out of focus (Page 4): You are welcome. Now, as you learn, share your experience and knowledge with others. Part of the UHH "Golden Rule". Smile, Jimmy T Sends :sm09: :sm09: :sm09:...

Jimmy T Loc: Virginia

alaaan wrote:

I just want to thank everyone for their extremely helpful advice. I've learned a lot in a short period of time.

The fact you guys and girls contributed so much time and effort to this question is AMAZING.

You are welcome. Now, as you learn, share your experience and knowledge with others. Part of the UHH "Golden Rule".
Smile,
Jimmy T Sends

Eric2018 Loc: Los Angeles, CA, USA

I don't have time to read all the responses, so forgive me if this has already been covered.
From your post, it looks like the FOREGROUND is much sharper than the background, i.e., the cobblestones near the bottom of the frame look fairly sharp. I'd say it's either an autofocus problem, or you should check which focus point your camera is using. I think you could "mash" all you want at 1/1000 and the image would be pretty sharp (although the camera may not be aimed where you intended).

poppi49

I agree with toxdoc42. Your focus appears clear on the nearest pavers, so you may have just missed your target.

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

alaaan wrote:

I've been reading the Ugly H for quite some time and find it extremely helpful.

I have a Canon Rebel 3 and have had issues with pictures being out of focus. I took some of the pictures to my local camera store and he told me the issue was camera shake since nothing in the picture was in focus. Having taken pictures at 1/1000 and higher I didn't think there could be camera shake. Your thoughts? I'm looking to trade up to the Canon EOS R if this will make a big difference. Thanks.

I have treated the image with Topaz Sharpen AI and I can definitively say that camera shake is the problem. I tried the Sharpen option, and if there was no shake and the image was in focus, then this option could improve it. But that didn't happen.

Then I tried the focus option. If the image had been out of focus, this option would have made it better. But it did not.

Finally, I tried the Stabilize option and that did the job. Everything is in focus now.

(Download)

JBGLADSTONE Loc: Oregon

I use a tripod or a monopod.
Using the tripod I set the camera to 2 second delay. This helps with camera shake after pressing the button.

I also use Back Focus. Plus f on the tripod, I use Live view and use the zoom in feature to make sure I am focus on the area I want.
Finally, in Live View I have found that the focus box has moved and not anywhere near the center. SO I am training myself to press the "set" button on my Canon 80D.

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

JBGLADSTONE wrote:

I use a tripod or a monopod.
Using the tripod I set the camera to 2 second delay. This helps with camera shake after pressing the button.

He shouldn't need to use a tripod for a shot like this. Maybe it is technique? I see this shot is 1/400 sec at ISO 100 and f/7.1 with focal length of 55mm. I would think that this is an easy shot to make.

Grahame Loc: Fiji

JBGLADSTONE wrote:

I use a tripod or a monopod.
Using the tripod I set the camera to 2 second delay. This helps with camera shake after pressing the button.

I also use Back Focus. Plus f on the tripod, I use Live view and use the zoom in feature to make sure I am focus on the area I want.
Finally, in Live View I have found that the focus box has moved and not anywhere near the center. SO I am training myself to press the "set" button on my Canon 80D.

Would you have used the 'procedure' you mention to take this image of the ops?

Harry0 Loc: Gardena, Cal

I dunno.
It appears to me that the closer bricks are sharper than the farther wall bricks.
Maybe the subject he's shooting is not the subject the camera is shooting.
I'd try some shots, on a tripod, full and careful manual. Eliminate the lens.
Then try focusing on a long line of parked cars. Some in front, in the middle, the a bit farther.
I have a pair of 18-55s. One focuses towards the back of the sweet spot, the other towards the front.

Silverrails

alaaan wrote:

I've been reading the Ugly H for quite some time and find it extremely helpful.

I have a Canon Rebel 3 and have had issues with pictures being out of focus. I took some of the pictures to my local camera store and he told me the issue was camera shake since nothing in the picture was in focus. Having taken pictures at 1/1000 and higher I didn't think there could be camera shake. Your thoughts? I'm looking to trade up to the Canon EOS R if this will make a big difference. Thanks.

One Diagnostic idea would be put camera on a Tripod, use self timer to 10 second and that may help determine if it is a Defective camera or Lens or Photographer Motion holding the camera, but hand held at 1/1000 should have reasonably eliminated Motion blurr.

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

Harry0 wrote:

I dunno.
It appears to me that the closer bricks are sharper than the farther wall bricks.
Maybe the subject he's shooting is not the subject the camera is shooting.
I'd try some shots, on a tripod, full and careful manual. Eliminate the lens.
Then try focusing on a long line of parked cars. Some in front, in the middle, the a bit farther.
I have a pair of 18-55s. One focuses towards the back of the sweet spot, the other towards the front.

It is not a focus problem. It is camera shake. In the original posted image, look at the license plate. Then in the fixed image, compare the license plate. Once the shake was fixed, everything else fell in line.

What I am surprised about is the amount of shake with a 1/400 sec exposure with a 55mm focal length (taken from EXIF data in the image). With that combination, there shouldn't have been noticeable shake. Not sure if the lens has shake reduction. If it has, maybe it was turned off. And even if turned off, there is still a lot of shake going on.

no12mo

Longshadow wrote:

Some people mash, my wife "presses" a lot with her camera.
I've actually seen her "press" and the camera move down. Yup, blurry.

The trick is to gently squeeze the shutter.

Motion induced blurring the picture can be proven by really blowing up any given picture and looking for highlights especially points of lighter objects say in the background. If the camera is moving during the exposure, there will be slight streaking. Look carefully at a given picture especially at the hightlights and see if you get this streaking effect

I'm wondering if the Rebel is having a problem with matrix focusing where computed distance is a compromise. My experience with my Nikons is that spot metering is best but you have to do the deliberate task of putting the spot right on where you want the focusing point to be. Almost all of my matrix mode pictures are slightly out of focus.

We need more than one picture where the author of this thread is noticing slightly out of focus or blurring.

More pictures for diagnosing the problem please.

no12mo

JimH123 wrote:

I have treated the image with Topaz Sharpen AI and I can definitively say that camera shake is the problem. I tried the Sharpen option, and if there was no shake and the image was in focus, then this option could improve it. But that didn't happen.

Then I tried the focus option. If the image had been out of focus, this option would have made it better. But it did not.

Finally, I tried the Stabilize option and that did the job. Everything is in focus now.

Jim: Do you feel free to post the resultant effort? I'd be interested in the result. I'm still not sure about the shake induced blur.

To the author of the original post of this thread: I took two areas one on the concrete or stone vertical surface to the left of the subject in the bench and the other to the right in the area between the tires of the two vehicles and see a mottling (for lack of a better expert term) that is very similar. Are you setting for either RAW or the finest JPEG quality or something of lesser quality? It's easy to get these setting in the wrong place. Not RAW but perhaps in the conversion to JPEG. In the JPEG, the setting should be in the finest setting.

I've seen some pretty amazing resolution photos on this forum. I've never seen this mottling. Pixelation doesn't look like this. Look at that dandelion (or flower??) near the tree just at the shadow. I don't see any motion there just mottling.

Response along with image examples welcome regarding this post.

Alan

no12mo

One final word to Jim

I'm impressed with that program. I'm looking to adding it to my arsenal for fixing my photo screwups which I must confess to. :)

Grahame Loc: Fiji

no12mo wrote:

I've seen some pretty amazing resolution photos on this forum. I've never seen this mottling. Pixelation doesn't look like this. Look at that dandelion (or flower??) near the tree just at the shadow. I don't see any motion there just mottling.

If the Exif is correct, (and it's not always), the image posted has had a fair amount of PP on it.

Exposure 2012 +0.33
Contrast 2012 +6
Highlights 2012 -50
Shadows 2012 +46
Whites 2012 +20
Blacks 2012 -13
Clarity 2012 0

no12mo

Grahame wrote:

If the Exif is correct, (and it's not always), the image posted has had a fair amount of PP on it.

Exposure 2012 +0.33
Contrast 2012 +6
Highlights 2012 -50
Shadows 2012 +46
Whites 2012 +20
Blacks 2012 -13
Clarity 2012 0

Funny, I was thinking the same thing. Might that induce the effect I was illustrating?