Getting frustrated with photo quality

TooManyDogs

I have a canon eos 450D with a canon EF 28-105 f3.5-4.5 lens on it and normally use it with a 420EX speedlite but the picture quality is frustrating the hell out of me. I'm finding alot of blurring unless the subject is lit by daylight. I love candid photos so people are moving, I'm not talking about running about but normal movements but I can't seem to freeze the moment, particularly when indoors with artifical lighting. I don't know what I'm doing wrong, is it the lens, or the camera settings? I don't want the white faces and black backgrounds look on board flashes often give but I dont want nice background lighting with blurred shots either.

I'm going to get a 55mm f1.8 lens when I'm in america next month, would this be any better?

Any ideas why my indoor family shots are crap would be great!

leche solara

Can you post a photo or 2, and show the exif data and someone here will give you some guidance

TooManyDogs

Oh god, I'm such an amateur... whats the exif data? Is it the shutter speed?

leche solara

It's the shutter speed, aperture (F number) and ISO. If the combination of all 3 isn't right your picture won't be right.

Freddie59

Are you shooting in full auto mode?

TooManyDogs

@Freddie - no, I'm trying to experiment with the settings but to be honest the full auto mode wasn't setting my world on fire with the photos either which is what made me think it was maybe the lens.



1/30 4.0 ISO 400
You can see the baby is blurred but the sofa and dvds are in focus




1/20 4.0 ISO 250
Everyone is generally blurred



1/20 4.0 ISO 250
Again baby is particularly blurred but adult not so bad


In each of these photos the baby was moving a bit but not jumping around like a lunatic

Squidgy Black

your shutter speeds are too slow that's why they're blurred.

try it around 1/60.

but they're also out of focus too, maybe that's the lens....

PCPhoto

your shutter speeds are causing movement/camera shake - you are not holding the camera steady

try resting against something solid when taking photos - or try increase the shutter speed (try 1/60) and lowering the aperture (or increasing the ISO...try 400)

Cakes.

I you are using auto focus do you have the auto-focus spot changed ?

don't know the exact name sorry

Your ISOs seem very low. I'm sure that doubling up to 800 or 1,600 ISO (if your camera allows) would fix the issue instantly. Your photos would be grainier, but the movement would be (should be) frozen.


If you're tracking moving subjects, make sure you have your focus set to Servo mode, so it will continue to focus if your subject moves.

Not at all familiar with your camera, but on the 20D, there's a button on top that says "AF-WB". Press this and whatever button it is to flick through the settons (there's a dial atop the camera on the 20D) until AI Servo is highlighted.


Chances are if you're going out of focus with your current gear, the 1.8 50mm won't help. At f/1.8, there's so little actually "in focus" that you're most likely going to be frustrated with the amount of blurry shots you get.

Without trying to sound like a prick, If you don't know what EXIF data is, chances are a little reading up on the theory side of things will do you no harm.

FoxT

Were these all taken with a flash?

- I expect your shutter speed is too slow. However when you use a flash, shutter speed is sometimes not as critical, which is why I ask.

- What problems did you have in program mode?

- FoxT

Promac

If I was you I'd reset all the camera settings (cause you might have it on spot metering with ISO fixed instead of auto, etc) and put it back to full auto to see if it was any different. Make sure the lens is on auto-focus too (it's easy to switch it off).

Then check the little wheel like in the picture below. If the white line isn't in the middle it's like wearing someone else's glasses and even though you're sharp in the viewfinder, the images themselves will be blurred.

Promac

Promac wrote: »

Then check the little wheel like in the picture below. If the white line isn't in the middle it's like wearing someone else's glasses and even though you're sharp in the viewfinder, the images themselves will be blurred.

Is that right?

I don't believe the viewfinder and the focus are related? I assumed that diopter adjustment was to fine tune the viewfinder to your eyesight?

I don't believe it has any affect on the image taken by the camera at all?

challengemaster

TooManyDogs wrote: »

@Freddie - no, I'm trying to experiment with the settings but to be honest the full auto mode wasn't setting my world on fire with the photos either which is what made me think it was maybe the lens.


1/30 4.0 ISO 400
You can see the baby is blurred but the sofa and dvds are in focus


1/20 4.0 ISO 250
Everyone is generally blurred


1/20 4.0 ISO 250
Again baby is particularly blurred but adult not so bad


In each of these photos the baby was moving a bit but not jumping around like a lunatic

Nope, not the lens...It's the settings. I'm assuming f/4 is as low as your lens goes, which isn't dreadful but it's not great for low-light. 1/20 - 1/30 and lower... and you really want a) a tripod to eliminate your shaking and b) a completely still subject

You want to be shooting 1/60 - 1/100 if not more. So up the ISO. You can get rid of noise very easily in camera raw these days...

Promac: you're completely wrong about the diopter, tis as KKV says - to adjust it to your eyesight. Mine isnt set as you said and images are pin sharp off the camera.

zerohamster

Deleted User wrote: »

Is that right?

I don't believe the viewfinder and the focus are related? I assumed that diopter adjustment was to fine tune the viewfinder to your eyesight?

I don't believe it has any affect on the image taken by the camera at all?

Diopter adjustment has no effect on autofocus at all but if manual focus was used then the user could focus incorrectly because it would look right in the viewfinder but the film plane/sensor wouldn't have the same focus as the compensated eyepiece (unless of course the diopter was adjusted to that persons eyesight.)

It seems like a combo of slow shutter speeds and in the first picture just incorrect focus (recomposed possibly) by mistake or the camera was set to use an off centre focus point.

TooManyDogs

Thanks all, I'll up the shutter speed and see how I get on.

KKV - you're right, a bit of theory would do me no harm! A friend who's a pro photographer keeps promising to teach me more but it hasn't happened so I think I'll check out night courses and get a book too. You know yourself that thinking you've been doing great on the day and then when you check the photos later and they're crap it just gets disheartening.

FoxT - in auto mode sometimes the AWB would choose a crap setting so the colours would be completely wrong, and again blurring with the speedlite or washout with the on board flash. I was told I'd get better results with using the different settings on the camera

Peace

From what i can see of the first picture there shouldn't have been a problem with the shutter speed. If you look a the conditions it seems pretty bright. Also the window in the background would be letting light into frame so should have further increased the shutted speed.

How are you finding the focusing on static objects? I would start there and see if its a setting that needs changing. Another idea would be to try the flash if you are shooting people but i hate the results from the flash. Shooting people indoors is a PITA as you can often get motion blur.

I'm sure others can give good advice on settings but i'm a nikon users/abuser so can't comment.

oshead

Shutter speed is not the cause of the problem.... It may look like it is, but it's not. Slow shutter speed is the effect that your approach has on the images. The real problem here is quality of light. To produce better images, you need to start learning how to identify good light from bad (if there is such a thing as bad light) and make either (a) Alterations to the location you are shooting in. (b) Move to a different location with better light for your needs. (c) Go with the flow and produce an apparently imperfect image. So look for the light when shooting. If you learn to see direction, intensity and colour of light, you're images will improve to no end and you'll be able to express what you are trying to say in an image.

Another thing, don't go paying someone to teach you how to see with the camera. You have a vibrant community here who are more than happy to help. Join a camera club, you'd be surprised how many photographers out there are willing to pass on their knowledge

Promac

As Zerohamster explained - if the diopter is off you can compose an image in the viewfinder that looks nice and sharp but it'll be off on the sensor.

If i was having trouble with blurred images I'd switch off the autofocus and try it manually - in which case, the diopter being off would screw up the image.

But even in full auto, if someone's not sure what they're doing they could easily move the focus points around the image until they see their subject sharp through the viewfinder while in reality they're actually focussed on something 2 feet behind or in front of the subject.

Edit: The OP says he has an EF 28-105 f3.5-4.5 - this lens has full-time manual focus so I could easily imagine him holding both the zoom ring AND the manual focus ring at the same time and throwing his images out of focus by zooming.

The manual focus ring is right in front of the zoom ring and could easily be moved if you're being a bit clumsy:

condra

I would recommend buying a faster lens such as the hugely popular Canon 50mm 1.8.
They are about 115 new, and go for around 70 second-hand on adverts.ie

That lens would allow you to shoot portraits using wider apertures (low F stops). That would allow you to use faster shutter speeds and lower ISOs, as well as giving you the dept of field effect.

challengemaster

oshead wrote: »

Another thing, don't go paying someone to teach you how to see with the camera. You have a vibrant community here who are more than happy to help. Join a camera club, you'd be surprised how many photographers out there are willing to pass on their knowledge

Agreed, especially considering how much information is on the internet these days, I can't believe people still do night courses... Quick google and you've got hours of reading material... even on boards there's plenty of other photographers who all started out in the same place, so would be more than willing to give help.

magicbastarder

Deleted User wrote: »

Without trying to sound like a prick, If you don't know what EXIF data is, chances are a little reading up on the theory side of things will do you no harm.

to be fair, EXIF is just a jargony name for a collection of parameters; not knowing what EXIF means does not mean you don't know what shutter speed is, etc.

zerohamster

Promac wrote: »

But even in full auto, if someone's not sure what they're doing they could easily move the focus points around the image until they see their subject sharp through the viewfinder while in reality they're actually focussed on something 2 feet behind or in front of the subject.

That is somewhat true but when autofocus is on if you point it at an object and focus on it,the lens will be focused on that object and the diopter will have no effect at all on the final image. The first image is definitely not a diopter error as even on the highest compensation it wouldnt change the focal point by that much at that close range.

magicbastarder

magicbastarder wrote: »

to be fair, EXIF is just a jargony name for a collection of parameters; not knowing what EXIF means does not mean you don't know what shutter speed is, etc.

Well I wasn't trying to sound insulting or anything. I just imagine that anyone reading into photography would know what EXIF data is. I knew what it was fairly quickly, despite not actually looking for it.

I think it's just a fairly common term that's used a lot and as such, a majority of people looking into photography would surely come across it a lot and no doubt end up finding out what it is very early on.

magicbastarder

actually, i dislike the phrase; it refers specifically to how the information is stored in the file, but has become a way for people to refer to exposure values, and as such is unneeded jargon.

Promac

zerohamster wrote: »

That is somewhat true but when autofocus is on if you point it at an object and focus on it,the lens will be focused on that object and the diopter will have no effect at all on the final image.

Not with full-time manual focus - you leave autofocus switched on but as soon as you move the focus ring the autofocus gets overridden and the manual focus stays until you press the shutter button again.

zerohamster

True, although with the autofocus switch on you still need to achieve autofocus confirmation on camera before messing with the FTM or it wont release the shutter (provided you arent using back button focus).

Edit: As far as Im aware (Im pretty sure thats the case on my Sigma 50mm f/1.4 but not sure with Canon lenses)

Promac

zerohamster wrote: »

True, although with the autofocus switch on you still need to achieve autofocus confirmation on camera before messing with the FTM or it wont release the shutter (provided you arent using back button focus).

Edit: As far as Im aware (Im pretty sure thats the case on my Sigma 50mm f/1.4 but not sure with Canon lenses)

You get the autofocus beep but if you keep the shutter button half-depressed you can then move the FTM ring to focus on whatever you like and then release the shutter taking a pic of something very out of focus.

TooManyDogs

oshead wrote: »

The real problem here is quality of light. To produce better images, you need to start learning how to identify good light from bad

My house maybe isn't an ideal location then, it's north-south facing with small windows so if it's bright outside I get really strong light near the windows which washes out images, but then its dark in the rest of the room. Cos I love candid shots I'm finding it difficult to switch settings quickly as people move in and out of the light from the windows.... Shooting outside is absolutly fine so I guess it's indoor sourses of light is one of the issues. When you say good light and bad light can I ask for examples?

oshead wrote: »

Join a camera club, you'd be surprised how many photographers out there are willing to pass on their knowledge

Thanks for that, I didn't realise night classes were no good, I'll have a look for my nearest camera club. I bought a book too so we'll see how that goes, I'm more of a practical person than reader but I'll be giving it a go anyway!!!

condra wrote: »

I would recommend buying a faster lens such as the hugely popular Canon 50mm 1.8.

That's the plan. I'm going to America next month and that's one of the things on my shopping list!

magicbastarder wrote: »

to be fair, EXIF is just a jargony name for a collection of parameters; not knowing what EXIF means does not mean you don't know what shutter speed is, etc.

Thats pretty much where I was, I knew the individual terms but not that there was a collective one

Thanks everyone for the help, I know my questions must be the most basic ones you've come across in a while but I appreciate your patience!

Freddie59

TooManyDogs wrote: »

@Freddie - no, I'm trying to experiment with the settings but to be honest the full auto mode wasn't setting my world on fire with the photos either which is what made me think it was maybe the lens.



1/30 4.0 ISO 400
You can see the baby is blurred but the sofa and dvds are in focus




1/20 4.0 ISO 250
Everyone is generally blurred



1/20 4.0 ISO 250
Again baby is particularly blurred but adult not so bad


In each of these photos the baby was moving a bit but not jumping around like a lunatic

Sorry for the delay in getting back. I had the same problems when I started out three years ago with DSLRs. Full auto on a 450D was terrible. But I bought Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson and it changed everything for me - literally.

As a beginner (and from my very limited experience) the shutter speed in the shots you posted is way too low. As others have pointed out, increase the ISO. Don't be afraid to use ISO 800. This will allow you to up the shutter speed to between 1/60 and 1/00 (depending on the available lighting conditions and/or flash). At 1/20 you're nearly into tripod territory.

But one important thing - IS lens or not - keep a very steady hand when shooting. the f/1.4 will be of little use to you if you can't get the pictures right using the kit lens. Experiment more with the kit lens. Then, when you've mastered the settings, consider a different, or additional, lens(es).

Hope that helps.:)

5uspect

Many people tend to shoot in Aperture Priority (Av) mode since they're primarily interested in the depth of field and not too bothered about the exposure, leaving that to the camera to handle.

However when you include a flash in the equation this can cause issues. The E-TTL system used to figure out the camera settings with flash has a habit of upping the exposure so much as to make moving subjects blurry. This is because it is simply trying to balance the subject illuminated by the flash and the background illuminated by the ambient light.

What you should try is shooting in Manual (M) or Shutter Priority (Tv) with an exposure of about 1/60s to 1/100 depending on the mobility of your subject increasing the ISO to bring up the ambient background.

Also, at the risk of being patronising, make sure your using the auto focus correctly. You can select different focus points in the viewfinder and use this to aim for the subjects eye.

I had a friend who once had an SLR thrust upon him at a wedding by the groom and all of his photos were on the nice wall behind the guests on either side on the center focus point.

oshead

TooManyDogs wrote: »

When you say good light and bad light can I ask for examples?

I know I've introduced the concept to the discussion, but the question above is a kind of hypothetical one. The term good light, bad light is all about light for purpose. It is the ascetics and to an equal degree the functional aspects of the light.

Just one example. While photographing babies and very young children. They cannot be directed, so you want light in whatever direction they face. Children tend to have soft round faces and a big soft diffuse light is IMO suitable, ascetically speaking that is. In a studio type setting you might try and use an even shadow-less light. Say with a 1:1 ratio configuration. Probably with a couple of large umbrellas. This light is pleasing enough but it's mostly functional. I would call that good light, but heres the catch, only if that was what I was the actual goal. Bad light might be defined as harsh light without much diffusion. It would probably create dark shadows in the eye sockets and blown out highlights say on the face. But If this is what you're after then fine.

To sum up, Good light, bad light is about how light suits the purpose. You could switch the example above around. The harsh light on a man would create a very stylized, high contrast type of look where as, soft and diffuse would not suit very much.

Freddie59

5uspect wrote: »

Many people tend to shoot in Aperture Priority (Av) mode since they're primarily interested in the depth of field and not too bothered about the exposure, leaving that to the camera to handle.

However when you include a flash in the equation this can cause issues. The E-TTL system used to figure out the camera settings with flash has a habit of upping the exposure so much as to make moving subjects blurry. This is because it is simply trying to balance the subject illuminated by the flash and the background illuminated by the ambient light.

What you should try is shooting in Manual (M) or Shutter Priority (Tv) with an exposure of about 1/60s to 1/100 depending on the mobility of your subject increasing the ISO to bring up the ambient background.

Also, at the risk of being patronising, make sure your using the auto focus correctly. You can select different focus points in the viewfinder and use this to aim for the subjects eye.

I had a friend who once had an SLR thrust upon him at a wedding by the groom and all of his photos were on the nice wall behind the guests on either side on the center focus point.

Good points. I use M all the time. It gives you great freedom - once you get used to it. On the autofocus points, just be careful if you use all of them. The camera tends to focus on the one nearest to you, leaving others in the shot out of focus.

I only use the centre focus point myself.

This thread is interesting as it presents views from both sides.