Why Do My Wide Angle Shots Look Weird + Out Of Focus?

[julie_jagt]

<p>I've recently bought a 50mm 1.8, out of all the lenses I've rented it's been my favorite so far. However, sometimes I feel like my pictures look weird. <br>

<br />So I'll take a tight shot of a subject and it looks amazing. So I'll move back a bit and get a middle shot, it still looks good. Then I'll go back even further to get a wide shot and it looks completely out of focus. I'm trying to figure out the problem here. Is it:<br>

1. The 50mm is just not good for this type of shot? But then I'll read other blogs and watch videos and they say they use the 50mm most of the time, so then I'm like, why can't I?<br>

2. I'm leaving my aperture at 1.8. Could this be the reason why its not focusing when I'm so far away? Should I maybe move it to a 2.8 or something? would that help?</p>

<p>I'm still new at this and trying to figure everything out. I still get confused and overwhelmed at times. But this also leads to another question about apertures and lenses. how do you shoot wide open while still keeping everything in focus? And are there certain distances that work best with different lenses. Like if I'm using a 50mm should I stand at X distance, and when I use a 35mm stand at X distance? I'm still very confused with the whole DOF and focal length jazz when it's spoken very technically. So if you can, can you dumb it down a bit :)</p>

<p>Just for a reference, I am using the Nikon D5000 so it is a crop camera (not sure if that has anything to do with my issues) and it is the Nikkor 50mm 1.8G lens.<br>

<br />Any feedback and tips would be greatly appreciated!</p>

[Jochen_S]

<p>Julie, you might be unlucky that for which reason ever your lens does not focus to infinity?<br>

If so, there is no other way than sending it in, preferably together with your camera. and maybe even all your lenses describing the problem clearly asking the techs to just fix that one lens if its faulty the entire kit if they have to.<br>

Try double checking. Focus by hand at infinity and try to pictue a fence or such vanishing into the horizon (50m should be fine) and later determine where the infinity setting is according to which fence element appears sharp. of course do the shot wide open or do a series at different apertures to figure out where infinity becomes sharp.<br>

I have zero Nikon experience but guess that once in a while faulty gear gets shipped.<br>

If the lens works with manual focus for infinity try to read up how to adjust back and front focusing for specific lenses in your camera (some have an option for that) maybe yours is tweked into the utterly wrong direction by accident?<br>

Good luck!</p>

[Ray House]

<p> Julie, there are several issues that you are addressing and you have asked some good questions. A good start for you would be to click on the learning tab at the top of this page. Also, I think it would be very helpful if you could post a photo that shows the problem you are having. I think you might be having issues with "Depth of Field" (DOF), but I doubt there is a problem with your camera. Post a photo...</p>

[colin carron]

<blockquote>

<p>I'm leaving my aperture at 1.8. Could this be the reason why its not focusing when I'm so far away?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I think you have your answer there. When you want to get more of the depth of the scene in focus you need to adjust your aperture from f1.8 down to maybe f8 or so. This is called <em>depth of field</em>. It just means that more of the depth of the picture will look in focus. <br /> A large aperture like 1.8 only gives a very shallow depth of field so background and foreground will appear out of focus. As you make the aperture smaller through to say 5.6 more of the depth of the scene comes into focus and if you go on to 16 or 22 almost everything will appear in focus throughout the depth of the scene.<br /> This depth of field effect is used creatively by photographers so that for a portrait you might use say f 2.8 of f4 to make the background out of focus and concentrate attention on the face. For say, a landscape where you might want everything in focus you might set an aperture of f16 or more.<br /> As you adjust your aperture from 1.8 downwards the camera will need to set a slower shutter speed to get the same exposure effect. If you are using an auto mode the camera will do this for you but you may then find as the shutter speed gets longer that you start to get camera shake. In that case you need to adjust the ISO speed upwards to compensate.<br /> Most photography is a matter of juggling those three things : aperture (adjustable size of lens hole), shutter speed (length of time the light has to get through the lens and ISO speed (how quickly the camera records the light coming through the lens). It is the choices we make here which are at the heart of camera technique.<br /> It seems complicated at first but if you try out different combinations of these settings and read the relevant pages of your camera manual the mists will start to clear. Best of luck!</p>

<p> </p>

[colin carron]

<p>Just as a further comment about shooting modes, as the camera behaves a bit differently when different modes (top dial marked Auto, P, S, A, M etc). If you have Auto or P (programmed)) set the camera will pretty much adjust the aperture, shutter and (optionally) ISO speed for you. With A (Aperture Priority Auto) the camera lets you set the lens aperture then adjusts the shutter for you. It will also adjust ISO speed in this mode if you have Auto ISO set.<br /> While you are getting the hang of aperture I suggest you set A mode (aperture priority auto). Then you can set the aperture and the camera will try its best to do the rest. In this mode you can try out the different aperture settings and see what difference it makes. Having Auto ISO set (see manual!) will make things easier to start you off.</p>

<p>Let us know if this is helping you get somewhere.</p>

[SCL]

<p>To add to the comments - most consumer lenses aren't optimized for sharpness wide open and often are rather soft, to sharpen things up one should stop down about 2 f/stops. Also a 50mm lens isn't a wide angle lens, and on a cropped sensor camera it actually produces a shot more like a mild telephoto. You should test your lens and see if it is the issue on longer shots or it is user error. Place your camera on a tripod if you have one, or a firm steady surface if you don't. Make sure your focus spot in the camera is on a distant object and stop down the diaphragm 1-2 stops. Now take a shot. If it is still out of focus (not on your LCD on the back of the camera - on your computer screen with a touch of sharpening added in your processing software) your lens may not be focusing properly and you should have your dealer check it out; if everything is fine, you probably are introducing introducing inadvertant movement into your shots and need to practice your shooting technique</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>The point Colin makes about depth of field is important, and one of the key elements to learn in photography. If you ask: how can you shoot wide open and keep everything in focus, the answer is really: you cannot. You'll have to change aperture.<br /> Stephen is right about closing down, but as it happens, the 50 f/1.8G is a very decent performer wide open. Personally (and I own the lens and use it frequently), I do not think it is the cause of what you experience. And as you've found out, it does work properly when you're at closer distances. And as it happens, that result of your testing makes everything more complicated.<br /> A bit more theory on depth of field: the shorter the distance between you and the subject, the less depth of field you will have. So, the close range shots you make, have <em>less</em> depth of field, and therefore, more of the photo will look out of focus, and focussing correctly is harder. While if you move back, the depth of field increases, and so more of the photo should appear to be in focus. The result you find is the exact opposite, which is weird.</p>

<p>Thinking out loud, this could be two things:</p>

<ul>

<li>You did not re-focus between shots; possibly the lens is set to M instead of M/A on the switch on the side of its barrel;</li>

<li>The lens you've rented has an issue and cannot focus at infinity.</li>

</ul>

<p>The first one is easy to check. When you use the lens, and change the distance towards the subject, before making the shot you should see the distance on the distance scale (on the lens itself) change. When making a photo at long distances, check if the distance indicated on that window is indeed a lot (or at infinity, which looks like an 8 on its side).</p>

<p>From your description, you seem to mix up between focus distance and focal length of a lens. The focus distance is the distance between your camera, and the subject you put in focus. The focal length of a lens is a whole different thing. Focal length "determines" how wide an angle your view is - from extremely wide panoramic view (wide angle lenses, focal length on a D5000 between 8 and 18mm), to normal regular views (from about 18 to 40mm) to small angles that show a smaller part of a scene, or make things far away seem close, "zoomed in" (telelenses; focal lengths between 50 and 800mm). So, do note your 50mm lens will never make a wide angle shot; it simply isn't a wide angle lens.<br /> A zoomlens can change its focal length between a certain range (i.e. 18 to 55mm); a lens like the 50mm you tried only has one focal length. In both cases, though, the focus distance can still be changed from infinity to a much shorter distance (depending on the lens model how close you can focus; for the 50mm f/1.8 is't around 45cm). So, there aren't specific distances that work best with specific lenses, but different focal lengths will give different views on the same scene.</p>

[William Michael]

<blockquote>

<p>Post a photo... <em>[of the issue that is concerning you]</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>+1<br>

Also in the sample image that you post please note the EXIF details and (if you can) what AF Focus Point was active.</p>

<p>WW</p>

<p> </p>

[julie_jagt]

<p>Of course I can't find the photos when I need them...but I've been thinking it over, and I think it may have been an issue with lighting and not focusing properly. I still get a bit nervous and feel like I have to rush things and I think I need to learn and take it slow each time. And yes, Ray, I think I'm still having trouble completely understanding DOF. Thanks for all your help! :)</p>

[julie_jagt]

<p>Colin, yes that helps a bunch! I already do shoot in full manual mode so I'm still juggling with getting all my settings correct, but I think I'm almost there. I try to practice a bit each day. I feel kind of silly for posting this question because I feel like I already knew the answer, I just felt like I needed a second opinion.<br>

<br />Stephen, thanks so much for your tip, I'll make sure to try that out!<br>

<br />Wouter: "The first one is easy to check. When you use the lens, and change the distance towards the subject, before making the shot you should see the distance on the distance scale (on the lens itself) change. When making a photo at long distances, check if the distance indicated on that window is indeed a lot (or at infinity, which looks like an 8 on its side)." - this I did not know, and thank you!! I think you understood more of what I was having troubles with. Just so I can understand more clearly (so sorry I don't have photos to explain what I mean so I'll try my best to explain) Let's say it's a vertical shot, three grids across, and four down and I wanted my subject in the bottom left "grid" if I used the 50mm I should have an aperture of say 8? Or would it be more typical to use say a 35mm or a 24mm? Sorry for all the questions, I just want to make sure I fully understand. I really appreciate the help and I hope I explained myself well enough.</p>

<p>Once again, thank you so much to all of you! Your feedback truly means a lot and I appreciate the time you take to read this and help a sista out! :)</p>

 

[William Michael]

<blockquote>

<p>Of course I can't find the photos when I need them...but I've been thinking it over, and I think it may have been an issue with lighting and <strong>not focusing properly.</strong> I still get a bit nervous and feel like I have to rush things and <strong>I think I need to learn and take it slow each time.</strong></p>

</blockquote>

<p>I am not a mind reader but one of my good guesses would be that it is not about lighting but rather that an outer AF point nabbed focus on something that was NOT the MAIN Subject.</p>

<p>Also - YES - do not rush.</p>

<p>WW</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Julie, not quite sure whether I understand your last question: where to position your subject within the frame is independent of focal length or aperture. The only problem I can see with that is how to ensure you focus on this subject. Now, it may sound backwards, but try focussing manually, using the viewfinder to see when the object you want to be sharp in focus is in focus, and then make the photo. It could be that your problem is caused by the AF mode you are using, but as I'm not sure I'm reading your question right, I might be wrong.</p>

<p>Do you have the normal 18-55 lens that usually comes with the camera? It might be worth using that one for a while, so it'll be at least clear what the difference would be between 35, 24 and 50 mm.</p>

[William Michael]

<blockquote>

<p>"It could be that your problem is caused by the AF mode you are using"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes. Please see my last response posted one minute before yours. I am thinking that Julie may have all AF points active and she is getting intermittent good and poor results.</p>

<p>Maybe Julie could use <strong>Centre Point Only AF</strong> and frames the Subject in the centre of the frame, as a beginning step.</p>

<p>WW</p>

 

[James G. Dainis]

"<I>... I wanted my subject in the bottom left "grid" if I used the 50mm I should have an aperture of say 8? Or would it be more typical to use say a 35mm or a 24mm?"</I><P>

 

The focal length (mm) of the lens determines the magnification that one gets. If a person's face were in that grid and filled the grid with a 50mm lens, if you switched to a 24mm lens the face would only fill 1/2 of the grid, it would be 1/2 the size. If you had 3 grids across and three faces filling those grids with a 50mm lens you would have 3 faces across the photo. If you switched to a 24mm lens you would have 6 faces across the photo. If you switched to 100mm lens you would only have 1-1/2 faces across the photo. <P>

 

With the 50mm lens you could back up to get all six faces in the photo but if you couldn't back up then you would switch to the 24mm lens to get all 6 faces.<P>

 

Whether you are at f/8 or f/16 or f/2 has nothing to do with this. The magnification of the lens stays the same regardless of the aperture chosen. The depth of field (DOF) would change but the faces would be in good focus for all with more background blur (less DOF) with the wider aperture. The effect of DOF is more pronounced for a given aperture with a longer lens (100mm) than with a shorter lens (24mm).

[julie_jagt]

<p>I don't think I've been making my point very clear LOL! and that's totally fine! I've never been very good at explaining things..<br>

I went out today and I put all of these little tips to the test, and I've figured out the problem. I was thinking back and I think I just had it all wrong. I was using a very wide aperture and a slow shutter speed (because I was in a dark forest and I didn't want to bump up my ISO and increase grain) and I was going to fast and not taking the time to focus. Today I took the time to properly think over the trinity (ISO, F-stop and shutter speed), firmly and steadily held my camera and I took the time to focus and compose my shot and it came out perfectly.<br>

Sometimes I just go through it too fast and I'll forget to change my settings and to take my time and think things through. I know it all comes with practice and I'm trying really hard to work on it! It just gets very overwhelming at times.<br>

Thanks to all who put up with all my questions! It really helped me out and I am very grateful to all of you who took the time to answer. :)</p>

[robert100]

i won't be on here long enought to write the explanation for it and give you the math, but if you do a search you'll

find it, the topic to search is "Hyperfocal Distance", it will explain to you the mathematical calculation which will

let you know how far away from your camera's focal plane to focus to achieve "everything half that distance

from you, to infinity, in focus". (in the "old days", lenses had the scale right on them). And yes, you'll want to use

an aperture of more like f32 or f45 if you have it (or 22 or whatever you have on that lens), and when you do the

math, your 50 mil lens on that camera is "mathematically" an equivalent of an 80 mm lens (which is not exactly

wide angle) if the math formula you find on the web is based on "35mm camera math", which it "likely" will be.

 

The dof you are trying to achieve is not done by "guesswork", it's determinable by pure simple mathematics.

[q.g._de_bakker]

That "pure simple mathematics" part however includes lots of assumptions, lots of guesswork. The perhaps most important is the "acceptably unsharp" part of Depth of Field and how that converts into a numeric value.<br>It is important to understand that there is only one distance, one plane in focus. There is no "everything half that distance from you, to infinity, in focus". It is not "in focus". The usual, and more accurate, description is "in acceptable focus", which really means "not really in focus, but not as unsharp as to be objectionable".<br>Basically, that means it is unsharp.<br><br>Using apertures as small as f/32 or f/45 will also reduce how sharp the really sharp bit will be. Every two stops you stop a lens down, resolution, sharpness, will be halved. That means that though the unsharp bits get to look a bit less unsharp, at the same time the sharp bits will be considerably more unsharp.<br><br>Most lenses also have some faults that reduce sharpness (and contrast) that improve a bit when stopping down. So when stopping down, the improvements win over the degradation, and the image will be better. But after stopping the lens down a stop or two, further stopping down will no longer reduce lens faults but will degrade sharpness. So f/32 or even f/45 are not apertures you would want to use. f/16 and f/22 are already somthing to avoid using.