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

 
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
15,696 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 5737
Joined Sep 2007
     
Oct 25, 2016 21:35 |  #16

1ton wrote in post #18166952 (external link)
The camera was on a tripod. It's possible people were moving.

Manual or AF? Maybe the lens is at its limits? Iso 800 can look poor if zoomed in.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - CV 21/3.5 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
bildeb0rg
Goldmember
Avatar
2,816 posts
Gallery: 231 photos
Likes: 1037
Joined Oct 2006
Location: north yorks
     
Oct 26, 2016 03:04 |  #17

For that group shot, at those settings, I would have popped a flash on. For greater separation, move your subject away from the background so you can use a smaller aperture for the depth of field you need.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
That's my line!
Avatar
9,482 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 2148
Joined Jun 2011
Location: The Uwharrie Mts, NC
Post edited over 2 years ago by Left Handed Brisket.
     
Oct 26, 2016 05:25 |  #18

i wanted to get home and look at it on my computer before commenting more, but I'm beginning to think you may have unrealistic expectations. It's hard to judge from the relatively low res file you posted, but sharpness throughout seems at least equal. Posting a crop of just 2-3 people (head and shoulders) might help us further help you, but I'm thinking you are just zooming in too close on your screen. Another thing you might consider is the camera's Picture Style setting and how you are sharpening the image. People often expect better images straight away from a DSLR vs a point and shoot, but the fact is, often the point and shoot processes images in such a way that they look better straight out of the camera ... a greater level of involvement is required from DSLR users.

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #17908332 (external link)
Have you ever looked at a DOF calculator (external link)?

did you ever take a look at this ^^^ ?

at 17mm and 5.6 hyperfocal distance is 8.8 feet with the near limit at 4.7 feet.

having used the tamron 17-50 on a crop, i would guess you were at it's widest setting, but even at 22mm and 5.6:

Subject distance 12 ft

Depth of field
Near limit 6.64 ft
Far limit 62.3 ft
Total 55.6 ft

In front of subject 5.4 ft (10%)
Behind subject 50.3 ft (90%)

---

so, plenty of depth of field.


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
1ton
THREAD ­ STARTER
Mostly Lurking
16 posts
Joined Mar 2015
     
Oct 26, 2016 06:45 |  #19

The focal length is 32 and the shutter was 1/25. The camera was on a tripod about 10 feet away from the subjects. The photo was set to AF.

In instances like this, is there a better/more preferred lens to take a group picture? Or is it just my settings need to be modified.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
15,696 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 5737
Joined Sep 2007
     
Oct 26, 2016 08:40 |  #20

1ton wrote in post #18167267 (external link)
The focal length is 32 and the shutter was 1/25. The camera was on a tripod about 10 feet away from the subjects. The photo was set to AF.

In instances like this, is there a better/more preferred lens to take a group picture? Or is it just my settings need to be modified.

There may be better, but it won't be by much, you're stopped down on a tripod....

I would manual focus in live view. Do a test shot with just yourself.

The other option is to use a flash, you will get much better results @f8 iso 100 1/160, assuming your flash it's strong enough.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - CV 21/3.5 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,502 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2456
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Oct 26, 2016 08:49 as a reply to  @ post 17908332 |  #21

^^

Without some examples of the issues you are running into, it is hard to guess if it is a lens misperforming, or overexpectations on your part due to lack of full understanding of the principles.


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,502 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2456
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
Post edited over 2 years ago by Wilt. (5 edits in all)
     
Oct 26, 2016 09:04 |  #22

1/25 shutter with lens FL of 32mm on an APS-C body ...normally would be 1/50 for the usual Rule of Thumb for an average person hand holding and exercising a reasonable degree of care not to shake camera when pressing the shutter release. Definitely too slow for proper freezing of camera AND possible subject motion.

As for sufficient DOF -- ignoring the camera motion/subject motion issues created with using too slow of a shutter speed -- for the group shot posted as an example, if you were about 10' away from the front row with your 32mm FL in order to see a vertical AOV of about 15' at the back wall. Focused at 10' at f/5.6, your DOF (for a viewer with 20/20 vision viewing an 8x10 at 12") would be 9-11', so insufficient DOF could be the issue.


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
15,696 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 5737
Joined Sep 2007
     
Oct 26, 2016 10:01 |  #23

Wilt wrote in post #18167367 (external link)
1/25 shutter with lens FL of 32mm on an APS-C body ...normally would be 1/50 for the usual Rule of Thumb for an average person hand holding and exercising a reasonable degree of care not to shake camera when pressing the shutter release. Definitely too slow for proper freezing of camera AND possible subject motion.

As for sufficient DOF -- ignoring the camera motion/subject motion issues created with using too slow of a shutter speed -- for the group shot posted as an example, if you were about 10' away from the front row with your 32mm FL in order to see a vertical AOV of about 15' at the back wall. Focused at 10' at f/5.6, your DOF (for a viewer with 20/20 vision viewing an 8x10 at 12") would be 9-11', so insufficient DOF could be the issue.

Shot was on a tripod


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - CV 21/3.5 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,502 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2456
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Oct 26, 2016 10:32 |  #24

Charlie wrote in post #18167413 (external link)
Shot was on a tripod

So camera motion was not the issue, but that leaves insufficient DOF and subject motion as both contributors to 'not as sharp' observations.


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
15,696 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 5737
Joined Sep 2007
     
Oct 26, 2016 10:38 |  #25

Wilt wrote in post #18167439 (external link)
So camera motion was not the issue, but that leaves insufficient DOF and subject motion as both contributors to 'not as sharp' observations.

DOF could be an issue, but based on how far back, and being 5.6 on crop, maybe*(if properly focused).

I'm concerned about the focus because it was using AF, and there's a table closest to the camera. It could have locked on that. Hard to say without the original file, but the table sure looks sharp to my eyes. Having two rows of people can be a DOF problem, but based on how they dont really fill the frame, I'm guessing TS was fairly far back.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - CV 21/3.5 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,502 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2456
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
Post edited over 2 years ago by Wilt.
     
Oct 26, 2016 10:55 |  #26

Charlie wrote in post #18167444 (external link)
DOF could be an issue, but based on how far back, and being 5.6 on crop, maybe*(if properly focused).

I'm concerned about the focus because it was using AF, and there's a table closest to the camera. It could have locked on that. Hard to say without the original file, but the table sure looks sharp to my eyes. Having two rows of people can be a DOF problem, but based on how they dont really fill the frame, I'm guessing TS was fairly far back.


As I have already stated, when focused at 10' with f/5.6 32mm, the DOF (for a viewer with 20/20 vision viewing an 8x10 at 12") would be 9-11', so insufficient DOF could be the issue for the folks standing 2' behind.

Not knowing how AF points were set (typical amateur 'let the camera choose which ones' ?!) you are right that it might have chosen the wrong plane of focus, making the DOF issue even worse.


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Snydremark
my very own Lightrules moment
18,412 posts
Gallery: 44 photos
Likes: 1458
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Issaquah, WA USA
     
Oct 26, 2016 11:38 |  #27

What focus mode/method are you using? It looks, to me, like focus fell on the back wall/curtains.


- Eric S.: My Birds/Wildlife (external link) (7D MkII/5D IV, Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105L f/4 IS, Canon 70-200L f/2.8 IS MkII, Canon 100-400L f/4.5-5.6 IS I/II)
"The easiest way to improve your photos is to adjust the loose nut between the shutter release and the ground."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
n1as
Goldmember
2,327 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Salem, OR
     
Oct 26, 2016 11:41 |  #28

People motion is probably the issue.

It is hard to see the lack of sharpness. The people are not filling the frame. Makes me wonder if this is photo of the people or a photo of the room?

Also, f/5.6 may not be enough depth of field to cover the group. If you focus on the front row, the back row may be soft.


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
That's my line!
Avatar
9,482 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 2148
Joined Jun 2011
Location: The Uwharrie Mts, NC
     
Oct 26, 2016 23:26 |  #29

i'm still saying that pixel peeping is the issue ... shot looks uniformly sharp.

post a 1024 x 1024 crop of just a couple of people and until then it is just speculation and chasing tails. if you really want to know post the same size crop from the people and from places nearer and farther from the subjects.


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
1ton
THREAD ­ STARTER
Mostly Lurking
16 posts
Joined Mar 2015
     
Oct 29, 2016 08:03 as a reply to  @ Charlie's post |  #30

I think you may be right. The coffee table does look pretty sharp. AF was used with a remote control to take the group photo. I am looking through other pictures and the table seems to be more focused. We did do a test shot with one person but, that was not with a remote so my cousin who was taking it may have adjusted properly.




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

6,689 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 kmanohar
553 guests, 340 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.