sharpness issues... Still!!!

<p>hi all<br>

again...<br>

i asked the same question about 18 months ago and got some great advice.<br>

Back then i noticed my photographs were lacking a sharpness/clarity and almost seems slightly out of focus.<br>

I was advised to invest in a lens hood, remove polarising filter (unless needed), watch shutter speed, make sure lens clean, run photos through auto contrast + unsharp mask in Photoshop----i put all these recommendations into practice</p>

<p>I recently came back from a trip to south america. The photos look perfect when viewed on the camera and i put them all through auto contrast + unsharp mask in Photoshop. But when viewed on my laptop they just don't seem right!!--especially this time as i had my samsung galaxy 2 8gb camera phone with me and often took the same picture with both my phone and camera (eos 450d 17-85mmnd the guy had a quick look at the settings and cleaned the lens a bit and said it looked fine to him.....<br>

just wondering do you guys have any suggestions?-- I don't have another lens i can test on the camera body to see if it is the body or the lens that is the problem--or is it operator error rather than equipment error!!--any advice greatly appreciated!!</p>

<p>http://www.photo.net/photo/16634653<br>

http://www.photo.net/photo/16634652<br>

http://www.photo.net/photo/16634637<br>

http://www.photo.net/photo/16634638<br>

http://www.photo.net/photo/16634636<br>

http://www.photo.net/photo/16634635<br>

http://www.photo.net/photo/16634633<br>

http://www.photo.net/photo/16634634<br>

http://www.photo.net/photo/16634614<br>

http://www.photo.net/photo/16634616<br>

http://www.photo.net/photo/16634613<br>

http://www.photo.net/photo/16634612</p>

I don't see so much in the way of sharpness issues as I do color saturation. Your camera phone is really over saturating the colors, which

is part of the reason they look brighter/sharper. It's also almost over-sharpening them. Look at the mountains in the phone photos--they're

unnaturally blue. You can mimic that to some extent in Photoshop with your DSLR photos if you shot RAW, which gives you a lot more

freedom to make changes.

Also, it appears that many of these shots might have been taken in the middle of the day. The best landscape shots, where you get the

beautiful golden light and more depth in your highlights and shadows, are taken around 45 minutes to an hour after sunrise or before

sunset.

<p>hi Devon-thanks for the reply--yea i know the phone is over saturating the photos--its just the way the app "camera 360" messes around a bit with the colours (and sharpness)--but ignoring the over saturation/sharpening the Canon pictures just seem out of focus/unsharp to me--maybe i am expecting too much?</p>

<p>P&S cameras sharpen a lot, often too much. If you want comparable sharpening from a DSLR, you would have to strengthen the amount of sharpening in postprocessing.</p>

<p>When I first switched to digital, 5 years ago, I had this same experience. I had photos from a P&S and a Rebel, and the former were sharper. I thought something was wrong with the DSLR. There was nothing wrong at all. I just did not understand that the developing algorithms in the two cameras were different.</p>

<p>If you really want control of this, shoot raw and study the various ways of sharpening in postprocessing. There are a number of options, the most common of which is unsharp mask.</p>

 

<p>Was a tripod used?</p>

<p>Have you tried NOT using the unsharp feature? I've had probelms with it balling up the whole works. There are no magic formulas in Photoshop or anything else. You have to bust a gut finding out what will work for you.<br>

I think you might be fixing everything on your race car except a flat tire.</p>

<p>So a couple of questions, were you shooting wide open and as Jeff asked, did you have a tripod? The initial suggestions were good (keeping your lens clean, watching your shutterspeed, etc) but for truly sharp photos you want to invest in a tripod and stop down your lens. Those two things will help your photography unbelievably. Especially for landscapes. Now for the processing, I understand that auto contrast takes no time or thought but a simple Curves adjustment will allow you boost the contrast and saturation with a single action but more importantly you can adjust it to suit each image. Now there's also the fact that a phone's camera shooting at f2.8 has a dof more similar to a dslr shooting at f8-f11.</p>

<p>I don't see any issues with sharpness. I think you could work with settings in camera as to sharpening, contrast and saturation. Post processing via software would be an even better solution. The attached was adjusted by Color, Contrast and Levels (all auto) in Photoshop and some Unsharp mask applied.</p><div></div>

<p>I agree, your pictures are not sharp. Given the focal length and shutter speeds used on some of them they should be sharper at the size your have uploaded them. I'm not sure what is the issue, but it should be easy enough to test out your system.<br>

First get a good sturdy tripod and take the same shot with and without it. Shoot at f/5.6 and see how the focal point looks. See if the tripod shot is sharp. If it is you know it's your holding technique. Are your hands steady? If you don't see much difference between a handheld and a tripod shot I would then suspect your lens. Maybe it's not focusing where you think it is. Or it's defective. Has it been dropped?<br>

Also, were these shot in RAW or JPG? If JPG what settings are you using? I think you should always shoot in RAW mode, but if you insist on JPG I think you need to do lots of experimenting to get the camera settings just right.<br>

Also, it seems that many of your shots are at f/11 to f/14. These small apertures will be slightly softer than the optimal (probably f/5.6 to f/8). But I don't think that's the main issue you are having.</p>

<p>A shutter speed of 1/60s will most likely be causing camerashake if you don't use a tripod or some other kind of support for the camera.</p>

<p>Do you have your camera set to release without having obtained focus?</p>

<p>Can you say something about what you do to focus when you are shooting landscapes?</p>

<p>Well, this data is for<br>

<a href="../photo/16634636" rel="nofollow">http://www.photo.net/photo/16634636</a><br>

Original Date/Time {0x9003} = 2012:10:24 19:40:26<br />Digitization Date/Time {0x9004} = 2012:10:24 19:40:26<br />Components Configuration {0x9101} = 0x01,0x02,0x03,0x00 / YCbCr<br />Shutter Speed Value (APEX) {0x9201} = 368640/65536<br />Shutter Speed (Exposure Time) = 1/49.35 second<br />Aperture Value (APEX) {0x9202} = 417792/65536<br />Aperture = ƒ/9.11</p>

<p>1/50 sec is a "lot" on the slow side for handheld shots if you aren't using excellent technique.</p>

 

<p>It just looks like your Canon shots aren't sharpened as much as your camera phone shots.<br>

In general all digital shots need sharpening, it's just the nature of the sensor. Just sharpen until you get the look you want. The only drawback to that is the more you sharpen the more you also increase the noise, so you have to strive for a balance. But usually web photos are so small that noise rarely is a problem.<br>

And just to repeat what others have said, in order to maximize sharpness use either a tripod or high shutter speed (at least 2x the focal length you're shooting at), keep the f stop to f8 or less to minimize diffraction, use the best aperture for your lens, usually around f5.6-8, and always check the autofocus to make sure it actually focused accurately and on where you wanted it to.</p>

<p id="yui_3_7_2_20_1354110468255_49">hi all, thanks so much for the input</p>

<p id="yui_3_7_2_20_1354110468255_49"> </p>

<p id="yui_3_7_2_20_1354110468255_49">Dan M -- i applied unsharp mask in photoshop to all the photos--all shot in jpg format though--to be honest i see a big difference when using autocontrast in photoshop--the unsharp mask function doesn't produce any noticeable difference</p>

<p id="yui_3_7_2_20_1354110468255_49"> </p>

<p id="yui_3_7_2_20_1354110468255_49">Jeff--no tripod used--i have IS on the camera and i tend to TRY shoot at at least 1/focal length --and i consider myself to have a steady hand..... Most of the photos i provided are landscape photos because they show clearly what i am trying to get at--but even non landscape photos (buildings, people shots) suffer from the same problem -- must try upload some later to illustrate</p>

<p id="yui_3_7_2_20_1354110468255_49"> </p>

<p id="yui_3_7_2_20_1354110468255_49">Ryan--the aperture varied-- for eg the jeep pic; f11, 1/100 sec --horse pic the same setting --iso 100(auto)</p>

<p id="yui_3_7_2_20_1354110468255_49">pic of cow and horse on hill : f/4 1/400 sec</p>

<p id="yui_3_7_2_20_1354110468255_49">pic of colonial village square: f7.1 1/160 sec</p>

<p id="yui_3_7_2_20_1354110468255_49">So all of them vary to be honest</p>

<p id="yui_3_7_2_20_1354110468255_49">The curves adjustment you mention?--that's available in photoshop</p>

<p id="yui_3_7_2_20_1354110468255_49">In of the photos i also increased the saturation, brought out bit of shadows, reduced highlights, increased/decreased brightness using corel paint shop pro</p>

<p id="yui_3_7_2_20_1354110468255_49"> </p>

<p id="yui_3_7_2_20_1354110468255_49">Ray--i have to say your photo does "look a lot better" than mine--- i must try this curves function--that alters sharpness? I tried Autocolour in PS before but didn't like the results.</p>

<p id="yui_3_7_2_20_1354110468255_49">Maybe as you say i could alter the sat/contrast/sharpening options on the camera --at the moment i have them all set to the base line setting</p>

<p id="yui_3_7_2_20_1354110468255_49"> </p>

<p id="yui_3_7_2_20_1354110468255_49">L.G --yes i will try what you suggested , shooting with and without tripod and sharing-but i honestly think my grip is very steady and should not make any difference especially seeing as i have IS and many pics shot faster than 1/160 sec.</p>

<p id="yui_3_7_2_20_1354110468255_49">Camera and lens have backpacked with me quite a bit, so yes it is possible it could have been knocked somewhere, sometime..</p>

<p id="yui_3_7_2_20_1354110468255_49">Have had the lens maybe 3 years but just thought the issue became an issues about 18 months ago--but maybe that's because i paid more attention to the results... The lens was bought second hand on ebay..</p>

<p id="yui_3_7_2_20_1354110468255_49"> </p>

<p id="yui_3_7_2_20_1354110468255_49">I rarely shoot in RAW--i am of the opinion that i am not at a level to produce any noticeable difference in the end results by doing so... I shoot in Av mode 99% of the time i would say -- have used RAW, but only to try HDR images in photomatix</p>

<p id="yui_3_7_2_20_1354110468255_49"> </p>

<p id="yui_3_7_2_20_1354110468255_49">Ann--i have to camera set to beep when it has focused--normally when button half pressed--then i fully depress the button</p>

<p id="yui_3_7_2_20_1354110468255_49">I would normally focus on something half way into the scene--but not always--i probably focused on the 2 horses in the pic provided and hoped the f/11 setting would mean the rest of scene was in focus--having said that i have been reading recently that it's probably best to focus at a point 1/3 into scene for landscapes...Also i would normally be in AV mode and would increase the aperture towards f/22 whilst at least keeping the shutter faster or equal to 1/focal length</p>

<p id="yui_3_7_2_20_1354110468255_49"> </p>

<p id="yui_3_7_2_20_1354110468255_49">Bob --probably a bit slow alright but i thought i would "get away with it" with steady hand and IS..</p>

<p id="yui_3_7_2_20_1354110468255_49"> </p>

<p id="yui_3_7_2_20_1354110468255_49">Mike--so for landscape photos there is no advantage to trying to get close to f/22 to get at much as possible in focus? Would you use f 5.6-8 for landscapes?</p>

<p id="yui_3_7_2_20_1354110468255_49"> </p>

<p id="yui_3_7_2_20_1354110468255_49">Does curves in PS sharpen the photo?---i tried high pass sharpen in corel paint shop pro but it over does it in my opinion--i will try set the camera setting to automatically sharpen the pictures i think</p>

<p id="yui_3_7_2_20_1354110468255_49"> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>Jeff--no tripod used--i have IS on the camera and i tend to TRY shoot at at least 1/focal length --and i consider myself to have a steady hand..... Most of the photos i provided are landscape photos because they show clearly what i am trying to get at--but even non landscape photos (buildings, people shots) suffer from the same problem -- must try upload some later to illustrate</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

The problem here is that this is the wrong way to do an analysis of sharpness of equipment because technique is an issue. You need to try it on a tripod, with IS turned off, and with a reasonable test target. Otherwise, there is always the possibility that technique, regardless of what you think about yours, is always a factor and will reduce sharpness.<br>

</p>

<blockquote>

<p>increase the aperture towards f/22</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

Apertures closer to f22 will reduce sharpness.<br>

</p>

<p>Diffraction starts to overcome the dof advantage around f8-11 depending on the pixel density of your sensor (for the 24mp Nex 7 I use I can see it past f5.6), so if you're needing greater dof past f8 and nothing is moving (i.e. a still nature scene) then focus stacking will give you better results. </p>

<p>Seems to me that you should be using your two tools, camera and editor, as they should be used whereas the cellphone assumes that you don't have an editor and does it itself :-)<br>

I picked two shots at random, seashore and valley of trees and both came up 'nicely' with a little bit of sharpening. The DSLR maker assumes that you have an editing programme so deliberately produces a less than razor sharp image in case you don't share the current pre-occupation with razor sharp images. [ or maybe to encourage you to buy more expensive lenses to overcome this effect perhap :-) ]<br>

Three of the four images that got me first place in my club's competitions in the past year were over sharpened to my way of thinking.</p>

<p>hi</p>

<p>Jeff, i will try some tests with and without the tripod in the coming weeks to see if i can notice any difference<br>

JC, what function did you use to sharpen them? -- can it be done as a batch process to all photos?---is it recommended in general to apply some degree of sharpening/sat/contrast in the camera settings before shooting or is it best to apply these post shooting in Photoshop etc?--or is it just personal preference?</p>

<p>cheers!</p>

<p>Tom, I think if you are going to be applying sharpening and other adjustments in a batch operation you would really be better off shooting in RAW mode. Then use Lightroom to apply the settings and export the files. I see JPG mainly as a way to get files that are ready to use out of the camera. The quality won't be as good as RAW, but it's a bit easier for some tasks. It does however require that you setup your camera to make the changes you want as it's saving the file.</p>

<p>The sharpening built into Lightroom is much better than what the cameras do. Same with the color corrections and exposure adjustments.</p>

<p>But first test the camera on a tripod at optimal apertures. Use Live View to focus if your camera has it.</p>

<p>Hi Tom - I had the same sort of issue. I use a Canon T2i. I wanted crystal clarity, since the final objective was to print my photos, but no matter what I tried I couldn't seem to get them sharp enough. And the larger the photo, the more noticable the softness was.</p>

<p>One thing that really helped me, and that I would recommend to you, was that I purchased a prime lens. There is something inherent in the optics of the zoom lenses that come with the cameras these days that just don't give the extreme clarity that you and I are looking for. I also notice that the zooms my camera came with seem to give my photos a faint grayish cast as well. (At least to my eye).</p>

<p>I bought myself Canon's cheap little 50mm 1.8 lens (about $100) and have found it to be a godsend, sharpness wise. Verrry sharp, and great color. I took the photo at this link with it:</p>

<p><a href="../photo/16636974&size=md">http://www.photo.net/photo/16636974&size=md</a></p>

<p>The picture of the yacht is straight out of the camera, with no post-processing at all. And even if you click on the large version, it stays sharp. It's a great little lens. The drawback of course, is that it's not as convenient as a zoom and you have a small field of view. I'm probably going to end up buying a wider angle prime lens to use as well, just to cover my bases.</p>

<p>Anyway, hope this helps.</p>

 

<p>hi again</p>

<p>L G -- when you import the RAW files into lightroom is there an auto sharpen function somewhere?<br>

I will try try the tripod solution and then the internal camera settings-- but now after the feedback on here i think it's the lack of internal camera settings/post processing that's my problem--well i am hoping that, cos other wise my lens is malfunctioning..</p>

<p>Hi Richard -- i already have that 50mm lens you are talking about-- i haven't used it in year to be honest-- i like the 17-85mm lens as i like the range , especially the wide angle (although i just read last night on a forum that 17-24 probably sould be "avoided" as it suffers a lot with distortion--also read that the "sweet spot" on this lens is f5.6 to f8 -- these are two things i will have to focus on in future i think... </p>

 

<p>Tom, yes you can save a set of development settings and apply those to all files imported. But keep in mind Lightroom doesn't actually edit the files. It works by importing the files as they are. Then the changes are stored in the lightroom catalog. So you see the changes in Lightroom, but they are not actually used to modify your file. From Lightroom you can then export a copy of the file with the settings applied, or directly open it in Photoshop (in which case it will be pulled back into Lightroom when you save). Because of this flow there really isn't a good reason not to shoot RAW, as the workflow will be the same between the two, but the results will be better with RAW (and more adjustments are possible).<br>

I suggest you pull down the free trial from Adobe and give it a shot. Try shooting the same images with both RAW and JPG to see what is possible with each.</p>

<p>Tom, I have found that DxO does an excellent job in some of my RAW conversions. I have a Nikon 18-200mm which is full of compromises optically, but DxO does a great job in overcoming some of these. The key though is to shoot in RAW in the first place. The advice not to shoot above f11 due to diffraction is sound. </p>

<p>Just a question but have you done a comparison between shooting with auto focus and then compare that to manual focus?</p>

<p>Hi Simon-- i have downloaded a trail version of that program and will give it a shot over the next few days--all my photos are in jpg format though--but maybe it will help </p>

<p>Mark--haven't tried it yet--i am going to go out maybe tomorrow or monday and try a few snaps with and without the tripod---will also try a few manual and auto focus shots -- will shoot some landscape scene or any other you recommend for this test?</p>

<p> </p>

<p>You could download a lens test sheet, mount the camera on a tripod, auto focus the lens test sheet and see how sharp your image is. This method is a good way to see how the auto focus is working and where the focus is happening, ie, foreground, background or at the focal point you choose. Here is link to one I have used complete with instructions on its use.<br>

<br /> http://regex.info/blog/photo-tech/focus-chart</p>