Check out Sports Photography section of our forum.
Can I assume this is camera shake?
Apr 29, 2012 19:19:21 #
I had a chance encounter with these yellow birds today. Canon 20d, Tamron 28-300 with no filter. Most of my shots are like this, I can find nothing in focus in the pictures so I'm guessing it's a camera shake problem as it was hand held standing on uneven footing on a windy day. I'd like to know if anyone thinks it may be something else other than camera shake.
Thanks!
Thanks!
Large jpeg
Medium jpeg
Apr 29, 2012 19:22:40 #
what was your shutter speed and fstop used? seems to me to be a depth of field "problem" which sugests a smaller fstop number was used which has less depth of field, instead of a larger number.
Apr 29, 2012 19:34:35 #
sinatraman wrote:
what was your shutter speed and fstop used? seems to me to be a depth of field "problem" which sugests a smaller fstop number was used which has less depth of field, instead of a larger number.
First one 1/800 f 5.6 183mm
Second one 1/640 f 6.3 300mm
There is so much else around my intended focal point both closer and farther that I figured there should be something in focus if it was the settings. Is that a bad assumption?
Check out Street Photography section of our forum.
Apr 29, 2012 19:36:46 #
hflare
Loc: Florida
slclog wrote:
First one 1/800 f 5.6 183mm
Second one 1/640 f 6.3 300mm
There is so much else around my intended focal point both closer and farther that I figured there should be something in focus if was settings. Is that a bad assumption?
sinatraman wrote:
what was your shutter speed and fstop used? seems to me to be a depth of field "problem" which sugests a smaller fstop number was used which has less depth of field, instead of a larger number.
First one 1/800 f 5.6 183mm
Second one 1/640 f 6.3 300mm
There is so much else around my intended focal point both closer and farther that I figured there should be something in focus if was settings. Is that a bad assumption?
Did you have "auto Focus" ? turned on?
It needs to have been focused by hand....as the auto focus will be thrown off by those branches.....
Apr 29, 2012 19:44:50 #
if the birds were some distance away and you didnt want the foreground to be out of focus, i would have shot at f11 or above to give large amount of dof. also your telephotos have less dof then a wide angle lens. you have to compensate for that. you could have reduced your shutter speed safely without risking camera shake and shot with a larger fstop number f16 etc. you would have gotten excellant dof, and all would be in focus. mastering the interrelated concepts of apeture size, focal length, shutterspeed and iso is not easy. may i suggest one of the greatest how to photography books ever written "UNDERSTANDING EXPOSURE" by Bryan Petersen. in plain english and with lots of amazing photos he explains all about fstops, shutterspeed, iso,focal length etc. I reread my copy constantly.
Apr 29, 2012 19:51:24 #
[/quote]
Did you have "auto Focus" ? turned on?
It needs to have been focused by hand....as the auto focus will be thrown off by those branches.....[/quote]
Both are Auto using only the center dot as the focal zone I took others using manual, they look the same
Did you have "auto Focus" ? turned on?
It needs to have been focused by hand....as the auto focus will be thrown off by those branches.....[/quote]
Both are Auto using only the center dot as the focal zone I took others using manual, they look the same
Apr 29, 2012 19:56:10 #
sinatraman wrote:
if the birds were some distance away and you didnt... (show quote)
Got it, and I appreciate the tips. My question is perhaps better stated like this. The bush the bird is in is about 8-10 feet front to back. Not a single thing in the photo is in focus. Not branches in the foreground, not branches in the background, and clearly not the bird. That leads me to believe the total lack of sharpness ANYWHERE in the picture is caused by something. In a situation like this, does that indicate that camera shake is the cause of the blur or what else might it be? If it was a DOF problem, something should be in focus, shouldn't it?
Check out Printers and Color Printing Forum section of our forum.
Apr 29, 2012 20:04:39 #
actualy around the bird apears to these tired eyes as in focus. unless you are having a physical problem with the weight of your camera/lens set up, camera shake should not come into play until you get to the slower shutter speeds. a rule of thumb is any shutter speed below the reciprocal of the focal length you are using should require you to mount camera on tripod to avoid camera shake. for example with your lens anything below 1/300th of a second would be vunerable to camera shake. does your tamaron have whatever tamaron calls its image stabalization? if so by turning it on you can shoot up to 4 stops slower without tripod or worrying about camera shake.
Apr 29, 2012 20:33:53 #
sinatraman wrote:
actualy around the bird apears to these tired eye... (show quote)
No IS type option in this lens. I find the old rule of thumb of shutter speed and focal length to not work so well in the field, especially when it is windy and my footing is not so good.
Maybe I'm expecting too much sharpness from the lens.
Apr 29, 2012 20:39:34 #
I'm not seeing the typical one directional smearing that is indicative of camera shake. Having said that you were also dealing with subject movement so having the camera moving in one directon and the foliage and bird moving in another may be causing the problem.
Generally, birds that are buried deep in the foliage are extremely difficult to get into focus. I would have used manual focus in this case. Actually, I would have passed on the photograph until the bird came out more in the open. Even then, I would have tried to get closer. Here are some tips on how to do that: Approach quietly, stop take a few photos, wait 20-30 seconds then take 3 to 4 steps closer, take some more shots, wait 20-30 secs, move 3-4 more steps and so on. Keep the camera up to your face so you aren't making any sudden moves. You would be surprized at how close you can get. some birds are more skittish than others. Goldfinches usually let you get reasonably close.
Generally, birds that are buried deep in the foliage are extremely difficult to get into focus. I would have used manual focus in this case. Actually, I would have passed on the photograph until the bird came out more in the open. Even then, I would have tried to get closer. Here are some tips on how to do that: Approach quietly, stop take a few photos, wait 20-30 seconds then take 3 to 4 steps closer, take some more shots, wait 20-30 secs, move 3-4 more steps and so on. Keep the camera up to your face so you aren't making any sudden moves. You would be surprized at how close you can get. some birds are more skittish than others. Goldfinches usually let you get reasonably close.
Apr 29, 2012 20:40:26 #
with the right depth of field the birds will be sharp. i have a tamaron af film lens 28-105 that i absolutely love that is usually on my camera unless i want the extra apeture of my nikon nifty fivty. truthfully down here in sunny florida outside i rarely shoot below f8 anyways using a hot shoe mount flash if i need extra oomph.
Check out Traditional Street and Architectural Photography section of our forum.
Apr 29, 2012 20:44:08 #
slclog wrote:
I had a chance encounter with these yellow birds today. Canon 20d, Tamron 28-300 with no filter. Most of my shots are like this, I can find nothing in focus in the pictures so I'm guessing it's a camera shake problem as it was hand held standing on uneven footing on a windy day. I'd like to know if anyone thinks it may be something else other than camera shake.
Thanks!
Thanks!
If you want tack sharp you HAVE to use a tripod. If you are using auto focus there is a lot to focus on in these two pictures. A few braches are sharp so you may need to adjust your to spot focus. Although I recommend hand focus. oh and tripod, tripod, tripod!
Apr 29, 2012 20:48:33 #
photopete wrote:
quote=slclog I had a chance encounter with these ... (show quote)
It must just be me. I blow these up to 100% and nothing is really sharp to me. This was totally unplanned and just a chance shot. I just grabbed the camera and took a few shots. If I was planning, I would have used a tripod. I actually tried to move around so I could brace against a tree, but where I could do that, I couldn't see the birds. Also, the pictures I manually focused are the same as those I spot focused for what that is worth.
Apr 29, 2012 20:53:02 #
Apr 29, 2012 23:28:06 #
Here is a 300% crop of a branch below and to the left of the bird in image #1. There is a branch running diagonally from lower left to upper right that is pretty much in focus. It appears to be closer to you than the bird was and is the distance at which you AF focused. I see no evidence of camera shake, just a very out of focus picture. So many small branches running all over will always throw off AF, even in spot focus mode, there is just way too much info to work with. Manual focus is the only real solution in a case like this. (This is a very tight crop so it appears quite small)
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Check out Astronomical Photography Forum section of our forum.