# Help, why are my pictures so blurry?



## page_tyson (May 6, 2010)

Here are some pictures I took today of some friends.  I'm kinda bummed cause almost every picture is out of focus.  Here's what I took the pictures with, Canon Rebel xs 10.1 mp, and a canon 50 mm 1.8 ef lens.  I know I'm doing something wrong here but don't know what.  I try to focus on faces (typically around the eyes).  Is there a setting on my camera that I should be aware of? or Is there something wrong with my auto focus? I've only had the camera for a few months now and am just not getting the results I would like. Does this blurriness come from user error or lack of quality equipment? I can't for the life of me take a crystal clear picture.  I took these pictures at  f1.8 and Iso 200.  Is the ISO set too low?  Even the pictures taken from a tripod are not in focus. (These pictures have not yet been photoshoped)

1.
IMG_5950.jpg picture by page_tyson - Photobucket

2.
IMG_5954.jpg picture by page_tyson - Photobucket

3.
http://s809.photobucket.com/albums/zz15/page_tyson/?action=view&current=IMG_5955.jpg


----------



## vansnxtweek (May 6, 2010)

I see what you mean.  Have you tried using the manual focus function to focus exactly where you want?  Maybe go into the P mode on the camera that way it still chooses the shutter speed and aperature value but you have a bit more control over focus.


----------



## kelli_anne (May 6, 2010)

I would use manual focus for these types of shots.  If this was moving kids then that would be a different story! There should be different focus settings on your camera.  The ISO should have nothing to do with the blurring. 200 is a fairly low number, the higher the number the more nosie a photo can have, this is not nosie this is focusing problems. I would read through your camera user manual and see what it says on focusing. I always find that I get better results when I focus myself.


----------



## Fedaykin (May 6, 2010)

Try either using your AF points instead of full auto AF or Manual focus. In that first picture for example you could have chosen the second to left most AF point on your XS and placed it over her eyes, that should have gotten a good focus. If you were shooting wide open try stopping down to say f/5.6 so you have a larger DoF to work with. 

If you don't want to have to manually select your AF point(it's actually very easy and fast to do and right in the viewfinder) or use MF you could just use AF point selection and leave it in the center point; focus on your subject by placing it/him/her right in the middle and half-pressing the shutter, then leave it half pressed, recompose and take the shot. problem with this is it's not always spot on and you're still moving your lens somewhat, so I recommend manually selecting you AF point if you can. 

Hope that helps.


----------



## ghpham (May 6, 2010)

Looks like the problem is that the camera is choosing its own AF point instead of you.  If you take a look at the third photo for instant, you will see the girl's jean and to some degree, the bridge they were on is pretty clearly focused.


----------



## page_tyson (May 6, 2010)

That's why it's so frustrating. I always select the focus point.  Anyway thanks for the suggestions. I'll try stopping down to around 5.6 and see if it helps.  I love the DOF I get at 1.8-2.2 and the amount of light it gives me, doing so just doesn't give me the consistency that I would like.  As far as equipment goes I should get better results though right?


----------



## Goontz (May 6, 2010)

The DOF is so narrow at those large apertures that even using a focus and recompose method can throw your intended focal point out of the DOF. You have to be very careful how much you move the camera when recomposing. That could be the problem here.


----------



## bazooka (May 6, 2010)

Also note that the 1.8 is quite soft at 1.8.  Stopping down will help with overall sharpness.


----------



## DerekSalem (May 6, 2010)

At f/1.8 the dof is literally probably only an inch or 2 at that distance (second pic). Decrease aperture size but also just use the center focus point. It's usually the most accurate of them. Lock focus then move the viewfinder where you want. 

And it's not a movement blur problem it's just an out of focus problem with possibly some softness from the camera body


----------



## KmH (May 6, 2010)

Do you have 'protective' UV filters on your lens(s)? If you do and they are not high quality filters, take them off.

The pop-ups on photobucket are very annoying:

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...forum-functions-pictoral-guide-using-tpf.html


----------



## mwcfarms (May 6, 2010)

Im not sure if Canons software has this option or not but this has helped me somewhat in my focusing. In the Nikon software you have the option to see what your camera actually focused on once you've downloaded them to the computer. If you go out take a few shots write down what you think you were focusing on and then checking again see how off it is. Im not sure if Canon does but it helped me a bit. Good luck.


----------



## gsgary (May 6, 2010)

Your setting are all to cock, at that distance you should have been at F8, iso was too high at iso400 which gave you a shutter speed of 1/4000, don't use F1.8 for shooting outdoor portraits nowhere near enough DOF


----------



## Derrel (May 6, 2010)

"I took these pictures at f1.8 "

THAT is almost assuredly your problem.


----------



## Jeff Colburn (May 6, 2010)

You're too far away from your subjects to be using f/1.8. This setting will give you almost no depth of field. Try shooting at 5.6-8 and see how that works.

Have Fun,
Jeff


----------



## page_tyson (May 6, 2010)

Awesome, thanks for the replies. I was starting to realize that towards the end of the shoot.  I'm just not quite familiar with this new lens.  It was the first time I had really used it outdoors.  I'm just glad it was a more a user error and not the cheap lens I bought.  For the price I love the indoor pictures it takes.


----------



## Ryan L (May 6, 2010)

erose86 said:


> Yeah Canon does... at least it came with my T2i... I've used it several times... which is how I discovered that my camera was constantly focusing on my husband's cymbals rather than his *face* at shows, haha.


 
I didn't know this! I have never used the Canon software. Do you know which program it is? Maybe the EOS Utility?


----------



## chammer (May 6, 2010)

Ryan L: DPP. Here's a screenshot showing the menu, and what it looks like...

http://www.sixtysixdegrees.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/dpp_af_point.png


----------



## Ryan L (May 6, 2010)

chammer said:


> Ryan L: DPP. Here's a screenshot showing the menu, and what it looks like...
> 
> http://www.sixtysixdegrees.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/dpp_af_point.png


 
I never loaded it, but I might just have to check it out. Thanks


----------



## page_tyson (May 6, 2010)

Thanks for the replies.  I've learned a lot from all of them.


----------



## tsaraleksi (May 7, 2010)

Your problem is all in using your focus points correctly. As long as you get the focus points right, then you can use 1.8 just fine if you want shallow depth of field. I'd suggest practicing on static objects to figure out what exactly is going wrong in your process. 

One thing that can help is switching your autofocus off of the shutter button and to the "*" button on the back of the camera. This can really help to keep you from misfocusing as you shoot pictures. 

One last note: Jeff, you have things turned around a bit. If you are using a wide-open aperture, getting further away will actually get *more* of your subject in focus rather than less.


----------



## Jeff Colburn (May 7, 2010)

tsaraleksi said:


> One last note: Jeff, you have things turned around a bit. If you are using a wide-open aperture, getting further away will actually get *more* of your subject in focus rather than less.



Sorry, my wording was a bit off. Yes, the further away you are from a subject the greater the depth of field at any aperture. But f/1.8 will give you the least depth of field at any distance, and since the man's face is in focus, but not the girl's (their faces are different distances from the camera) the problem is the f/1.8. Now if the photographer backed up another 50-100 feet, the f/1.8 setting would probably be fine.

Have Fun,
Jeff


----------

