Poor IQ

[joel222]

My wifes uncle has been restoring a 1965 Lambretta, and asked me to go around and take some pics of it with my kids in too. Below is a pic I took yesterday and then a crop of it to show how bad the quality is. I cant understand why so many of these turned out bad like this. These ones were taken with a 50mm 1.8 at f2.5 iso 200 1/1000th sec. I also took some with a 15-85 and some with a 70-200L, and they were also poor. What is the problem?

They are both un-edited, 1st one slight crop, second big crop to show IQ.

 

[PaulButler]

You were shooting into a bright light source (the sun) this will usually cause a lack of contrast. There are some CA's showing too which won't help. Not sure where you were focussing (looks like on the kids).

Using a hood will help with the contrast, and also you could have used a smaller aperture which would have given greater DoF and get the lens nearer to it's sweet spot (usually somewhere smaller than f5.6) which would also help a little with contrast and CAs. The scooter would also have been more in focus too.

 

[AJQS]

Struggling to work out where the focal point is, did you have it stuck in manual focus perhaps?

 

[joel222]

Thanks for the reply. I actually wanted the scooter out of focus and the kids in focus, that's why I used a fairly big aperture, and thought by lifting it a couple of stops from wide open to 2.5 would be somewhere near the 'sweet spot'. I should of used a hood, as I have one for each lens, I don't know why I didn't. What are CAs?

 

[robhooley167]

Chromatic Aberrations, the green and purple fringes you can see around the highlights and the kids hair

 

[Pookeyhead]

The kids are out of focus. User error. I'm assuming you are using auto focus? If so, are you focusing, reframing, then shooting? Is it on continuous AF or single?

This is almost certainly user error and not a fault I bet.

 

[seriousrikk]

The branches in the tree appear to be sharper - so you appear to have got the focus slightly off.

How was the focus set up?

 

[Suvv]

Focus problem as others have said plus low contrast, did you have a UV filter fitted? With the sun in that position a UV filter will make things worse.

 

[Phil V]

All of what David Richard and Kev said.

 

[joel222]

I was changing the focus points with each shot because when I've focused and reframed in the past with a wide apertutre it has been soft/blurry because the movement must have thrown the focus off. Taken with one shot focus and without filter.

 

[tdodd]

The first problem is with the most horrific lighting conditions you could imagine, with dazzling backlight bleaching out their hair and the grass and heavy shade, especially under the tree, really knocking out detail and contrast from their faces and the bike. You really should try to find more sympathetic lighting for this.

Apart from the light you do plainly have a focus miss. I don't know why, but there's no question it is a big miss. I know the 50/1.8 has its faults where AF is concerned and you may well need to shoot some extra safety shots, just in case, but first fix the lighting.

I performed a little test shoot in my garden this evening, using similar settings - crop sensor, 50mm, f/2.5, 200 ISO, but in my case 1/800 instead of 1/1000. The scene and distances involved are vaguely similar, but the lighting is quite a bit different. Here's my example....

Even with this example there seems to have been a small focus miss when viewed at 100%, but the end result is still rather kinder to the subject, I think, and that's mostly down to the more even lighting.

 

[joel222]

Thanks for that, I will be going back round there this week for another try. This time I will be more observant of the lighting conditions.

So what would you suggest to do if the sun is out, and there isn't any shade. Let's say at a wedding or christening and it's midday and the sun is beating down. What would be the way to approach the shot?

 

[hollis_f]

Take off the UV filter.

 

[robhooley167]

Take off the UV filter.

He wasnt using one

 

[tdodd]

Thanks for that, I will be going back round there this week for another try. This time I will be more observant of the lighting conditions.

So what would you suggest to do if the sun is out, and there isn't any shade. Let's say at a wedding or christening and it's midday and the sun is beating down. What would be the way to approach the shot?

If you have the opportunity to pick the time/weather/composition of elements within the scene then of course you can exercise full control. At a wedding the question becomes - are you in charge and directing the "shoot" or just trying for candids as a guest, without much/any influence? Unless it is a beach wedding or set in a field you would expect to be able to find shade somewhere - the side of a building (a church perhaps?) or a line of trees/bushes, so try to steer your subjects there if you can, but to be honest you can shoot in full sunshine as well. The most important things to consider are to avoid the squinting look, and to avoid uneven lighting upon the subject.

In your example above you have the direct back/top light on their heads (and the grass), but rather than open shade above them they are covered by a tree, meaning their faces are less well lit than they would be with a plain, open blue sky. If you had moved them forward they would be fully in the shade, along with the background, but reframing or repositioning to avoid the bright patch on the lawn would help too. Perhaps you could have moved the children back to be with the bike, thus putting everything in shade and avoiding the tricky lighting variations.

Anyway, here are a few random examples (mostly not from weddings), but showing people shot in bright, sunny conditions. Not much magic here, or skill or talent, but note that the people are all lit evenly, whether in shade or full sunshine. Any partial shadows cast are by themselves rather than some external obstruction. All but one are without edits other than cropping. There is a bit of a squint on the third, and shadowed eyes, but this was a street candid, not a posed shot. The fourth is with on camera fill flash. The last is with the subject fully shaded (not partially shaded) by a tree above.

I am sure that for a family event the memories will be of far more concern than technical perfection, so don't sweat it too much. Just try to look for even lighting, whether sun or shade, rather than a mixture of both on the subject(s).

 

[HoppyUK]

Take off the UV filter.

LOL That was my first thought

Comments: focus is clearly well out. The theory that focus-recompose is inaccurate is an internet myth and it's actually very fast and accurate. The only exception is when a) you're very close, much closer than that, b) subject is way off to one side, and c) shooting at a very low f/number with very shallow DoF. Even then, other errors like subject or camera distance shifts are more likely causes.

Shooting into the light is never easy. A good lens hood helps but they're mostly not very efficient. Try shading the lens with your hand, so that your hand is only just out of shot.

Fast lenses are more prone because of the large area of glass and greater opportunity for internal reflections to bounce around inside. Using a filter of any kind will make things much worse.

 

[philthejuggler]

I don't think the lighting in this shot is that much of an issue and the highlights it gives the hair in the children are flattering. If the shot had been in focus it would have been more than acceptable.

 

[nikontos]

Might be the camera settings are the cause, as you have shot with 3 good lenses with similar results. I can see that this is not the first time you used the camera, so I rule out the lack of ability to to focus the lenses properly .

 

[u8myufo]

They are both un-edited, 1st one slight crop, second big crop to show IQ.

Dumb question time Are we talking un-edited Raw or Jpeg?

 

[Phil V]

Might be the camera settings are the cause, as you have shot with 3 good lenses with similar results. I can see that this is not the first time you used the camera, so I rule out the lack of ability to to focus the lenses properly .

This is the most twisted logic answer I've ever read on here. The image is clearly not in focus (we can all agree that), if all of the lenses have produced in focus images on other occasions, then the ONLY possible answer is user error .

And I'd also add, the backlighting might make focussing trickier (it's mentioned in the manual) the concept of the shot is sound enough, it just needs a little more care. I'd go with some fill flash to help the subjects pop (once they're in focus).

And for clarity 2.5 isn't 'a few stops down' from wide open. F2 would be 1/3 of a stop down, 2.8 is a stop and a third, f4 is only 2 and 1/3 stops down.

 

[Mr Bump]

Even with the DOF issue which I think should have been much lower the focus looks poor I would agree.

 

[nikontos]

This is the most twisted logic answer I've ever read on here. The image is clearly not in focus (we can all agree that), if all of the lenses have produced in focus images on other occasions, then the ONLY possible answer is user error .

And I'd also add, the backlighting might make focussing trickier (it's mentioned in the manual) the concept of the shot is sound enough, it just needs a little more care. I'd go with some fill flash to help the subjects pop (once they're in focus).

And for clarity 2.5 isn't 'a few stops down' from wide open. F2 would be 1/3 of a stop down, 2.8 is a stop and a third, f4 is only 2 and 1/3 stops down.

Its been a while since I used my canon DSLR (given to my wife ), but I remember being able to set the camera to use only one focusing point, say far left. If such setting was selected and forgotten about one would missfocus most of the time! Hope it helps to understand my logic!

 

[Phil V]

Its been a while since I used my canon DSLR (given to my wife ), but I remember being able to set the camera to use only one focusing point, say far left. If such setting was selected and forgotten about one would missfocus most of the time! Hope it helps to understand my logic!

The OP hasn't just left the camera on the wrong point though...

I was changing the focus points with each shot because when I've focused and reframed in the past with a wide apertutre it has been soft/blurry because the movement must have thrown the focus off. Taken with one shot focus and without filter.

 

[nikontos]

You are right, still a good illustration of my argument. Besides I think it rather difficult to missfocus so often - the shooter would have to be quite inexperienced, don't you agree? There is mention of difficult light etc, but that alone would not explain it in my opinion. Take my opinion with a pinch of salt though - I only focus manually. Once you get used to it, you see the focus plane before you press the shutter.

 

[Phil V]

You are right, still a good illustration of my argument. Besides I think it rather difficult to missfocus so often - the shooter would have to be quite inexperienced, don't you agree? There is mention of difficult light etc, but that alone would not explain it in my opinion. Take my opinion with a pinch of salt though - I only focus manually. Once you get used to it, you see the focus plane before you press the shutter.

As I said earlier, check your manual, or even experiment yourself. Having a bright light point stright into the lens will knock out the ability of the AF system.

And the OP is relatively inexperienced, also covered and also obvious.