Seeking Advise on Lack of Sharpness

[Sistereinstein]

Good Morning.
I enjoy landscape shots but am experiencing issues with sharpness, and am not sure if it is a Shutter Speed or Aperture setting or if it is the lens itself.



Link for Large Size:

Shot in RAW format, EXIF:
Camera Canon EOS Digital Rebel XSi w/ 18-55 IS lens
Exposure 0.005 sec (1/200)
Aperture f/10.0
Focal Length 47 mm
ISO Speed 200
Exposure Bias 0 EV

My questions is about lack of sharpness. It may not be visible rightoff, but when it is viewed large you can really tell. The smaller barn and the trees have some blur.

I run into this alot when shooting trees. I assume it's that the shutter is too slow or depth of field problem, but would like to get a second/3rd/4th opinion if I can please.

Thank you for your time,

[Aleix]

Doesn't look like camera shake to me, but rather bad focus or lens problem. Not sure though. Are you experiencing always such problem with this lens? Because I do have a lens which is really unsharp, but at first I thought I was doing something wrong.

Try shooting with a tripod to further test if this is a lens problem or not. Remember to turn off the image stabilization of the camera/lens, if available, when shooting with a tripod (otherwise it may produce blurry shots).

Regards

EDIT: I read again the blur you usually experience is when shooting trees, but as far as I can see in the large picture, static elements seem to appear unsharp as well...

[fire-eyes]

I can't really tell because the largest size is simply nowhere near large enough to judge, but it could be diffraction limiting.

The higher your aperture, the deeper your depth of field, but at some point each lens starts to suffer this issue that is not immediately obvious.

Diffraction Limited Photography: Pixel Size, Aperture and Airy Disks

See if your lens has a review at slrgear, and look for the information on when diffraction limiting starts to set in. 10.0 would be absurdly early, but you never know.

Are you using auto or manual focus? Either way, where are you optimizing focus at? You'll want to read up on hyperfocal distance (lost my link for that...), but a general rule is: optimize your focus at 1/3 into the "depth" of the image.

Finally, digital photos are soft by their very nature. You'll always need some sharpening, the trick is just to not overdo it.

Is this an issue that you have always seen, or only recently?

[Aleix]

Originally Posted by fire-eyes

10.0 would be absurdly early, but you never know.

Agreed. I too find strange that this is because of the f/10 aperture.

Originally Posted by fire-eyes

Finally, digital photos are soft by their very nature. You'll always need some sharpening, the trick is just to not overdo it.

True, especially when shooting RAW.

[fire-eyes]

Here's a personal example of me learning the diffraction limiting lesson. And boy, did I take a lot of pictures this way.

Someone told me that for landscapes you want the most depth of field, so hey, set that aperture as tiny as possible. That was f/22 on this lens. I just accepted it.

Months later a friend broke it to me. I tried to ignore it, but then I went out and shot the same thing, one with f/22 and the other with f/9. The diffraction limiting in my lens starts at f/16 according to slrgear. I still tried to ignore the results staring me in the face, but there it was.

The f/9 version was sharper and clearer than the f/22 version. Worse yet, the f/9 looked better out of the camera without sharpening compared to the f/22 with sharpening. Further, the f/22 was just plain muddy and smudgy-looking. I may have puked.

So here's the f/22 version quite small, it looks fine here (too lazy to do thumbs):

Valley of Fire - 006

Here it is full size, don't let your browser resize it:

http://fire-eyes.org/gal/d/40349-3/_N9H4169.jpg

In particular, look at the orange rock formations in the foreground, between the "grass" and the distant mountains.

I sort of hope this is your issue, because it is easy to fix in future images.

[navcom]

First off, I second the comment that digital photos are soft by nature. It's true. You usually have to add some form of sharpening to get a really good landscape photograph.

On diffraction...that doesn't appear to be the case here at all. As stated, f/10 is absurdly low and unless you have a super cheap lens, it should never be an issue. I've never seen diffraction at f/10 before. And diffraction is usually spread across the image, not necessarily localized.

Another issue to consider if you are only dealing with trees is wind. If those trees were swaying from the wind, even 1/200th may show a bit of blur. But this doesn't explain the small barn.

Looking at your larger version, it really doesn't appear that bad right out of the camera...especially if you are using the kit lens (I'm assuming here on 18-55mm). It might be a slight DOF issue, especially if you are focusing very near your standing position. F/10 usually has a fairly deep DOF but not super deep. I'm leaning a bit towards this as your issue. Try shooting at f/13 or f/16 and see what happens. Anything above f/13 and you may start experiencing diffraction. F/16 should be very slight and shouldn't give you a problem.

Second, be very concerned about camera shake all the time regardless of this issue. Use a tripod for sure..and use one that is sturdy, especially when using smaller apertures. If possible, never extend the top extension on the tripod unless absolutely necessary (the extra extension that extends the camera above the actual tripod portion). It can cause some sway as it's not as stable as when it's retracted. Also use a shutter release cable or remote control as well as your camera's shutter delay feature. And finally (as already stated) turn off your IS when using a tripod. These things should eliminate any concerns with camera sway/motion.

Hope that helps a bit!

[LeeR]

I don't believe you have a sharpness or diffraction problem at all. No, let me put that another way, I don't think either of those is your biggest problem here. When I pulled your image up in PS your histogram shows that this image is slightly underexposed and rather limited in tonality. The net result is an image that is flat and uninspiring. If you will correctly set the white and black points, thereby spreading the tonality, you will find you have a far more interesting image and, I suspect, your complaints about sharpness will disappear.

[tpsimages]

Hey there,
I'll echo the other comments and suggest using a tripod when taking these landscape shots. And I agree, you can expand you DOF using a smaller aperture setting. If you don't have a tripod, try increasing the iso to 400 (grain shouldn't bee too bad with your camera) and increase shutter speed to 1/500. Experiment to see what works best for you.

Best,
TPS

[Sistereinstein]

Fire-eyes - this looks very much like the same issue, though you did not say whether you were using a tripod. I believe I focused on the barn, where I should have focused 1/3rd in.

Admittedly, I don't have a tripod yet for this camera, it's on my wish list.

Normally, I would agree with Lee's point as well regarding exposure, if that was my complaint. I shoot in RAW so I can correct those post processing. I tend to take several compositions in different settings, but in most cases I underexpose by habit. I do need to utilize the histogram.

Extremely helpful responses - I have read that lenses have their sweet spot and am not quite convinced (yet) that the lens is at fault, though the idea has been creeping as of late.

I am always striving to improve and will try to upload an "after" image.

Thanks very much everyone!

[fire-eyes]

Ah yes, I was using a tripod, a very solid one. And a cable release, 2 second delay, mirror lock up... IS of the lens off (tripod sense sometimes makes mistakes), basically everything I possibly could do. I guess that goes to show how much diffraction limiting can hose a shot, if that's what it actually was, which I'm on the fence about at f/10.

Good luck!