"Focus is a bourgeois concept!"

DeVore

The subject is a quote a friend of mine, who is a pro, regaled me with once!

I'm finding I dont get as good focus as I would like. I'm using my trusty workhorse 400D with a nifty fifty on it. My beloved setup

My problem is that while I can get sharp focus if the subject stays still and the light is good... at other times when I think its been caught nicely, I look at the full size pic and find that no area of the shot is really as sharp as I would like it.

Now, what I want to know is: is this me? the lens? the body?

Would an upgrade to a 500D result in better shots? or would it just be a case of "same muppet misusing a more expensive camera" ?

Is there much of a difference between a 400D and something like a 500D ?

DeV.

PCPhoto

it could be any number of things .... the focus motor on the lens, the optics on the lens, the camera, the person ....etc etc

the only way to find out if its the camera/lens ...if to try using the same camera with different lens and/or different camera/same lens.

magicbastarder

do you have the AF set to single shot or continuous?

Mr. Grieves

Have you chosen manually which AF point you want to use? Don't let the camera decide as it will be totally unpredictible.

Choose an AF point, and be sure it's exacly over the point you want to focus on when you half-press the shutter. The shutter shouldn't fire unless AF is locked, so provided you've done the first bit, you should get a sharp result. This is especially important using f/1.8 with a close subject as the depth of field is so narrow.

I seriously doubt you'd see any difference using the 500d. It may (or may not) have be faster or better in low light (though the lens will affect this too), but its accuracy is probably the same (and subject to the same manufacturing variability etc).

AnimalRights

Get a 2nd hand 40D (more to grip)
learn back button focus and use centre auto focus point.
Moving object use AI servo
static use 1 shot.

Zillah

Check your focus point. It might be trying to focus on people's feet if stuff got jostled. Check your shutter speed. If it's open for just a tiny bit too long it will come out a tiny bit smeared (which will look identical to being a bit out of focus). If shutter speed isn't the issue, try closing down your aperture a bit. The widest aperture is always the softest. This is my best guess at the moment; you could very well be leaving it at its widest most of the time to make shutter speeds a no brainer.

A nift fifty should be pretty damn sharp so it's either broken or you're misusing it.

I tell ya...the man can administer a massive website but operating a small handheld piece of equipment is beyond him :pac:

ThOnda

For the first, is it a motion blur? Try shooting at bright daylight with open aperture, to get the shortest shutter speeds. Subject that goes from in front of the focal plane behind it, something like a fence.
The higher the aperture value, the more depth of field and more sharp parts of the picture.

It is very common that shutter could be pressed to hard or abruptly, so the camera moves at the moment of exposure. If you are not certain, stick the camera onto a tripod, select exposure for time shorter than 1/60s and shoot something (in angle) that could show if there is something sharp. You could try for example newspaper lying on the floor.

Or try something from google.

And don't forget, that 50/1.8 is the cheapest lens Canon sells

charybdis

I believe the quote is actually "sharpness is a bourgeois concept".

The reality is that a lack of sharpness can be caused by many factors and trying to diagnose a generalised problem by attributing it to just one thing isn't really a useful exercise. New equipment may help, although it probably won't.

Also, the spirit of the aforementioned quote is that striving for outright image sharpness is a meaningless endeavour if done for its own sake. A great photograph will still be a great photograph even if it's a little soft, and a photograph is by no means great just because it's sharp.

It would help a lot if you could post specific examples with intact EXIF metadata.

Tin Foil Hat

I have a similar problem myself. I have a Nikon D40. I can't get decent sharpness on manual settings (A,S or M). I get decent sharpness using the dreaded auto settings, but can't replicate it even if I use manual and duplicate the settings exactly. Very frustrating.

CabanSail

If your 400D is faulty is the only reason that moving to a 500D would make a difference.

The two most likely suspects would be camera shake and wrong focus point with shallow DoF.

With a 50mm you should use the reciprocal rule for shutter speed but with the crop factor. The full frame equiv is 80mm .... so you should keep shutter speeds above about1/80th sec, maybe 1/100th would be better.

When shooting with the 50mm wide open (f1.8) your depth of field will be very shallow. So your focus has to be spot on. If you focus and it locks on then the focus will be fixed, but if you move the camera then the subject may have moved outside the focal plane.

As said above an example with Exif may narrow things down. If not it may still give us a chance the extract the urine.

DeVore

Woaaahhh.... ok, great advice everyone! Thanks! I'll get cracking on trying some of these and I'll see if I can post a few examples of the results.

I think its also a bit of GAS (Gear Acquisition Syndrome) too as I found myself trying to find reasons to buy a telephoto lens for the 400D (but bailed at last minute and bought a set of poor-mans-macro attachments).

So, I have a mad week coming but I'll see if I cant find time to play with these suggestions as it seems like everything people have said I shouldnt do... I'm doing


DeV.

sheesh

you can set the back focus in the 400d too devore

ie the camers is not focusing when you push the button you focus by pushing the * button at the back of the camera

I am wondering if it is too much to expect the camera to have perfect sharpness at 100%.

theboat

Sorry if this is a little OT, but is back button focusing more effective? I've only used a couple of times, so maybe I haven't given it a proper chance...

FoxT

Once you get used to it, Back-button focus is the greatest thing since sliced bread & butter.I use it all the time now. If you google it you'll find some good articles on it.

Promac

AR posted about it:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055870428

Simplicius

One photo out of focus is a mistake, ten photos out of focus are an experiment, one hundred photos out of focus is a style.

DaireQuinlan

Simplicius wrote: »

One photo out of focus is a mistake, ten photos out of focus are an experiment, one hundred photos out of focus is a style.

*starts counting out of focus pictures .....


YESSSS !

Fionn

just buy an EOS 40/50/60 D, it'll salve solve all your problems away - honest;)

sheesh

theboat wrote: »

Sorry if this is a little OT, but is back button focusing more effective? I've only used a couple of times, so maybe I haven't given it a proper chance...

ok the reason i say use back focus is that once you focus on a spot you know that the lens is focused there or there abouts you can tell if the subject moves in space and refocus but you know that the shutter will fire when you press the button there will be no delay for focusing.

Fionn

this site Nikon D70 Focus test chart is good for back focus testing

Borderfox

DeVore wrote: »

The subject is a quote a friend of mine, who is a pro, regaled me with once!

I'm finding I dont get as good focus as I would like. I'm using my trusty workhorse 400D with a nifty fifty on it. My beloved setup

My problem is that while I can get sharp focus if the subject stays still and the light is good... at other times when I think its been caught nicely, I look at the full size pic and find that no area of the shot is really as sharp as I would like it.

Now, what I want to know is: is this me? the lens? the body?

Would an upgrade to a 500D result in better shots? or would it just be a case of "same muppet misusing a more expensive camera" ?

Is there much of a difference between a 400D and something like a 500D ?

DeV.

Stop looking at the full size shots, I know that sounds simple but the more you pixel peep the worse it gets

ThOnda

Focus? Why? For my contacts on Flickr, there is one reason why to forget about focusing.

DougL

sheesh wrote: »

ok the reason i say use back focus is that once you focus on a spot you know that the lens is focused there or there abouts you can tell if the subject moves in space and refocus but you know that the shutter will fire when you press the button there will be no delay for focusing.

I tried back focus for a while, but I kept forgetting to focus! After wasting a number of shots, I gave up and went back to normal focus. Maybe I'm doing it wrong.

sheesh

DougL wrote: »

I tried back focus for a while, but I kept forgetting to focus! After wasting a number of shots, I gave up and went back to normal focus. Maybe I'm doing it wrong.

well thats just habit. and yeah I still do that occasionally too.

what ever way you are happiest doing it is fine I think.