Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Photo Analysis
Not as sharp as I would like
Page <<first <prev 4 of 7 next> last>>
Dec 26, 2022 15:59:43   #
amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA
 
Something I forgot earlier... You might want to do some research on "focus stacking". With digital it's a popular method of overcoming the limitations of depth of field.

Reply
Dec 26, 2022 16:42:26   #
photogeneralist Loc: Lopez Island Washington State
 
junglejim1949 wrote:
I am learning my R7 and was in search of something to shoot. Very cold and foggy this morning but I did find some color. The photo was softer than I wanted and would appreciate any suggestions. I hope I wasn't shaking due to the cold. I will increase shutter speed next go around and see if that helps.

Thank you,
Jim


Dear Jungle: Close ups in the near macro range are very difficult to get crisp. Was the camera on a tripod?. Was the subject moving imperceptibly in any breeze/ 1/250 sec at 70 mm f /4.0 is probably not good enough The depth of crisp focus is probably paper thin at that close up distance and especially 70 mm at f/4. Close ups at near macro are very hard to hold steady and even breathing can be enough to move the camera distance such that the subject is ouside the range of where the camera was sharply focused. Another possibility (however slight) other than operator error may be that your lens' design is not not optimized for f/4 macros. You can check this out by selecting a subject at least 5 feet away and F/5.6 to F/8 with camera on a sturdy tripod I'D GUESS THE 5 FT + IMAGE WILL BE QUITE SHARP.

Don't be too leery of sensor noise caused by too high ISO. A sharp but slightly noisy photo is probably preferable to a soft focused macro. I try to shoot all my hand held macros at no slower than 1/1000 and at least f/6.3 even if it means a high iso. (I have shaky hands though)

I've taken a screenshot of the exif values for your photo which I'll include below"


(Download)

Reply
Dec 26, 2022 16:44:58   #
junglejim1949 Loc: Sacramento,CA
 
Grahame wrote:
Something I do not see mentioned (apologies if missed) is that with close up/macro shooting where you know you are going to get a shallow DoF changing the angle of the camera to the subject can assist in getting a greater area in focus of the section you want most prominent.


A lot to take in. You are the first to suggest camera angle. I will try and test all suggestions.
Thank you,
Jim

Reply
 
 
Dec 26, 2022 22:01:26   #
TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC
 
I’d also suggest downloading a DOF field ap such as DOFMaster and try plugging in various distances and apertures at several FLs so that you get a feel for the DOF of the combination you’re using. For example, your body at 70 mm and 4’ at f4 yields a razor thin DOF of 1.7”. Changing the aperture to f8 doubles the DOF to 3.6” and f11 yields 4.8”. Stepping back 1 foot to 5’ (and cropping more) yields almost 8”

Reply
Dec 27, 2022 11:34:50   #
imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida
 
David Martin wrote:
Your focus point is on the yellow stamina (pleural of stamen) at the 3 o'clock position, and these are indeed in focus.
I think the lack of focus elsewhere is therefore the very narrow depth of field.


f4 and narrow DOF is your main problem - the IS of the body and lens should allow a slower shutter ....

Reply
Dec 27, 2022 13:43:34   #
photophile Loc: Lakewood, Ohio, USA
 
junglejim1949 wrote:
I am learning my R7 and was in search of something to shoot. Very cold and foggy this morning but I did find some color. The photo was softer than I wanted and would appreciate any suggestions. I hope I wasn't shaking due to the cold. I will increase shutter speed next go around and see if that helps.

Thank you,
Jim


Very nice in download.

Reply
Dec 27, 2022 17:32:38   #
linda lagace
 
junglejim1949 wrote:
I am learning my R7 and was in search of something to shoot. Very cold and foggy this morning but I did find some color. The photo was softer than I wanted and would appreciate any suggestions. I hope I wasn't shaking due to the cold. I will increase shutter speed next go around and see if that helps.

Thank you,
Jim


Personal opinion. I like the out of focus petals probably due to short depth of field because they draw attention to the more important stamen and pistols at the center of the photo. To me it would not have been as interesting to have it all in focus.

Reply
 
 
Dec 27, 2022 19:52:26   #
junglejim1949 Loc: Sacramento,CA
 
linda lagace wrote:
Personal opinion. I like the out of focus petals probably due to short depth of field because they draw attention to the more important stamen and pistols at the center of the photo. To me it would not have been as interesting to have it all in focus.


Thank you Linda. I am practicing with my new camera (R7) and appreciate your feedback.

Reply
Jan 2, 2023 10:57:31   #
Chicago312 Loc: Western suburb, Chicago
 
fetzler wrote:
There are several possible reasons for the blur.

1. Wind motion of the flower and your body motion if you are handholding. Increasing shutter speed or using a tripod to can help to eliminate motion blur.

2. Your focus point appears to be in the upper right. Using a single point or small group of focus points can help.

3. Use continuous auto focus and allow shutter activation when focus is acquired only. Body or flower motion due to the wind can shift focus quickly. Depth of field is rather small in close up work. Use a small aperature (e.g. f11)

I find that using a tripod is essential to eliminate body motion. It is just too hard to hold very still in awkward positions. I do this type of photography often.
There are several possible reasons for the blur. b... (show quote)


I agree. The shallow depth of field at f4 combined with wind motion of the flower and body motion lead to the results shown.
I take multiple photos in these situations in hopes of getting at least one decent shot. It’s like shooting BIF hand holding a super telephoto lens.

Reply
Jan 2, 2023 11:00:19   #
junglejim1949 Loc: Sacramento,CA
 
Chicago312 wrote:
I agree. The shallow depth of field at f4 combined with wind motion of the flower and body motion lead to the results shown.
I take multiple photos in these situations in hopes of getting at least one decent shot. It’s like shooting BIF hand holding a super telephoto lens.


Chicago321, I think you are correct. I will make adjustments

Reply
Jan 4, 2023 20:35:00   #
paulrnzpn Loc: New Zealand
 
If you used a macro lens (or extension tubes) then that will explain the narrow focal plain (very little being in focus). With close-up shots like this, often you need to focus stack in order to get more of the subject in sharp focus, especially when a macro lens is used. And even with an 'ordinary lens', close-up photos have less depth of field (shallow DoF).

Focus stacking is where you take multiple exposures on manual focus, each one with a slightly different focus point, and then use focus stacking software to stitch them. You can also do the stitching manually in Photoshop, but that can take quite a while to do. Also, some cameras have a built-in focus stacking function, such as some Olympus cameras.

You also need to use a tripod for focus stacking projects.

Reply
 
 
Jan 4, 2023 20:51:28   #
paulrnzpn Loc: New Zealand
 
Since my previous post I spotted your camera settings.

So to add..
f/4 at close range also causes shallow depth of field, as others have already pointed out.
However, if you close the aperture down then you have to increase the ISO even more, or use a slower shutter speed. Also, already at ISO-800 I see, so going even higher and you'll start to get more digital noise. And an even slower shutter than 1/250sec when outdoors poses problems too of course.
I often take tricky shots like this indoors when I want lots in sharp focus, so then I can shoot on smaller aperture and low ISO, and so a slow shutter speed does not matter (using a tripod).
Another trick is to invest in a ring flash, especially if you're shooting lots of close-ups outdoors.

FWIW, I take a lot of macro and close-up photos outdoors using my Canon 100mm Macro lens, and often I shoot on f/2.8 or slightly smaller aperture. I use my tripod for that quite a lot, but not always. And I don't use a ring flash, but sometimes I use a small LED light to light up the subject. Sometimes it can be very tricky to get a well focused and nicely lit photo, but I am very patient. I spent three hours shooting macro photos of some moss one time. It was three hours well worth spending - very nice photos...and you learn a lot from the process.

Reply
Jan 7, 2023 18:03:57   #
E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada
 
If you are not satisfied with the sharpness, consider a few suggestions.

You may have had several gremlins conspiring against you. You use a 70mm focal lengh at f/4 which, especially at close distances, yields a shallow depth of field. This is not necessarily a bad thing- the softness is nice IF HOWEVER, there is one sharp element that such as in the detail at the center of the flower. I don't think you have camera movement blur but it is hard to difficult to maintain critical focus at wide apertures, longer focal lengths, and close distances. A tripod or monopod would help.

ISO 800 should not seriously affect IQ- perhaps just a bit more noise but I don't think that is your issue with this image.

In my commercial work, I do lots of flowers- that is because I do work for the Canadian Florists association and several horticultural organizations.

So, keep the camera steady with support equipment, decide on the depth of field issues and open up or stop down accordingly, sometimes manual focus works better, and try to give the viewers' eye something relatively sharp to become the point of interest.

Natural light is my favorite for flowers in the natural environment. - I only use flash occasionally on studio shots of floral arrangements. Try back ligh that trans-illuminates the leaves or petals.









Reply
Jan 7, 2023 18:14:14   #
junglejim1949 Loc: Sacramento,CA
 
E.L.. Shapiro wrote:
If you are not satisfied with the sharpness, consider a few suggestions.

You may have had several gremlins conspiring against you. You use a 70mm focal lengh at f/4 which, especially at close distances, yields a shallow depth of field. This is not necessarily a bad thing- the softness is nice IF HOWEVER, there is one sharp element that such as in the detail at the center of the flower. I don't think you have camera movement blur but it is hard to difficult to maintain critical focus at wide apertures, longer focal lengths, and close distances. A tripod or monopod would help.

ISO 800 should not seriously affect IQ- perhaps just a bit more noise but I don't think that is your issue with this image.

In my commercial work, I do lots of flowers- that is because I do work for the Canadian Florists association and several horticultural organizations.

So, keep the camera steady with support equipment, decide on the depth of field issues and open up or stop down accordingly, sometimes manual focus works better, and try to give the viewers' eye something relatively sharp to become the point of interest.

Natural light is my favorite for flowers in the natural environment. - I only use flash occasionally on studio shots of floral arrangements. Try back ligh that trans-illuminates the leaves or petals.
If you are not satisfied with the sharpness, consi... (show quote)


Thank you for the info and your photos

Reply
Jan 7, 2023 18:15:16   #
junglejim1949 Loc: Sacramento,CA
 
E.L.. Shapiro wrote:
If you are not satisfied with the sharpness, consider a few suggestions.

You may have had several gremlins conspiring against you. You use a 70mm focal lengh at f/4 which, especially at close distances, yields a shallow depth of field. This is not necessarily a bad thing- the softness is nice IF HOWEVER, there is one sharp element that such as in the detail at the center of the flower. I don't think you have camera movement blur but it is hard to difficult to maintain critical focus at wide apertures, longer focal lengths, and close distances. A tripod or monopod would help.

ISO 800 should not seriously affect IQ- perhaps just a bit more noise but I don't think that is your issue with this image.

In my commercial work, I do lots of flowers- that is because I do work for the Canadian Florists association and several horticultural organizations.

So, keep the camera steady with support equipment, decide on the depth of field issues and open up or stop down accordingly, sometimes manual focus works better, and try to give the viewers' eye something relatively sharp to become the point of interest.

Natural light is my favorite for flowers in the natural environment. - I only use flash occasionally on studio shots of floral arrangements. Try back ligh that trans-illuminates the leaves or petals.
If you are not satisfied with the sharpness, consi... (show quote)


#2 is glorious

Reply
Page <<first <prev 4 of 7 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Photo Analysis
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.