Driving me mad!!

George · Post by **George** » Tue May 08, 2007 1:30 pm

Hi - I have had a new camera (Canon 400D) for a few weeks now but try as I might I cannot get a really sharp picture! It is driving me mad - am I being too critical or do I need to practise or experiment more?

Am I right in thinking that with DSLR photography it is harder to get it right than with a digital camera as the shots I have taken with my Panasonic all seem to be better than with the Canon! I am not doing something right!

Here are a couple of shots taken recently with the Canon 100mm macro lens (both 1/500th, top one F6.3 and ISO400, bottom one F5.6 and ISO400). Please be critical as I am sure it will help and if anyone has any tips for getting it right please help before I drive myself totally mad!!

I am totally in awe of the images obtained by V6GTO but maybe asking too much without extension tubes (or is it just experience?)

Thanks

Post by **Padfield** » Tue May 08, 2007 1:51 pm

Those are pretty nice pictures, George!

If they fall short of the perfection you seek, it seems to me it is a depth-of-field problem (the antennae are a little off); and speaking as a physicist I would try closing down the aperture a couple of stops and reducing the shutter speed a couple of stops too. That will increase depth of field but increase the effect of handshake if you don't have an image-stabilised lens. The handshake effect depends on the zoom you are using - the same degree of arc of hand movement represents a greater actual distance on the butterfly if you are further away. If you are getting in close to take the pictures handshake will be a minimal problem (and going in close accentuates the depth-of field problem, so benefits most from stopping down the aperture).

Apologies if you knew all that already.

When I used an SLR (an old-fashioned, manual SLR, where I had to measure the light with a light-meter and calculate everything) I generally tried to use f16 in good light. Sadly, my 50 year-old Praktica Nova I died in 2004 and I have since used a compact digital camera, which always produces acceptable results but nothing like the fantastic pictures I see on these pages.

Guy

JKT · Post by **JKT** » Tue May 08, 2007 2:05 pm

padfield wrote:If you are getting in close to take the pictures handshake will be a minimal problem (and going in close accentuates the depth-of field problem, so benefits most from stopping down the aperture).

Ditto on the aperture, but I have always heard that increased magnification makes the handshake worse, not better. Oh well.

In addition to the angular handshake, you'll soon notice axial shake as well. That is the focus is not where you thought it would be. Which happens to be the (small) problem in your samples. Both have a slight back focus and therefore the head does not appear to be sharp. The only cure I have found for that (besides smaller aperture - but not beyond 16) is taking multiple shots and hoping for the best. Your situation is even worse than mine, as the viewfinder in 20D is somewhat better.

Besides the focus, I don't see anything wrong with your samples.

Dave McCormick · Post by **Dave McCormick** » Tue May 08, 2007 2:08 pm

Here is a few questions that might help, I don't have an SLR, but hoping to get one soon "soon" a year or so. Found this on yahoo answers:

1) Have you set the aperture to a very high number (e.g. f32) and as a result your shutter speed is slow?

2) Have you set a slow shutter speed manually?

3) Are you"snatching" when pressing the shutter release?

As a rule you need a shutter speed of 1 / focal length or faster to avoid camera shake blurring. i.e. if you are shooting with a 100mm lens you need a shutter speed of 1/100s or faster to avoid excessing camera movement during the shot. Personally at 100mm I'd go for 1/200s or faster, but then again my hands shake quite a bit

To make sure it's not a fault with the camera try switching it to fully auto mode and taking a few shots in reasonable light to see if you still get blurring. Also check the shutter speed for the photos you take to make sure they are faster than the 1 / focal length rule.

Finally you may need to practice your technique when pressing the shutter release - I use one of the focal points in the viewfinder and something within the scene to get an idea of how much the camera is moving prior to pressing the shutter release - if it's moving a lot I try to find something to rest against, or get my monopod or tripod out

Basically I perfer full manual control, but it can be hard to get composition right and by the time you focus into your subject and press shutter, it flies off. My camera has a good manual control max f/7.8 with max 1cm macro and max 400 ISO and 1/2000 sec exposure, nothing spectacular.

Post by **Padfield** » Tue May 08, 2007 2:42 pm

JKT wrote: Ditto on the aperture, but I have always heard that increased magnification makes the handshake worse, not better. Oh well.

Quite so. But in terms of absolute distance on the butterfly, magnification makes no difference - only the distance away does. At a given distance, a certain degree of arc of handshake might represent, say, one scale. If you zoom in from the same distance, that one scale to the side will represent a bigger ugliness, so magnifying more means the handshake effect is greater.

Guy

Dave · Post by **Dave** » Tue May 08, 2007 4:06 pm

Taken me ages to get your images - can only see the first one as yet but initially I would say you're focusing on the wrong area - always focus on the eye. Also your depth of field is too small take it up to at least f/8. You should be using spot or partial metering as well for "item" shots. Pattern is really for landscapes etc. You may also find that fill in flash from say a 430ex will help - forget the onboard it's useless. And finally absolutely always use a monopod or tripod.
Another thought don't forget to use the magnetic lasoo on the out of focus bits (photoshop) and then apply unsharp mask to the selections. This can give surprisingly good results.

JKT · Post by **JKT** » Tue May 08, 2007 4:28 pm

If I read you right, you are saying that with a constant magnification the shorter focal length gives less hand shake due to the shorter distance. That makes sense - at least for angular movement, which is not quite as dominant with large magnification as it is for normal photography.

I just can't seem to be able to figure out how your statement works with constant focal length and different distance. Or is it that the absolute shake decreases, but the relative stays constant thus negating the perceived effect?

Post by **Padfield** » Wed May 09, 2007 4:31 pm

I guess we're speaking at cross-purposes somehow, unless I'm just wrong, which does happen quite a lot.

My main point was that if you're photographing from a distance and using optics to bring the butterfly in close, you may not be able to afford to reduce your shutter speed (in compensation for decreasing the aperture) so much as if you are physically close to the butterfly.

I'm sorry if I sowed confusion (and/or error) in trying to help George get that perfect picture!!

Guy

JKT · Post by **JKT** » Wed May 09, 2007 8:19 pm

Oh, you meant the "1/f"-rule! Which, incidentally, is no longer quite the same as it requires full-frame equivalent f. In my case it seems to work quite well as the rate of success increases considerably when the time is 1/320 or less with 180 mm optics (180*1.6=288).

It may be that you had a complicated way of saying it or my command of English is not what I'd like it to be.

e.garnett · Post by **e.garnett** » Thu May 10, 2007 12:36 am

hi can i throw my thoughts into the pot doest matter where the shake comes form or what type , its how to get round it that is the answer ,the higher the shutter speed the better, but without the correct app you wont get a sharp shot from back to front ,firstly if you want to fill the frame set the app to no less than f11, then always use a tripod you will never be able to hold the camera still enough , to get a image that is truely sharp you will be rocking back and forward and to the side without one ,when your eye is against the view finder ,all my shots in my gallery , have been taken with a tripod with out exception .be aware of movemnt caused by the wind its almost always there as someone said earlier use the focusing points in the view finder as a guide to the amount of movement ,but the real trick is to get as parraell to the subject as possible, the more the wings are on the same plain of focus the sharper the subject will be all over, also use a shutter release to negate any additional vibration ,its all a pain but the results when you get it right are so worth it

best
eric

George · Post by **George** » Fri May 18, 2007 7:42 am

Thanks for the help guys. I guess it is a combination of practice and a steady hand!

Will take all the comments on board and ensure I have the tripod with me always. Strangely enough when I saw the Dukes at Bison Hill recently I hadn't bothered with the tripod thinking we wouldn't see any as it had been such a dull day, but of course as soon as they knew I did not have it they all sat for ages posing!!

Martin · Post by **Martin** » Fri May 18, 2007 10:35 am

Can't say as I agree with the "allways use a tripod" sentiment. I never use a tripod, and think my results are acceptable. It seems that using one just means you miss more shots.

Martin.

George · Post by **George** » Fri May 18, 2007 4:04 pm

Martin - I agree that a tripod is somewhat cumbersome (even a resonably light one) - I am amazed with the sharpness of the shots you post - even more if they are without a tripod!!

e.garnett · Post by **e.garnett** » Sat May 19, 2007 12:02 am

hi guys i think theres a differance between what is acceptably sharp and a realy sharp shot from wing tip to wing tip, if your composing the image in the view finder and the subject is at least 1/3 in size then your dof will be no more than mm you will not be able to hold your camera with macro lens attached still and get a truely sharp shot that can be enlarged 100% and not fall apart i admit that its not easy to get close but thats when your field craft comes in
the best time to photgraphy butterflies without question is early or late in the day the subject will be more helpfull and the softer light produces better images but your shuter speed will be slower
i still say use a tripod the ones you get will be superior if not pleantfull

best

eric

George · Post by **George** » Tue May 22, 2007 7:28 pm

Hi,

Thanks for all your help and advice - here are some shots from a local "hotspot". Saw 30+ Dingy Skippers and 30+ Common Blues and my first Large Skipper. Must have been freshly emerged as it was a gorgeous golden colour.

e.garnett · Post by **e.garnett** » Tue May 22, 2007 10:04 pm

well done some nice sharp shots there like the mating shot nd the dingy best
infact they seem a little to sharp have you used photo shop to enhance the image

best

eric

Dave McCormick · Post by **Dave McCormick** » Wed May 23, 2007 8:01 am

I thought they looked a little "too" sharp, nice anyway.

George · Post by **George** » Wed May 23, 2007 9:45 am

Oops!
Guilty as charged.

George

e.garnett · Post by **e.garnett** » Thu May 24, 2007 12:29 am

hi george

theres nothing wrong in sharping images infact most images that are digital in origin do require a small amount of sharping when you process them, this is normal .but try not to over sharpen tempting i know .they dont actually sharpen ,more the contrast increases so when its over done it becomes unreal and the tell tale halo round edges are visable try making a selection just off the butterfly and sharpen slightly then the background does not go grainey either and so the effect is much more natural ,the other usefull tip is shoot in raw less images per card i know but the file size is so much bigger more pixcels to and when you work on them they dont fall apart as much hope iam not insulting your inteligence just trying to be helpful

best

eric

eccles · Post by **eccles** » Sat May 26, 2007 11:06 pm

Shot 1 is nicely framed but doesn't 'pop'
Shot 3 of the skipper has traces of motion blur, i.e. camera shake.
Shot 2, the paired common blue is nice. You're getting there!
Edit: worked out why 1 isn't right. You've plonked the butterfly right in the middle. Take your shot with the subject to one side but facing into the picture.