Shaking..... Too Much

[reginamaldonado]

I have a Rebel XT. Shoot with canon EF 18-55 and a canon macro EF 100mm f/2.8.

Latlely when I take a pictures I am getting nothing but blury images. I have

taken into consideration my subject movement, using a tripod, and my settings.

Which I think it may fall in to area of the settings. Specificaly, shooting in

Manuel, at times TV or AV. Could it be possible that since I have to choose the

correct setting that I am just off on the sutter speed? I try to keep my ISO

Low nothing over 4oo. The rest is just what I think might be good. Maybe this

isn't the best. Anyone with some advice on what I should try, practice or read

on what maybe the problem?

Also, another broad question to ask...with not alot of specifics but,my

question is how do you get the WHOLE picture to come out clear not just one

specific area? Example on a buliding? if my camera is just picking up the

center and blurs out the rest what am I doing wrong?

 

Oh be gentle on the critiques....

[hakon_soreide]

The old rule of thumb for handheld shots is a shutter speed of 1 second divided by focal length - for 35mm, so for 1.6 crop, that must be multiplied.<p>

That means that at 55mm - 88mm equivalent field of view, nothing slower than 1/90s - to be assured of a steady shot almost every time, that is.<p>

For macro, that rule doesn't apply anymore since smaller movements of the lens and camera means a much bigger movement of the image. I've not seen any rules of thumb for 1:1 shots, but for handheld, I'd estimate adding two stops or so, so 1/400 for handheld shots with 100mm.<p>

Often overlooked, and important on a tripod too, is mirror shake, which rears its ugly head particularly between 1/60s and 1s - and if you get shutter speeds in that area, use mirror lock-up.<p>

To avoid subject movement, it naturally depends on the subject and its speed of motion. For subjects in motion, I'd say that anything slower than 1/125 is basically useless unless you want the blur.<p>

Now, to avoid getting shutter speeds in the danger-zone, it's actually better to increase ISO. I'd rather have an ISO 1600 sharp image with a bit of noise that can be reduced than an ISO 400 blurry shot that I just have to delete.

[Matt Laur]

On the last question you're asking, can you post an example? In general terms, getting more of the image in focus (depth-wise) means shooting with a narrower aperture (a higher f-stop number, say f/11 or greater when in comes to buildings... but there are countless other variables there, like the type of lens you're using, your distance to the subject, and more).

 

On your first question, seeing an example would almost immediately help us figure out if it's motion blur, DoF complexities, or a focusing problem. Sometimes, that picture IS worth a thousand words!

[hakon_soreide]

Oh, and if your camera gets the centre sharp but the corners blurry, it's a combination of lens limitations and a large aperture (small f-number). The optimum aperture for ultimate sharpness is usually f8 or f11, and at those, you'd need an awful lens to get significant corner blurring.<p>

That said, I have heard rumours that the 18-55 kit lens - assuming that's what you have - might not be the sharpest optic around...

[michael s.]

First, just to make certain that your autofocus (if you are relying upon autofocus) isn't malfunctioning, I'd probably try a few snaps in fairly good light with the camera set to P(rogram). Check to make certain that your camera body and lens are set appropriately, and that the lens is mounted securely. See if the camera is confirming focus at the selected points. Half-press of your shutter should lock focus. Try using the center sensor as the only active point. See if those test shots are sharp.

 

Assuming autofocus is working, then blur throughout your photo is a byproduct of subject motion, camera shake, etc., the factors you've identified.

 

Sharpness in the middle (presumably the focus area) with blur elsewhere, again assuming no malfunction, is a product of depth of field. For quick reference, the larger the aperture (f/2.8 is largest on your macro lens), the narrower the depth of field ... and the greater the resulting blur in the foreground and the background. Your distance to subject also has an impact. Your macro lens 'specializes' in permitting you to get close focus and will blur the background considerably, depending upon how you've set up the shot. Of course the blurred background is desirable on some shots, but not every shot.

 

You asked about something to read. I recall that Bryan Peterson's book "Understanding Exposure" (possibly available at your library, or if not, in paperback at a bookstore or Amazon) was worth my time as I was getting a sense of things. Also, I've said before that the most important $85 I've ever spent on photography was the tuition on an Intro class I took at a local community college several years ago.

 

Good luck.

[reginamaldonado]

Thank you for all the great answers. I will try them out and see. Michael S.- just took a class... was wonderful Thanks. I will also post a picture here in a couple of min....

[charles_stobbs3]

You haven't said how large your image is. From looking at projected 35mm slides I learned 1/250 sec is the minimum for consistently sharp (hand held) images.

[emptyspaces]

Switch to green tea. And shoot at an aperture of f/8 or f/11.