17-50mm lenses would be satisfactory. Are you stopping your aperture down far enough? Can you provide an example image with EXIF data or at least give details of one of your disappointing results (i.e., aperture, shutter, focal length, plane of focus)?

EDIT: With group shots you require more depth of field at the expense of background blur.


-Matt
Website (external link) | flickr (external link) | instagram (external link) | street portrait project on instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
13,139 posts
Gallery: 1605 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 10142
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
Post edited over 3 years ago by MalVeauX.
     
Feb 22, 2016 12:05 |  #4

1ton wrote in post #17908275 (external link)
I love this lens when the focus is on one person. As soon as I use the lens for a group shot or even 3 people, the focus is way off. Can anyone recommend a lens that will still blur the background but focus better on people? I am thinking about renting a lens for a wedding I am going to (I am not the photographer for it), just a family member and wanted to get some good photos. Any help is appreciated.

We need to see examples with EXIF data.

My guess is that this is 100% user error regarding shutter speed &/or depth of field. But to rule that out, we need sample images that show the problems you're stating.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
That's my line!
Avatar
9,493 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 2152
Joined Jun 2011
Location: The Uwharrie Mts, NC
     
Feb 22, 2016 12:11 |  #5

I agree that more info is needed, but i suspect that if you are getting at least one person in focus then you are probably shooting at 2.8 and do not have enough depth of field. Do you understand the relationship between aperture and DOF? Have you ever looked at a DOF calculator (external link)?


PSA: The above post may contain sarcasm, reply at your own risk | Not in gear database: Auto Sears 50mm 2.0 / 3x CL-360, Nikon SB-28, SunPak auto 322 D, Minolta 20

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
thc1979
Senior Member
Avatar
524 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 181
Joined Jun 2014
Location: East of England
     
Feb 22, 2016 12:13 |  #6

It's impossible for any lens to focus on three different people if each are at different distances from the lens. As others have said, stopping down more should help. If you are letting the camera choose the focus points that won't help either.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
1ton
THREAD ­ STARTER
Mostly Lurking
16 posts
Joined Mar 2015
     
Feb 22, 2016 12:14 |  #7

I am sure it is user error. I have not been able to get examples yet but I have noticed this primarily when I just set the camera on Automatic mode. I will change it to Manual and change the aperture.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
barsoum
Member
142 posts
Gallery: 53 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 234
Joined Nov 2015
Location: Toronto
     
Feb 22, 2016 12:16 as a reply to  @ 1ton's post |  #8

If it is in Auto mode I highly think its being used wide open...might be something else there




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kiapolo
Senior Member
Avatar
868 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Likes: 85
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Honolulu, Hawai`i
     
Feb 25, 2016 03:04 |  #9

I think you figured it out. You're shooting the lens wide open (f/2.8). DoF is pretty thin at f/2.8.

Try shooting in Av mode and stop the lens down when trying to shoot a group.


| kiapolo.com (external link) (blog) | Gear List | Flickr (external link) | YouTube (external link) | 2012 Project 366 (external link) |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
n1as
Goldmember
2,327 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Salem, OR
     
Feb 25, 2016 08:52 |  #10

While it is most likely user error, there is the possibility that the lens is contributing to the issue via focus field curvature.

If the focus zone of the lens bends away from the camera as you go from the center to the edges and you arrange a group of say 4 people in a straight line, the folks in the center may be in focus while the focus zone may have bent behind those along the edge leaving them a bit blurry.

At one time I shot a wedding with a 17-50 Tamron that did this. I ended up with some slightly blurry faces in group shots. Not bad enough to be an issue for my customer but bad enough for me to get a different lens.


- Keith
http://darwinphoto.zen​folio.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
35,762 posts
Gallery: 102 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5125
Joined May 2002
Location: Cannelton
     
Feb 25, 2016 09:10 |  #11

3 people aren't enough to exhibit field curvature issues, I wouldn't think. This feels like the simple issue of not having shut the aperture down enough to increase the area in focus to cover 3 people. When I do portraits, I shoot at f4 for singles/couples and then go up to f5.6 and perhaps f7.1 for larger groups. I also increase my distance or go wider on the lens which increases DOF.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
1ton
THREAD ­ STARTER
Mostly Lurking
16 posts
Joined Mar 2015
     
Oct 25, 2016 14:30 |  #12

Sorry it has been so long since I replied. Here is an example of a picture taken with the same lens. It was set to F5.6. Everyone's face is not clear. What should I do in this type of scenario?


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
That's my line!
Avatar
9,493 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 2152
Joined Jun 2011
Location: The Uwharrie Mts, NC
     
Oct 25, 2016 15:20 |  #13

Shooting at 1/25, I'd say you probably have some camera shake and potentially subject movement going on.


PSA: The above post may contain sarcasm, reply at your own risk | Not in gear database: Auto Sears 50mm 2.0 / 3x CL-360, Nikon SB-28, SunPak auto 322 D, Minolta 20

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
drmaxx
Goldmember
1,116 posts
Gallery: 29 photos
Likes: 353
Joined Jul 2010
     
Oct 25, 2016 15:49 as a reply to  @ Left Handed Brisket's post |  #14

Most probably ^^this^^. I generally use 1/125 for people and only if the light is poor and the people posing I dare to go slower (1/40 @ 50mm).


Donate if you love POTN

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
1ton
THREAD ­ STARTER
Mostly Lurking
16 posts
Joined Mar 2015
     
Oct 25, 2016 20:11 |  #15

The camera was on a tripod. It's possible people were moving.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

6,699 views & 1 like for this thread
17-50 2.8 lens - too blurry
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is juans613
777 guests, 286 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.