Crystal clear sharp photos

[kencaleno]

Originally Posted by LindaCCC

Ken,

I would like to know more about the technique because I don't get sharp images from the kit lens on my Canon 300D.

Thanks very much,

Linda

Here you go, Linda:

1. Set your Focus icons - detach lens, (so you are adjusting focus on focus point, not image) - adjust dioptre (next to viewfinder) so focus points are sharply in focus. (easier against a white, or light background) Re-attach lens.

2. All modern cameras have Auto-focusing, which works very well, but there are times when you need to focus manually. For auto-focus to work properly it requires a certain amount of contrast, if the contrast isn’t adequate you will need to focus manually.[ NOTE: In your camera’s viewfinder, depending on camera-flagship models generally have many focusing spots, and lesser, entry-level dslr’s will have around 5 focusing spots. With lens wide open, any of these spots can be used for selecting where to auto focus-But, depending on maximum aperture of lens in use, the ones you are able to use get fewer. Top-of-the-line cameras will only have the centre spot usable at F8,and entry level cameras at F5.6, and less than that, even these single spots aren’t reliable.]
Actually it is more beneficial to set auto focus by the centre spot, then re-compose, rather than use the peripheral spots-The reason being that only the centre spot has vertical and horizontal pixel rows. This means that if you use the peripheral spots (top and bottom spots have horizontal pixels only and right and left spots have vertical pixels only) To focus, you must have a part of the scene crossing a line of pixels at 90 degrees, and the centre spot gives you a more accurate reading ,having both vertical and horizontal pixels) It will pay you to manually focus most of the time, for full control of the situation. For instance, if an unnoticed reed encroaches into your image, when your are shooting a swan at the lake, for instance, your lens may auto-focus on that reed, rendering your actual subject out of focus.

3.There are times, you will find when auto focus will fail to respond favourably-although auto focus is able to lock on to any subject, there are certain conditions where it may not be possible ,even when the indicator lights are on, and the shutter releases.

Subjects with low contrast
Solution: Focus on something the same distance as the subject you want to make an image of, then aim at that subject
Subjects that do not contain vertical lines
Solution: Hold camera vertically, lock focus, then switch to horizontal
Subjects in excessively bright light
Solution: Focus on something the same distance as the subject you want to make an image of, then aim at that subject
Two subjects at differing distances
Solution: Focus on something the same distance as the subject you want to make an image of, then aim at that subject, and re-compose
Subjects with repetitive patterns
Solution: Focus on something the same distance as the subject you want to make an image of, then aim at that subject, and recompose
High speed subjects at close range
Solution: focus on another subject at the same distance-to-subject distance first, then re-compose your frame

To ensure you are in focus, there, in the viewfinder, is the electronic rangefinder icon, that comes on when you are in focus. NOTE: Each lens has its “sweet-spot”, that is when the aperture and zoom length combine to give optimum sharpness- 18-55 mm zooms usually have this “sweet-spot” at the 35mm distance setting and 2 stops back from wide open. On a 70-300mm zoom the “sweet-spot” would be around 185-200mm aperture 2 stops back from widest.
Auto focus is good for situations where you cannot focus fast enough, manually, such as

sports and wildlife photography.
Depth of field appears to be the most confusing of focus elements. Depth of field is a range of acceptable sharpness in an image, from near to far. Three factors control Depth of field: Aperture: The wider the aperture, the shallower the depth of field. Focal length of lens, The longer the focal length of the lens, the shallower the depth of field will be. and Distance from subject, Landscape images have great depth of field, whereas Macro (extreme close-up) images have very shallow depth of field. Concerning depth of field, Hyperfocal distance seems to be even more confusing -Hyperfocal distance is a point of focus where at a certain aperture, Half the distance from that point to Infinity, (which starts at 30 feet, and extends to as far as you are able to see)) will be in acceptable focus, The best lenses for hyperfocal distance are 80mm or wider ; telephoto lenses, because of their relative short depth of field, are rarely used. (Prime lenses have a scale on them for this, zooms do not) Using a 18mm setting on your zoom lens at f11, Hyperfocal distance is somewhere around 5 feet (1500mm), so depth of field at this aperture would be from 2 1/2 feet ( 750mm) to infinity, when focused at 5 feet. A good guideline for great depth of field for landscapes is to use the bottom focusing marker in your DSLR viewfinder, (either horizontal, or vertical) as this will focus 1/3 of the way into the distance, (It is on the lower third imaginary “Rule of Thirds” gridline!) ,as is usually recommended. [ NOTE: Unless your camera has depth of field preview, looking through the viewfinder all will not be in focus, because your lens, until you press the shutter button to make the shot, will be open at full aperture.]

To avoid camera-shake, always use a sturdy tripod. When using lenses equipped with VR/IS (vibration reduction-Nikon/Image stabilisation-Canon), on a tripod you will need to turn off the anti-shake, or lens will still try to counteract vibration that isn‘t there,, and cause unwanted shake. If, for some reason you cannot use a tripod, use your self as one-
Feet at “T-Stance”, left hand supporting camera, elbow against ribs
Camera pressed against nose and brow
Right hand also elbow against ribs, index finger on shutter button
Set shooting mode to continuous, and “Roll” index finger on shutter button - First couple of shots will probably be blurred, but somewhere between 3-4 and 5 you should have a shake-free shot of the scene. ( When using zoom lenses longer than 200mm-I usually set ISO to 400, when hand-holding)

An alternative way to turn yourself into a tripod/monopod, is to:

1. Extend your left arm out in front of you, palm down.

2. Bend forearm back, so fingers just touch right shoulder

3. Bring right hand and arm up inside that triangle, resting edge of right hand on crook of bent left arm-pull right arm back, so left hand grips right forearm.

4. That’s the grip, and with camera held by right hand, with lens resting in crook of left elbow, press camera against brow and nose for stability. ( I hope this is clear to understand) ( Picture below)

© Kenneth William Caleno (Dip Phot) 2010

Regards, Ken

[daan05]

These things often require an answer more complicated than 'one solution'. Post processing to adjust levels, clean up artifacts, emphasis edges, hue, saturation, cropping, and/or other common photographic/darkroom techniques will often leave the final image looking 'razor sharp'. It is true that non-zoom (fixed focal) lenses can appear cleaner, but that may be more of a factor that those lenses are usually faster. As far as pricing on these lenses, the basic Canon 50mm (f1.8) is around USD $90.00. The f1.4 version (which every Canon photographer should have) is under USD $400.00 (Many pro's say the f1.2 is not worth the price for the small amount of extra quality you get). There are a range of longer lenses from third parties that are very good to excellent for under USD $600.00. Remember though, you will have to move using them instead of 'zooming'.
One last note: The Canon 30D has a 1.6 factor (APS-C sensor). So the 270mm lens gave you an equivalent image of a 400mm lens.
My personal opinion is; hue correct and lighten up the faces (bring out the shadow detail) and lower the luminance of the floor behind them and you will be pretty happy with the picture. I think you have something really good there, just needs a little ppl (post processing love). If you really want to push it, research tutorials about using hi-pass (or maybe unsharp mask in photoshop).

[daan05]

Linda,
Sharpening, whether in the camera, or post-processing, is a digital manipulation of the image. Without getting too technical, the contrast between pixels is adjusted to make an appearance of sharpness. Easiest way to see that is take a picture and keep sharping it. After a while you will see a ghostly white outline around the dark objects.
It works to some extent, but will not actually 'sharpen' an out-of-focus image. This is why many digital photographers recommend shooting in 'raw' mode with neutral or faithful settings. JPG is a pre-processed image that comes out of your camera. The computer chip in your camera makes some choices for you on what to use and what to throw away. Raw mode, on the other hand, returns all the sensor image information, making it available to you to manipulate based on your own judgement. Same goes for in-camera compensation settings. It is probably a matter of how much you want to work the final image.
To go with my other post, you could shoot jpg and get great images by thinking out what would be done in post processing and adjusting for that before the picture is taken (standing where the light is perfect etc.) Either way involves sweat, it is how we like to sweat that determines the method.
Heck, if it was easy, everyone would be a fabulous photographer.

[Raoul Isidro]

There is also timing. There will be portions of the play where the actors sort of freeze and stay put, and that's the right timing for a clear shot.

[pasoviennese]

Originally Posted by natek313

Stock photography is basically licensing out your photos so that people can use them. People pay a fee for a photo they find and like. This eliminates them having to hire a photographer.

For an example, look around Stock Photography: Search Royalty Free Images & Photos.

Thanks for the link! The photos in there are amazing!
I'm no where near that good (neither is my photos that sharp).

I mainly print my photos out at no greater than 8x10, ususally at the standard 6x4 and give them to friends as a gift. People LOVE seeing photo of themselves dance.

[pasoviennese]

Dear Everyone,

Sorry I don't have time to reply to individual posts, but I did read every single one of them. Thank you so much for your input, it has been extremely helpful!

Special mention to Ken, the photos of the birds you posted were amazingly sharp! Does show that with the right skills, one can produce razor sharp images with consumer grade lens.

Interesting fact learnt about the camera auto-focusing point too. Too often I use peripheral focus points because sometimes the focus creeps when I re-compose my shot after focusing using the centre point. Any suggestions for that?

Thanks again!

[pasoviennese]

Thought I'd post a sharpness test just to give you an idea of the lens sharpness.

I took this shot in a dim lit room because most ballroom dance competitions are held in dim room with spot lights pointing at the dance floor.

I used 270mm because that' the focal length I often use to get a tighter crop on the subject, other wise it gets too busy with all the other dancers on the floor. At 270mm, maximum aperture on the lens is f6.3

I decreased the exposure time by 1 stop, from 1/125 to 1/250. Maybe this is the predominant reason for my images not being as sharp as they could. At 270mm, the lens on my 30D is an equivalent of 430mm.

Because I decreased the exposure time, I had to increase ISO to 1600. Not ideal for 30D cause it doesn't deal with noise that well.

Well, here's the photo (centre point focus)

[Raoul Isidro]

For all it's worth about sharpness, the simple and cheap Canon 18-55mm IS F3.5-5.6 is SHARP! And the macro details are awesome!
Also, the Nikon 55-200mm F4-5.6 VR is a fantastic zoom lens with admirable sharpness.
I use both lenses and In my experience they give great value for money.
Cheers

[pasoviennese]

Originally Posted by Raoul Isidro

For all it's worth about sharpness, the simple and cheap Canon 18-55mm IS F3.5-5.6 is SHARP! And the macro details are awesome!
Also, the Nikon 55-200mm F4-5.6 VR is a fantastic zoom lens with admirable sharpness.
I use both lenses and In my experience they give great value for money.
Cheers

I think I'm a bit lazy when I decided to get one lense that does the two combine. Tamron 18-270mm F3.5-6.3

[LindaCCC]

Wow! Thanks, Ken! That is a lot of information that will help me. Sorry I took so long to get back here... for some reason I never got an email that someone had replied to this thread (I got one for earlier replies, clicked through, and then never got another one).
I will print all the answers (thanks to everyone else as well!) and study them carefully.
I really appreciate this. Thanks!
Linda