1/250 still blur?

[shawntim]

hi guys,

I'm using 602.

I'm quite upset with the photos I've taken because ALL of them are blur at 3Mpx size. I'm using Metz32-1 and using 1/250, but when taking even stationary objects, it still comes out blur. I wonder if I'm the only one who's really that bad because all the pics i see posted here are post-processed with USM and scaled down, both which greatly increases the sharpness and clarity of lines in the image.

Any ideas?

 

[ckiang]

Originally posted by shawntim
hi guys,

I'm using 602.

I'm quite upset with the photos I've taken because ALL of them are blur at 3Mpx size. I'm using Metz32-1 and using 1/250, but when taking even stationary objects, it still comes out blur. I wonder if I'm the only one who's really that bad because all the pics i see posted here are post-processed with USM and scaled down, both which greatly increases the sharpness and clarity of lines in the image.

Any ideas?

Digital camera images, scanned images, etc are usually not very sharp to begin with. A touch of USM usually brings out all the sharpness there is.

Regards
CK

 

[darkness]

The "blur-ness" may be due to focusing problems?? Make sure that the "AF!" warning doesn't appear after you half-shutter it. Also, in low light (that's why u using flash?) focusing may cause some problems.

 

[Minority]

Originally posted by ckiang


Digital camera images, scanned images, etc are usually not very sharp to begin with. A touch of USM usually brings out all the sharpness there is.

Regards
CK

BTW whats a USM? how to use it?

 

[Adam Goi]

Originally posted by Minority


BTW whats a USM? how to use it?

USM=Unsharp Mask.

 

[Gr|ever]

Originally posted by AdamGoi


USM=Unsharp Mask.

Care to explain? Very curious...
How about a before USM & after USM pic? Hope I'm not asking for too much! :embrass:

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by shawntim
hi guys,

I'm using 602.

I'm quite upset with the photos I've taken because ALL of them are blur at 3Mpx size. I'm using Metz32-1 and using 1/250, but when taking even stationary objects, it still comes out blur. I wonder if I'm the only one who's really that bad because all the pics i see posted here are post-processed with USM and scaled down, both which greatly increases the sharpness and clarity of lines in the image.

Any ideas?

Hi

why not u post a full size untouched raw sample, and then we help to diagnose

 

[Minority]

Originally posted by AdamGoi


USM=Unsharp Mask.

Ah that. what is the usual setting?
50% 1 0?

 

[Acieed]

Originally posted by Minority


Ah that. what is the usual setting?
50% 1 0?

Don't think there's a "usual setting". But I would use 1 pixel for digicam images and play around with the %.

 

[ckiang]

Originally posted by Minority


Ah that. what is the usual setting?
50% 1 0?

There is no "usual setting". It depends on subject, noise level of the pic, grain size, how big the pic is, whether for screen or for print, for what kind of printer, etc.

Regards
CK

 

[shawntim]

Originally posted by Red Dawn
Hi

why not u post a full size untouched raw sample, and then we help to diagnose

Hi Red Dawn,

Thanks for offering to diagnose. On first look it seems like it's simply out of focus.. but when all of my shots are like these...

http://members.lycos.co.uk/taoer/misc/JurongBirdPark_134.JPG

 

[erwinx]

Originally posted by shawntim

Hi Red Dawn,

Thanks for offering to diagnose. On first look it seems like it's simply out of focus.. but when all of my shots are like these...

http://members.lycos.co.uk/taoer/misc/JurongBirdPark_134.JPG

Can we have a few more samples? This one seems to be due to failing to focus on the eye?

 

[Midnight]

Originally posted by Minority
Ah that. what is the usual setting?
50% 1 0?

As CK has pointed out, the settings you use will vary depending on the content of your photos as well as what you intend to do with them (eg. printing vs monitor display). Having said that, I find that 175%, radius 0.5, threshold 2 does the trick for me for most of the kind of photos I tend to take, so you might find those values to be a useful generic starting point.

If you want to learn a lot more, here is a link to a fairly well-written introduction to Unsharp Mask: http://www.creativepro.com/story/feature/11242.html

 

[imaginary_number]

I think photoshop can do wonders.

Using your pic as a sample:

Before

After

 

[imaginary_number]

Originally posted by shawntim
hi guys,

I'm using 602.

I'm quite upset with the photos I've taken because ALL of them are blur at 3Mpx size. I'm using Metz32-1 and using 1/250, but when taking even stationary objects, it still comes out blur. I wonder if I'm the only one who's really that bad because all the pics i see posted here are post-processed with USM and scaled down, both which greatly increases the sharpness and clarity of lines in the image.

Any ideas?

I realised that at times, the 602 focuses on the background as opposed to the subject, even though you locked the bracket on the subject. I wonder if you're having this problem as well?

Btw, what's the sharpening setting you're using?

 

[chenwei]

Originally posted by imaginary_number
I think photoshop can do wonders.
.....

i dun think this is the way to solve the problem, if everything need PS then what is the point...

shawn take note that for some birds behind the glass, u need to use manual focus since auto-focus dun really work fine. also, even 1/250, if the moment u press the shuttle ur hand still shaking, it still have the posibility to get blur.

oh ya, wat imaginary_number said is also correct, 602 sometimes somehow stupid focus the background... ;(

 

[ckiang]

Originally posted by chenwei

i dun think this is the way to solve the problem, if everything need PS then what is the point...

shawn take note that for some birds behind the glass, u need to use manual focus since auto-focus dun really work fine. also, even 1/250, if the moment u press the shuttle ur hand still shaking, it still have the posibility to get blur.

oh ya, wat imaginary_number said is also correct, 602 sometimes somehow stupid focus the background... ;(

Well, one has to get used to the new workflow when one shoot digital. Post processing is almost a must, not a taboo. Things like levels, curves adjustment, USM etc is part of the workflow, even for professionals. No way you can get a perfect image out of camera as the process of digital capture and de-mosaicing the CCD data introduces some level of softness.

The "focussing on background" problem is not a 602 problem, it's inherent in ALL consumer/prosumer digital cameras. This is because it uses what's known as Contrast Detection AF, and the background in this case is a lot more contrasty than the flamingo in the foreground, so there you have it.

Regards
CK

P.S. Sorry chenwei, while replying, I clicked on "Edit" instead of "Quote" and accidentally edited your post. I managed to put back most of it apart from the image, so you might want to post again. ;p :embrass:

 

[chenwei]

Originally posted by ckiang

Well, one has to get used to the new workflow when one shoot digital. Post processing is almost a must, not a taboo. Things like levels, curves adjustment, USM etc is part of the workflow, even for professionals. No way you can get a perfect image out of camera as the process of digital capture and de-mosaicing the CCD data introduces some level of softness.

The "focussing on background" problem is not a 602 problem, it's inherent in ALL consumer/prosumer digital cameras. This is because it uses what's known as Contrast Detection AF, and the background in this case is a lot more contrasty than the flamingo in the foreground, so there you have it.

Regards
CK

P.S. Sorry chenwei, while replying, I clicked on "Edit" instead of "Quote" and accidentally edited your post. I managed to put back most of it apart from the image, so you might want to post again. ;p :embrass:

i can't deny post processing is a must, like level and curve adjustment but NOT USM i think.

btw, lazy n forgot wat i wrote already.... ;p in points should be:
1. not focus properly
2. handshake
3. glass

 

[imaginary_number]

Originally posted by chenwei

i can't deny post processing is a must, like level and curve adjustment but NOT USM i think.

btw, lazy n forgot wat i wrote already.... ;p in points should be:
1. not focus properly
2. handshake
3. glass

IMHO, USM is almost a must, at least for me. As a matter of fact, by setting the sharpening option in the 602z to normal is already itself a form of USM.

Perhaps you might find this article interesting:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/smart_sharp.shtml

"Sharpening is a fact of life for photographers who output digitally. Both digital cameras and film scanners produce digital images which are subtly (or not!) softer than the optical images they are derived from..."

 

[imaginary_number]

Originally posted by ckiang

The "focussing on background" problem is not a 602 problem, it's inherent in ALL consumer/prosumer digital cameras. This is because it uses what's known as Contrast Detection AF, and the background in this case is a lot more contrasty than the flamingo in the foreground, so there you have it.

Hi CK,

Is there any way to avoid/resolve/work around this problem?