# So frustrated just feel like packing the whole blooming lot in :(



## BaileySnapz (Feb 19, 2013)

I just cant get any decent crystal clear shots, no matter what I do & im so fed up.... I even bought a new 7D for the super AF system & fast fps. The camera tells me they are perfectly exposed, they look fine, detailed really clear on the LCD they I upload & they are just rubbish, dull lots out of focus & to me look really really fuzzy as opposed to other peoples online shots & when I view through the Raw converter where my camera says it was perfectly exposed the software frequently highlights clipping with big exclamation marks. I just don't know what im doing wrong. Mainly using a sigma 30mm 1.4. I thought maybe the fuzziness was noise but had a photographer friend look & what I thought was noise (the fuzziness) he says is just the shallow DOF, but even when I zoom into the focal points like the eye its still fuzzy but not on my LCD I just don't get it can anyone suggest ANYTHING!!! getting desperate here!! please & many thanks in advance.


----------



## PixelRabbit (Feb 19, 2013)

Can you post a picture with the exif data as an example?  Without one it is hard to narrow things down, it can be so many things!


----------



## Wozza (Feb 19, 2013)

If you are getting a small area in focus, but not as much as you want then you may need to make sure the apature the camera selected isn't too shallow. Shooting a bigger number f-stop will let more of the image be in focus and give you a much wider depth of field.

As for clipping highlights, auto mode on cameras try's to get 50% grey throughout the image, try underexposing you images slightly by keeping the arrow a mark under what the camera thinks is exposed. With RAW files you can pull details out of shadows, but overexposed detail in highlights is gone.

Keep with it, maybe put the camera down for a week if you get too frustrated. Just know that starting out was rocky for all of us. I still have my first exposures when I started getting into digital and my hit rate of pictures I was happy with was super low.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Feb 19, 2013)

pics or it isn't happening


----------



## Joves (Feb 19, 2013)

So I am guessing you are shooting wide open. I say that judging by your friend stating that it is merely the shallow depth of field. First you need to use different apertures like f/6- f/11 if you want sharpness across a wide range. Since you are shooting RAW you need to adjust those photos. RAW format will always require post processing to get the most from a photo. Or you can shoot RAW+Jpeg, and then change your picture controls for the Jpegs, not sure what Canon offers for this. You can then Sharpen in camera for jpegs to offset the effects of the AA filter in your camera, which does effect sharpness. You can get more color by adding Saturation. If you are getting the blinkies I am guessing this is from over exposed parts, which in this case you may need to under expose some. I shoot in Manual all the time, and I have learned what my camera does with the given lighting, so I adjust for what I am shooting. I do much of what I have stated above, it took some time to learn how the settings effect the final image. Photography is pretty much a hobby of patience when starting out, I started in film, and when I went to digital I had to somewhat learn all over. And your photos will always look good on the LCD for the most part, it is not a true representation of the final image. I suggest you get a good book or two on photography, and maybe your camera in this case if you do not like experimenting. I like to experiment myself, sometimes you find things you did not know your camera could do.


----------



## kundalini (Feb 19, 2013)

The LCD on the back of your camera displays a JPEG rendition of the image.  There is an inherent sharpening applied by default.  If you're shooting RAW, you will need to apply some sharpening in the final steps of your post processing.  Still, your focal point should be sharp.  As PixelRabbit said, the EXIF data can reveal some problems that may show a possibility of user error.


----------



## BaileySnapz (Feb 19, 2013)

you guys are so quick thanks so much for your replies!  Im sorry I don't know how to get the exif data on it? unless maybe it is already what is that the settings used for an image?


----------



## BaileySnapz (Feb 19, 2013)

doesn't look as bad here as it does in photoshop although when you zoom in still fuzzy. ill upload another but this next one the ISO is 2000 so I suppose cant expect great things or should I? Would a full frame really be that much better for these conditions? indoors no flash?


----------



## TimothyJinx (Feb 19, 2013)

I'm a noob so take my comments for what they are worth.
Looks like the elbow is in focus - which is also the thing closest to the camera. Looks like you may be in auto mode letting the camera decide what to focus on. Manually select your focus point (closest eye) and close the iris a bit to get more in focus.


----------



## Wozza (Feb 19, 2013)

I can tell by looking at it that the aperture is your problem if you want more of the image in focus. Your shooting wide open, you need to knock the aperture back a couple to get a wider DOF. The smaller the hole in the lens the wider your depth of field is. Try shooting identical images at f3, f6, f8, f11 and then compare.


----------



## dbvirago (Feb 19, 2013)

Yeah, you shot this at 1.4 and you were fairly close, so narrow DOF. Having said that, it's not bad enough to quit over. Looks like you focused on the eyes, which is correct, but I think I'm seeing some motion blur even with the 100th sec exposure at 30mm. Do you have a tripod?


----------



## weepete (Feb 19, 2013)

Hi Bailey, I found the 7D a pretty steep learning curve and had a similar experience to what yours sounds like. I went through stages of thinking it was me, the camera body, the lenses etc. I finally got the time to sit down and test everything, and I found that it was in fact the soft bit of skin behind the equipment.

In the end I found that I need to be more precise with my use of the camera and pay alot more attention to dof, minimal focal distance, metering use of AF points and bear in mind that raw images allways need sharpened as well. 

I'd suggest calibrating the viewfinder, and testing your lenses, metering modes, focal points using a tripod and mirror lock up at different dofs. As a quick comparison take a couple of shots in jpeg as well to make sure you aren't just zooming in too much as well.

And as PixelRabbit says post an example so we can see what you are getting, as we can tell a lot more from an image than a description.


----------



## BaileySnapz (Feb 19, 2013)

maybe I made this too small I re-sized to a 6x4 print :/ straight out of camera nothing done to it converted to DNG then saved as JPEG


----------



## dbvirago (Feb 19, 2013)

No, full frame is not the problem. You should be able to nail it with what you have. Try the same shot at f4 or 5.6, up the ISO a bit. Practice your handheld technique and/or get a tripod.


----------



## weepete (Feb 19, 2013)

Better late than never, but looks like I've been beat to it!


----------



## dbvirago (Feb 19, 2013)

BaileySnapz said:


> View attachment 36726maybe I made this too small I re-sized to a 6x4 print :/ straight out of camera nothing done to it converted to DNG then saved as JPEG


 Yeah, hard to tell at that size, but it's still wide open. Practice with more light - that's going to be a tough low light situation.


----------



## TimothyJinx (Feb 19, 2013)

Again, it looks like the designs on the sweater are more in focus than the face. Did you try what several on here have suggested?


----------



## PixelRabbit (Feb 19, 2013)

Thanks for posting the example, yes the exif is the settings you used.  As someone else already guessed you were shooting wide open at F1.4 Shutter speed of 1/100 (0.01) ISO 400.

*Edit. Please disregard the part about the shutter speed, apparently I can't convert a decimal to a fraction lol I'll leave it there for information but your shutter speed was fine at 1/100 (not the 1/10 that I thought it was at  )*
Two things are working against you here, your shutter speed is way too low and you are going to get camera shake (although you seem to have done relatively well here!) A good rule of thumb is don't let your shutter speed go below the max focal length of your lens, ie. 200mm lens try to stay above 1/200.  You can get away with lower shutter speeds but I personally find that I can't get below about 1/60 without noticing it.
You also have your lens wide open @ F1.4, this is great for letting lots of light in but not so great for depth of field, it is going to be super narrow, there are resources for figuring out your DOF at different Fstops, a quick google search should give you lots of options.  

So, stop your lens down a bit to get more DOF and up your shutter speed, those two things should make a big difference!


----------



## dbvirago (Feb 19, 2013)

Another thing to keep in mind at that distance. If you use a center point to focus on the eye and then reposition, you've moved the plane of the lens and the focal point. I'm guessing at the distance, but your DOF is probably less than an inch


----------



## BaileySnapz (Feb 19, 2013)

Timothy Jinx, definitely manual & focused on the left eye (her right) the elbow perhaps is on the same focal plane?  you see I wanted her eyes to jump out at you so figured throwing everything else off focus this would do that but her eyes are still fuzzy when you zoom in & look closely, & also when I narrow down the aperture it underexposes unless I hike up the ISO. Ive been practising with exposing right with high ISO as above ISO2000 as ive read this is better than underexposing with a lower ISO & I don't want to use flash. I dunno maybe im being too fussy :/ but ive seen fantastic results on portraits shot at 1.4 but all with full frame cameras hence my full frame question  wee pete I don't actally even know what caliberating means do I need to take it to a photography shop?? sorry if its a stupid question


----------



## weepete (Feb 19, 2013)

No, nvm my answer the other guys have nailed it quicker than I could


----------



## amolitor (Feb 19, 2013)

Stop down at least a little bit, f/1.4 is possible, but it's actually a somewhat strange looking portrait. Typically the tip of the nose is out of focus with these things. Try f/2.8 to f/4.0 or so as a "working aperture" for this kind of thing. Practice holding the camera still, there are youtube videos (go and search) on good ways to hold the camera so it won't wobble as much when you're shooting, and try to keep the shutter speed up as people have indicated.

Running the ISO up is fine, your image should still be SHARP, it'll just be grainy/noisy. At this point I think you just want to be able to prove you can make sharp pictures, right? You can work on ISO issues later.


----------



## BaileySnapz (Feb 19, 2013)

ok thanks so much really appreciate your comments ill try with the smaller aperture & up the ISO so. Oh & yes I have a tripod never used it indoors though.


----------



## dbvirago (Feb 19, 2013)

Using my guess about the distance to subject a full frame would increase your depth of field form .84 of an inch to 1.3 inches, so an extra half inch in focus. This is not going to solve your problem. To make this shot at low ISO with an adequate DOF you are going to need more light.


----------



## BaileySnapz (Feb 19, 2013)

yep Amolitor you're right! I see all these great photographer's pages & websites & I want to be able to do what they do in natural light - patience is a virtue I suppose  thanks again.


----------



## dbvirago (Feb 19, 2013)

_Obi-Wan voice:_Use the tripod, Luke.  As amolitor said, eliminate one problem at a time. The tripod will eliminate the camera shake. A smaller aperture will eliminate dof issue. Get down on the baby's level to put more of the face on the same focal plane.


----------



## SCraig (Feb 19, 2013)

BaileySnapz said:


> Timothy Jinx, definitely manual & focused on the left eye (her right) the elbow perhaps is on the same focal plane?  you see I wanted her eyes to jump out at you so figured throwing everything else off focus this would do that but her eyes are still fuzzy when you zoom in & look closely, & also when I narrow down the aperture it underexposes unless I hike up the ISO. Ive been practising with exposing right with high ISO as above ISO2000 as ive read this is better than underexposing with a lower ISO & *I don't want to use flash*. I dunno maybe im being too fussy :/ but ive seen fantastic results on portraits shot at 1.4 but all with full frame cameras hence my full frame question  wee pete I don't actally even know what caliberating means do I need to take it to a photography shop?? sorry if its a stupid question



Why don't you want to use a flash?  Even a pop-up flash has its uses.


----------



## fokker (Feb 19, 2013)

BaileySnapz said:


> doesn't look as bad here as it does in photoshop although when you zoom in still fuzzy. ill upload another but this next one the ISO is 2000 so I suppose cant expect great things or should I? Would a full frame really be that much better for these conditions? indoors no flash?



Just a note, when you view images in photoshop, anything other than 100% viewing (or 50%, 25%, 12.5% etc) will not display the true sharpness - for instance if you try and view at 66.7% then every three pixels in the photo is trying to be rendered by two pixels on your computer screen, which will obviously affect how the fine details look.


----------



## Wozza (Feb 19, 2013)

Also when you are looking at other peoples work, odds are the ones you really like - the photographer has thought a lot about light and the photo has been taken where there is a lot of natural light. Windows with nettings can create quite a nice soft light for example, but yeah with natural light you need to make sure there is enough of it. Don't be afraid of flash though, you don;t want to blow your subject out but setting it on low for example can create a bit of fill light and bring out sparkles in eyes for example.


----------



## BaileySnapz (Feb 19, 2013)

SCraig - I just don't like the look of it, heres one with flash, I think it makes her look ghost like its the built in flash though it is set lower I have a flash gun but only a cheap thing from Dino Direct!


----------



## amolitor (Feb 19, 2013)

Also, a little photoshop tweaking can make things look slicker, after the fact, which the pros all do.




ETA: That looks pretty yellow now that I look at it. Oh well. It's the idea that counts, right?


----------



## thunderkyss (Feb 19, 2013)

BaileySnapz said:


> I thought maybe the fuzziness was noise but had a photographer friend look & what I thought was noise (the fuzziness) he says is just the shallow DOF,



When your friend says "shallow DoF" what does that mean to you? Please explain in your own words, don't use shallow & DoF in your definition please.



BaileySnapz said:


> but even when I zoom into the focal points like the eye its still fuzzy but not on my LCD I just don't get it can anyone suggest ANYTHING!!! getting desperate here!! please & many thanks in advance.



Neither zooming into a focal point, or buying a new camera is going to fix shallow DoF


----------



## table1349 (Feb 19, 2013)

Get this and read it. Amazon.com: Understanding Exposure, 3rd Edition: How to Shoot Great Photographs with Any Camera (9780817439392): Bryan Peterson: Books

Also Read this resource: Digital Photography Tutorials


----------



## SCraig (Feb 19, 2013)

BaileySnapz said:


> SCraig - I just don't like the look of it, heres one with flash, I think it makes her look ghost like its the built in flash though it is set lower I have a flash gun but only a cheap thing from Dino Direct!



You aren't using it properly.  If you can tell it was shot with a flash, other than the highlights in the eyes, then you're doing it wrong.  Look at any good, studio portraits.  Keep in mind that they were ALL shot with strobes.  If they are good you won't be able to tell it.

Put a couple of layers of tissue over your pop-up flash and hold them on with a rubber band.  Set your flash exposure to about -1 EV, and try that.  The tissue will diffuse those heavy shadows and shooting at -1EV will eliminate a lot of the horrendous glare.

Then go out and get a GOOD speedlight that you can bounce with and/or get it off the camera.  A pop-up flash is better than nothing but it won't take the place of a good speedlight.  A lousy speedlight is about as good as a pop-up flash.  A little better since it raises the flash off the axis of the lens, but that's about it.


----------



## thunderkyss (Feb 19, 2013)

Different strokes for different folks & all that, but my daughter would fall in love with the first two baby pictures you posted. She loves that soft background look.


----------



## deeky (Feb 19, 2013)

I think I got all of the previous posts.  If this is a duplicate, forgive me.

It looks like you are shooting manual mode.  Is the camera saving in raw format?  If so, remember that the camera is doing none of the automatic sharpening, etc. that is applied by the camera if saving in jpeg format.  If you are saving in raw, you need to apply the sharpening, contrast, etc. through post processing software that is otherwise done in camera.  I'm not familiar with your model of camera, but at least on some of them, the camera preview shows the results as if the camera had applied its automatic processing, but still spits out a raw image with no processing when you download.

One more item to check.


----------



## texkam (Feb 19, 2013)

Explore off-camera lighting techniques. With wireless triggers and a speedlight set a low power you will learn that you can throw in just enough light to make things look wonderful.


----------



## TimGreyPhotography (Feb 19, 2013)

Like many people commented before, increasing your aperture will help make more the picture in focus. There is also usually another advatange to this! Each lens has its "sweet spot". By that I mean an aperture that the lens is its sharpest. If you look at this resolution chart here of your lens: Sigma AF 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM (Nikon DX) - Review / Test Report - Analysis You will find that your lens is 15% sharper in the center at f/2.8-f/4 then it is at f/1.4. Also looking at this chart you can find that your lens has VERY poor resolution on the outside at f/1.4 and doesnt get good resolution till f/4. I would say f/4 is a good sweet spot for that lens.


----------



## TCampbell (Feb 20, 2013)

Two things:

1)  As so many have mentioned, shooting at a very low f-stop (aperture) will create a very narrow depth of field.  This will be compounded by focus point selection (more on that in a moment).  Sometimes you WANT a very shallow depth of field, but that really only works if you're sure the camera has locked focus on the part you really want in tack-sharp focus.  

2)  You have the ability to force the camera to lock focus at specific positions in the image.  The 7D has a 19 point AF system and several focus modes.  In many of these modes, the camera has some flexibility to lock focus on a target.  If the camera is offered some flexibility over what it picks, then it will pick the target with the CLOSEST focusing distance to the camera.  That means if you have a shallow depth of field, and you WANT the camera to lock focus on the subject's eye, but there's a something closer and another AF point is positioned over that "closer" object, then the closer object wins.  Due to the nuances of the way "phase detect" auto-focus sensors work, the camera does not have to test and evaluate focus by doing a focus hunt through all the points.  The direction of the phase shift tells the camera whether the focus needs to come in or go out to lock focus and the amount of phase shift tells the camera how far it needs to move.  The camera knows instantly which focus point can lock focus on the nearest element and moves the lens to lock at that position.  It's very fast (you paid good money for it to work that way.)

You can read a bit about the focus system here:  Canon DLC: Article: EOS 7D: Sophisticated, Customizable AF System

But there are many books and extensive articles that explain all the nuances of the system.  It's actually an extremely good system.  It was designed to offer a very high degree of control to action photographers who knew what they wanted.  But this means you have some homework to read about the system and learn to control it.

Minimally you'll want to learn to put the camera into spot AF mode.  Once the camera is in this mode, it will only use a single AF point to lock focus (the rest of the points are ignored.)  You can press the focus select button (upper-right on the back of the body) then use the joystick to navigate the selected focus point around.  Put the point directly on your subject's eye, lock focus, and take the shot.  This should put the tack-sharp focus directly on that specific point.

I normally return my camera to allow it to auto-select the focus point before powering off (I never know if I'll want to grab the camera in a hurry.)  But usually when shooting a subject, I don't use the auto-select mode... I pick the focus points or at least pick the focus zone.

Sometimes a lens misses focus even when the camera would have nailed it.  Lenses can have focus error in either the back-focus or front-focus direction.  Normally you wont notice a lens with focus error when shooting at even moderate f-stops because the amount of error is usually much smaller than the depth-of-field area.  That means even if the lens misses focus, the image still looks pretty sharp and you are none-the-wider to it.  BUT... when shooting at very low focal ratios, this can be a real problem.  It's possible to test a lens for focus accuracy using a decent focus target (there commercial targets available and also targets you can download, print on your home printer, fold up, and use them to test focus accuracy.)  If you find your lens is consistently missing focus (these tests must be carefully conducted to ensure that it is the lenses fault that focus was missed and not the fault of the camera operator.  That means the camera MUST be on a tripod and incapable of moving or the test isn't valid.)  The 7D has AF calibration which is per-lens (I think it can "remember" the calibration of up to 50 unique lenses that you own.  Far more than you'd ever likely need.)  If the camera knows that a certain lenses consistently back-focuses by a few focus units, it can be programmed to "lie" to the lens ... telling it to focus just a fraction closer than it really wants.  That way when the lens back-focuses, it actually nails the focus right where you want it.  That little feature is another reason why you paid more for a 7D.

There is one more thing that I notice some people do.

In the default focus mode (aka "One Shot" mode), the camera wont focus until you press a button to activate focus.  This can be a half-press to the shutter button OR you can use another button (you can program back-buttons to start focus.)  But here's the important part about "One Shot" mode:  Once the camera locks focus... it shuts off the AF system.  That's it.  It's locked.  If the subject moves or if YOU move, the camera will NOT adjust the focus.  You'd have to release the shutter button and do another half-press to get it to turn the AF system back on.  "One Shot" mode is made for shots when the subject isn't moving.  It's focus is more accurate BUT... you must NOT move.  I have seen people set very shallow depth of field, focus... and then LEAN forward or backward (which of course means the subject is no longer at that same distance where the focus was locked.)

The camera does have a mode when the focus distance is constantly changing.  In "AI Servo" mode the focus system never stops working.  It's always checking to see if the focus distance changed and if focus can be improved.  You'd think that you should just leave the camera in this mode all the time... but that would be a mistake.  Only use "AI Servo" when you KNOW the focus distance will constantly be changing (e.g. action shots).  If you know the subject is stationary then use "One Shot" mode.  This is because in "AI Servo", the camera believes the subject SHOULD be moving... so even after focus locked, the camera will still try to tweak focus to see if it's changed.  Another nuance of "AI Servo" mode is that it's also a "release priority" mode -- that means the camera WILL take the picture when you fully press the shutter button ... whether the shot was in focus or not.  And THAT means that if you fully press the shutter at a moment when the camera was testing for movement, you can get an out-of-focus result.  In "One Shot" mode the camera is in "Focus Priority".  It will NOT take the shot unless it was able to lock focus.  Of course it only locks focus once and then it's clear to take the shot (even if the subject moved.)


----------



## TCampbell (Feb 20, 2013)

BTW, I forgot to suggest... if you haven't done so already, install the Canon DPP (Digital Photo Professional) software that came with the camera.  

When you open an image in DPP, you can right-click the image (which makes a pop-up menu appear) and click on "AF".  This will put an overlay on the image that SHOWS you which auto-focus point or points were used in that particular image.  

This way you can look at the image and tell if the camera locked focus on the eye (which is what you wanted) vs. someplace else.  

Apple's "Aperture" software can also display the auto-focus overlay... but Aperture (fantastic software, btw) is only available on the Mac.  DPP comes with every Canon DSLR and works on either Mac or Windows.

Last I heard, Photoshop and Lightroom still can't display the AF points (sounds like users will need to start pressuring Adobe to implement that feature because the data is in the image data that the camera records.  They just have to be willing to display it.)


----------



## Pallycow (Feb 20, 2013)

You want your backgrounds blurred and out of focus...not parts of your subject.  So your ideal image is not really a good one.  Having eyes in focus, so they pop, and your subjects arms..head..or other parts blurred...is just weird.  The photos you see online are not like that I can almost guarantee.

So much great advice has been posted here thus far, no point repeating it.  I'll just say your issue is your mindset, and your aperture.  Both shots would be a world of difference stopped down to 5.6 ish.  If there is not enough light to support that aperture, make more light.

If you really want to shoot wide open like that, at 1.4...which not many do by the way, back up further away to help give you more of a focal plane.

Good luck, don't quit.


----------



## gsgary (Feb 20, 2013)

Yes i think you shoud pack up, how about taking up knitting or sewing


----------



## TimothyJinx (Feb 20, 2013)

gsgary said:


> Yes i think you shoud pack up, how about taking up knitting or sewing



Yes, and send me all your gear. 

Just kidding. There is some great advice in this thread and personally I am learning a lot by reading it. I used to shoot wide open ALL the time since it seemed I was always needing more light. And my photos were almost always out of focus.


----------



## thunderkyss (Feb 20, 2013)

TimGreyPhotography said:


> Like many people commented before, increasing your aperture will help make more the picture in focus. There is also usually another advatange to this! Each lens has its "sweet spot". By that I mean an aperture that the lens is its sharpest. If you look at this resolution chart here of your lens: Sigma AF 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM (Nikon DX) - Review / Test Report - Analysis You will find that your lens is 15% sharper in the center at f/2.8-f/4 then it is at f/1.4. Also looking at this chart you can find that your lens has VERY poor resolution on the outside at f/1.4 and doesnt get good resolution till f/4. I would say f/4 is a good sweet spot for that lens.



That's an awesome site & something I've been looking for that goes beyond the "more expensive lenses are generally better" lens reviews. I like to know what I'm paying for & this helps. Thank you very much.


----------



## gsgary (Feb 20, 2013)

TimothyJinx said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> > Yes i think you shoud pack up, how about taking up knitting or sewing
> ...



Nothing wrong with shooting wide open, but not when you are learning


----------



## cynicaster (Feb 28, 2013)

Don&#8217;t give up, if you&#8217;re motivated enough that you&#8217;ll post in a forum in an attempt to learn, you&#8217;ll get it eventually.  It&#8217;s good to see you&#8217;re at least trying to use your DSLR as a DSLR rather than a big point and shoot camera. 

Lately I&#8217;ve seen all kinds of people dump piles of cash on DSLR cameras and expect that just because it&#8217;s big and expensive it will make stunning photographs a given.  A guy I work with spent a few grand on DSLR gear and a few weeks later came to me bitching about how his camera is a piece of s&*t that won&#8217;t take good pictures, blah blah blah.  I asked him to bring his camera into work so I could see it and within 30 seconds I determined it was set up to focus on the left most focus point, so any time he tried to focus on something in the center of his frame he was getting blurry shots.  It&#8217;s not my place to judge where people spend their money, but I was a bit dumbfounded that he would spend thousands of dollars on the gear and not be able to figure this out on his own, after a few weeks of ownership.  Perfect example of somebody who got duped by a salesman and should have just bought a $200 point and shoot camera.


----------



## The_Traveler (Feb 28, 2013)

Take a step back.
Learn about the exposure triangle and the relationship between aperture and depth of field.
Use DOFmaster.com to see how aperture and distance to subject affects DOF.

It takes a while to get good and a fancy camera doesn't speed things up much.


----------



## petto (Aug 28, 2013)

Where do you live?  If you live close to portland OR I would be happy to meet for a day and do some shots. I have a 7D as well.


----------



## Gavjenks (Aug 29, 2013)

I doubt that a 30mm f/1.4 wide open looking at a RAW file would ever be "tack sharp" under *any *circumstances. No matter who you are or how good you are.

What people think of as super tack sharp is something that doesn't even really exist in nature usually.  When you apply sharpening to a photo, you actually make dark areas on one side of an edge darker than reality and light areas on the light side lighter than reality.  This is what your visual system does anyway, and having it in the photo helps you along a little bit.  People have gotten used to it enough that even a perfectly sharp natural, RAW photo may not even look all that sharp by comparison, because the sharpening hasn't been applied yet.

Add on the fact that you're shooting wide open (lenses show more defects wide open which tend to soften, AND 1.4 is a razor thin depth of the 3-d scene being in focus) and you stand no chance of getting a super sharp looking photo like others will have who are showing your their jpegs (not unsharpened RAWs) at f/8.


----------



## Gavjenks (Aug 29, 2013)

Dont feel bad by the way. It's not uncommon at all for beginners to say to themselves "i just paid extra for this f/1.4 lens, so I'm damn well going to use it at f/1.4 all the time!"

And then you end up missing focus and getting blurry shots and end up all confused.  Happens all the time.  Using your lens with its aperture wide open is something you should only do if you have a good reason to do it.  Like if you're doing an artsy portrait and you don't care if it's slightly blurry (sometimes that's even flattering) as long as you get the really creamy background.  Or if you're in a really dark room.  But if you don't need it, then don't use it - use a mroe common and normal f/5.6 or f/8.


----------



## EDL (Aug 29, 2013)

Personally I really like the first shot.  I like the composition, and although the DoF is too shallow and focus isn't dead on where you wanted it, just a tiny bit of post processing makes up for it.  I wouldn't be too upset with that shot at all.


A quick bump in saturation, some brightness/contrast change and sharpening:


----------

