Blurred images on the EOS R6

I've been testing my R6 for a few weeks now and can now confidently say that there's an issue somewhere in the body.

I've searched extensively for similar issues, ones of which suggested IBIS as a possible cause, so I added that to my tests today and drew no new conclusions.

I've prepared the below description of the issue in case I need to provide it to a repair centre, along with some example RAW files.

I think I've covered all bases, but if anyone thinks I've missed something I'd be grateful to hear it.

/***************/
I've been using my R6 for three weeks now and have been consistently seeing blurred images. During this period I've taken hundreds of test shots in a range of conditions, with a wide range of settings and various AF modes to eliminate user error and camera settings. The majority of images are unusable, and those in focus weren't adequately sharp.

The problem images are looking like the issues are caused by focus errors and/or image stabilisation issues. Sometimes the whole image is soft, in other examples focus seems to be better on different focal planes.

• The images appear sharp in the EFV at the time of exposure
  
• I've tested this with both my adapted EF 100-400mm and an RF 100-500mm lens which I have been trying
  
• Firmware of both the body and the EF lens have been updated to the latest versions
  
• I've used a range of AF Cases and Sensitivity settings, and both servo mode with tracking and one shot spot focusing on stationary subjects
  
• I've tested with and without lens IS/IBIS to see if the IBIS is the cause, and with fast shutter speeds of up to 1/3200 to rule out camera shake. I have also used a tripod at slower shutter speeds
  
• All but one were shot with the RF lens to rule out any compatibility or lens adapter issues.
  

I looked at your images and frankly see nothing that would suggest that something is wrong with the camera. What I do see is that the bird is either far away and/or in bad light and/or with (very) high ISO speeds and one or two have motion blur. When you shoot at ISO speeds of 8.000 and 12.800, in unfavourable light (and with the bird a distance away so you have to crop), you are going to get noise and it will be ugly and it will reduce detail.

The pics taken with the 6D are different in that the Stork was taken in nice light and at a low ISO speed, with the bird not too far away and spot on exposure. The reptilian is at ISO 2000 but the head is filling the frame, which is uncropped. Very different circumstances.

So I think it's user error.

You could always send the camera to Canon, have them check it out.

I've looked at your images as best I can. But I don't have software to convert a CR3 file to view them larger in my editing software, so cannot see much.

It would be better if you converted your images to TIFF or large JPEGs for more people to view without need for specialized software that can handle Canon's RAW files.

One possibility that occurs to me... Do you have "protection" filters on your lenses? If so, you might want to watch https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=EjEKoF8eDsQ and https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=P0CLPTd6Bds

Without closer inspection of the images and their EXIF, it's hard to suggest much more.

I looked at the images, and don't see what I would consider "blurred" images.

Maybe it's the monitor you're viewing them on that's at fault rather than the Camera or lens???

I'm not seeing blurred images due to a camera issue either. I looked at two pictures, 6D-4101 and R6-9074 as they seemed closes in settings. Some images are at ISO 12800 like 9310 and when you start to up the ISO, you get noise which will kill details. But comparing 4101 and 9074, they are pretty much the same even though the 6D was shot at ISO160 in good light (based on the settings) and the R6 is poorer light and ISO 1000.

What you might want to try is setting up a target in your yard or part and take the same image from each camera with similar settings, then compare. It's hard to make an evaluation between cameras when the shooting parameters are so far off and the targets are different.

Hi all, sorry I missed these.

Really appreciate the time you've all taken to respond.

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #19479843
I looked at your images and frankly see nothing that would suggest that something is wrong with the camera. What I do see is that the bird is either far away and/or in bad light and/or with (very) high ISO speeds and one or two have motion blur. When you shoot at ISO speeds of 8.000 and 12.800, in unfavourable light (and with the bird a distance away so you have to crop), you are going to get noise and it will be ugly and it will reduce detail.

The pics taken with the 6D are different in that the Stork was taken in nice light and at a low ISO speed, with the bird not too far away and spot on exposure. The reptilian is at ISO 2000 but the head is filling the frame, which is uncropped. Very different circumstances.

So I think it's user error.

You could always send the camera to Canon, have them check it out.

Good point about the conditions. I've been waiting for good light but here in London it's not always easy.

amfoto1 wrote in post #19481065
I've looked at your images as best I can. But I don't have software to convert a CR3 file to view them larger in my editing software, so cannot see much.

It would be better if you converted your images to TIFF or large JPEGs for more people to view without need for specialized software that can handle Canon's RAW files.

One possibility that occurs to me... Do you have "protection" filters on your lenses? If so, you might want to watch https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=EjEKoF8eDsQ and https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=P0CLPTd6Bds

Without closer inspection of the images and their EXIF, it's hard to suggest much more.

The RF 100-500 was a rental and was fitted with a Canon Protect filter. My own EF 100-400 however doesn't have one fitted, but it is fitted with an adaptor with a clear glass filter.

That said, if this was the cause then I would have expected the extent of the issue to be constant, whereas I'm getting varying results (see images of the robin below).

Leigh wrote in post #19481076
I looked at the images, and don't see what I would consider "blurred" images.

Maybe it's the monitor you're viewing them on that's at fault rather than the Camera or lens???

Thanks but it's definitely not my monitor. It's a very sharp 4k panel and displays other images very nicely.

gjl711 wrote in post #19481104
I'm not seeing blurred images due to a camera issue either. I looked at two pictures, 6D-4101 and R6-9074 as they seemed closes in settings. Some images are at ISO 12800 like 9310 and when you start to up the ISO, you get noise which will kill details. But comparing 4101 and 9074, they are pretty much the same even though the 6D was shot at ISO160 in good light (based on the settings) and the R6 is poorer light and ISO 1000.

What you might want to try is setting up a target in your yard or part and take the same image from each camera with similar settings, then compare. It's hard to make an evaluation between cameras when the shooting parameters are so far off and the targets are different.

gjl711 wrote in post #19481104
I'm not seeing blurred images due to a camera issue either. I looked at two pictures, 6D-4101 and R6-9074 as they seemed closes in settings. Some images are at ISO 12800 like 9310 and when you start to up the ISO, you get noise which will kill details. But comparing 4101 and 9074, they are pretty much the same even though the 6D was shot at ISO160 in good light (based on the settings) and the R6 is poorer light and ISO 1000.

What you might want to try is setting up a target in your yard or part and take the same image from each camera with similar settings, then compare. It's hard to make an evaluation between cameras when the shooting parameters are so far off and the targets are different.

Thanks for that. Unfortunately I sold my 6D otherwise that would have been a good test. I did perform an additional test which yielded some very interesting results. Shooting a stationary robin with a short burst with the electronic shutter, with focus locked on the subject’s eye throughout, the amount of blur changed from mild in the first two shots to severe on the 5th. The last four images of the burst are below. As you will see something within the camera seems to be shifting over this half second period.

I've rented an R5 to see compare similar images in similar conditions. When I first checked the raw files in DPP (and Faststone) they looked pretty bad, but then I opened them in Lightroom and they looked better, even considering the 12800ISO noise levels.

See comparison below. Clockwise from top left: 1) Lightroom unedited (no pre-applied adjustments), 2) De-noised with PureRaw, 3) Faststone, 4) DPP

I now find myself asking another question - which is the true representation with which I should judge the sharpness of my image?

Weirdly, it's the DPP and Faststone that seems to be applying some processing.

Full size TIFF is here:
https://drive.google.c​om …mUHjW/view?usp=​share_link

With my R7, I'm noticing that the focus sometimes goes to high contrast elements near the eye instead of the eye. The eye algorithm finds the eye but then illogically focuses on a nearby item. This happens most with distant subjects that are low contrast with high contrast stuff near the eye. It is inconsistent though.

With better subjects the AF works very well.

In your examples, it looks like the focus is drifting to the high contrast background.

Check out this thread. https://photography-on-the.net …read.php?t=1528​487&page=1

curiousgeorge wrote in post #19484939
I now find myself asking another question - which is the true representation with which I should judge the sharpness of my image?

This can be tricky because if you check the sharpening tabs on almost all RAW software, they all apply some sharpening by default. A RAW shot with zero sharpening often looks soft even when well taken. Thus even though sharpening is a destructive element to image data and typically saved till the last stage (or done on separate layers). With RAW shots you have to have some applied to have a shot so that you can functionally make choices regarding which shots are sharp and which are soft and to work with the shot in general.

So yes between different RAW processing packages you will see some variations in sharpness, partly the result of the different code they used to process and partly because of different default base values.

DPP uses your picture styles and all other settings you have in camera to process your raw files. I use this to my advantage, I work on getting a great results from the camera and then have minimal changes in raw and therefore less post processing in photoshop.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #19484986
DPP uses your picture styles and all other settings you have in camera to process your raw files. I use this to my advantage, I work on getting a great results from the camera and then have minimal changes in raw and therefore less post processing in photoshop.

I wouldn't say to process your raw files, more like the starting settings no? You don't really have the jpeg until you export the image though I suppose the image you are seeing is a processed photo.

gjl711 wrote in post #19485004
I wouldn't say to process your raw files, more like the starting settings no? You don't really have the jpeg until you export the image though I suppose the image you are seeing is a processed photo.

Every raw file had a full sized jpg within it. And DPP honors all in cameras settings, so you NEVER see just the raw file in DPP.

I do process the raw however to makes all final tweaks to various settings, correct the WB, etc because it is best to do that with the raw than to wait for the jpg.

This is interesting.

I downloaded the files and processed them through Adobe's DNG Converter to .dng files, and viewed them in Photoshop CS6, and I didn't note any specific blurring?

Look at the uppermost twig on the right side of the bird in the last photo, it's suddenly in focus. It's just focus shift in this case.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #19484986
DPP uses your picture styles and all other settings you have in camera to process your raw files. I use this to my advantage, I work on getting a great results from the camera and then have minimal changes in raw and therefore less post processing in photoshop.

I have seen your very high ISO samples in other threads and they are awesome. Do you mind sharing your technique for reducing the ISO noise