Why are my photos so soft?

[Photolicious]

I have a brand new Canon 450 d (digital rebel something) w/18-55 kit lens and my lovely nifty fifty that I have a love/hate relationsship with and here's why:

I dream of getting those clean crisp and sharp shots that are completely focused, but instead I find that they are quite soft...especially when shooting wide open (or close to it) to get that blurry background from a few feet away. Shotting at a smaller aperture doesn't really give me the sharp results I long for in group shots for instance. There is an example off this in my Flickr stream with my to kids.

What I want to achieve is tack sharp eyes and faces from a few feet away, while the background is blurry. But as you can see on my flickrstream, I am having problems with the sharpness and it really disappoints me.

I have a few examples like this one w before ad after post processing. I did curves, levels, colors, skin smooth, eye enhance and sharpness before I was satisfied. But how do I achieve that SOOC?

Thanks for all your advice.

Before and after processing,

Exif:
Canon EOS 450D
50 mm 1.8

Shutter: 1/800
F/2.2
ISO 200
Aperture Priority

[kencaleno]

........By learning the Lens's sweet spot, ( 18-55 should be at f 8; 35mm focal length- 50mm prime: f4)
and by adjusting dioptre in viewfinder:

Detach lens

Point at white or neutral light source,while looking through viewfinder

Adjust dioptre until focus points become clearest

Re-attach lens.

Use tripod/monopod

Regards, Ken

[inkista]

Yup, 50/1.8 II's sweet spot for sharpness is around f/4. Shooting close to wide open, it's going to be a little softer.

Secondly, are you using a single focus point? Check your fuzzier photos out in the Canon software, and see what AF points were used to focus on. And look to see what WAS in focus. Your camera/lens combination may also back/front focus slightly--with a thinner DoF, that slight error can become more evident. Aiming at high-contrast targets will help the AF system lock on. Don't trust the camera's AF system too much--confirm in the viewfinder that focus was achieved. Also, if you aren't shooting wide open, get familiar with the DoF preview button.

Thirdly, are you inside your minimum focus distance? the 50/1.8's is speced as 1.5 feet.

The idea that you can get shallow DoF on a group of people that are standing far away from you is kind of erroneous. The farther away your subject is, the deeper your DoF is going to be. If there's more distance between you and your subject than there is between your subject and the background you're trying to blur, you're going to have a hard time getting that isolation look. It's not impossible, but it's not going to be the same as working close in with a single subject.

Last but not least would be checking your shutter speed to make sure you don't have any camera shake blur. At 1/800s you're definitely clear of that, but going below 1/60s could be introducing motion blur. You do want to check that you've got good handholding technique.

[SusanH1970]

Take a look at the DOF calculator. Until I saw this and realized where I needed to be in relation to my subject and background, I was having an awful time getting sharp photos with nice bokeh. After studying and playing around with different distances, I was finally able to achieve sharp photos when shooting wide open. Hope this helps - here's an example, I shot this at f/1.8:

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4070/...a748814b_o.jpg

Also, try shooting in manual rather than aperture priority. When you shoot in AV mode the camera chooses the shutter speed and ISO, and the camera isn't as smart as it thinks it is.

ETA: Ah, posting at the same time as Inkista, the Master of All Things Technical as well as my Geek Hero.

[RLucas]

Look at the flower on the right, next to her arm, It is fairly sharp. You either inadvertently locked in on that flower, or you may be too close to the subject to work with f2.2. The farther back you are, the DOF increases. Or, if you are happy with the composition, stop down to f4, like everyone else has said, and see what that does for you. They actually don't really look that soft to me though.

[kencaleno]

That DOF calculator was good for film,where you had a definite circle of confusion-we are told,for example, that the circle of confusion 1.5 crop cameras is 0.020mm, based on diagonal of sensor. But sensor photosites are bigger than 0.20mm,causing a blur,so calculator is innaccurate.Just focus 1/3 into distance,and you will achieve your DOF

(See Thom Hogan's Site for more detailed info : http://www.bythom.com/ )

Regards, Ken

[SusanH1970]

Originally Posted by kencaleno

That DOF calculator was good for film,where you had a definite circle of confusion-we are told,for example, that the circle of confusion 1.5 crop cameras is 0.020mm, based on diagonal of sensor. But sensor photosites are bigger than 0.20mm,causing a blur,so calculator is innaccurate.Just focus 1/3 into distance,and you will achieve your DOF

(See Thom Hogan's Site for more detailed info)

Regards, Ken

Really? Then how did my image end up sharp, using a digital camera? And there is a link to the COC there as well.....

Oh and my camera is a 1.6 crop, not a 1.5. Just to add to the confusion.

[RLucas]

Originally Posted by kencaleno

That DOF calculator was good for film,where you had a definite circle of confusion-we are told,for example, that the circle of confusion 1.5 crop cameras is 0.020mm, based on diagonal of sensor. But sensor photosites are bigger than 0.20mm,causing a blur,so calculator is innaccurate.Just focus 1/3 into distance,and you will achieve your DOF

(See Thom Hogan's Site for more detailed info : Thom Hogan's Nikon Field Guide and Nikon Flash Guide )

Regards, Ken

Film had CoC resolving limitations too. It was called grain. Digital photosites are anywhere between .006mm to .012mm. How is that larger than .020mm?

[kencaleno]

Ok-first to susan-0.019mm canon0.020mm Nikon-not really a measureable difference.

Secondly,OK I read this recentlt and got it the wrong way round-PHOTOSITES ARE BIGGER THAN CIRCLES OF CONFUSION:

Thirdly-here's the article:

Hype About Hyperfocal

[SusanH1970]

I'll stick with Inkista.