Clear photos and lens choice for the Nikon D5000

astroNikon · Oct 21, 2016

Tbehl1214 said:
And here is one I did outside today. I basically played around with the settings, but kept it on AF-S. When I focus in on the subjects, they are still blurry. Ugh.

Want to confirm that you are in AF-S Focus Mode with Single Focus Point
so the single focus point is on the subject ?

Your shutter speed should be fine unless you move the camera a lot. To the right of the shed you can see a DOF variation.

I'll say this. I had a 55-200 non-VR lens at one time. It was a soft lens, ie not very sharp at all.
Can you retry with a different lens?

Camera: Nikon D5000
Lens: 55-200 mm f/4-5.6
Shot at 55 mm
Exposure: Auto exposure, Aperture-priority AE, 1/200 sec, f/4.5, ISO 400

Tim Tucker · Oct 23, 2016

Though I understand that the modern trend is to look towards the technology for an answer, you must also not forget to look at the subject.

Sharpness, or the appearance of sharpness in an image is strongly linked to contrast (or more accurately, acutance). Hence the terms 'hard light' and 'soft light' because it really does make a difference.

Now all the images on this page where there is sunlight you have placed the kids in the shadow and pointed the camera into the direction of the light. This reduces the contrast in your subject considerably (and adds lens flare), it also decreases the levels of light you have to work with. With "Jack", for instance, his face is in shadow because the main diffuse light is from behind.

Try shooting a couple where the light is behind your shoulder and illuminating the subject rather that behind the subject so you're shooting into the shadows. See the difference.

EDIT: Here is the last shot you posted, as an example. See how you're pointing the camera into the direction of the light and placing your subjects into the shadow. You already have your subjects lit by the lowest levels of light and contrast. You are also committing yourself to bigger adjustments in your editing software inevitably increasing noise. I also can't help but notice that in editing you've recovered the detail in the sunlight parts of the image rather than giving the best renditioning of the subjects. With more careful subject placement the overblown highlights wouldn't be there so why edit you photo to them at the expense of the subject?

Original:

Edited more for the subject:

Tbehl1214 · Oct 25, 2016

astroNikon said:
Tbehl1214 said:

And here is one I did outside today. I basically played around with the settings, but kept it on AF-S. When I focus in on the subjects, they are still blurry. Ugh.

Click to expand...

Want to confirm that you are in AF-S Focus Mode with Single Focus Point
so the single focus point is on the subject ?

Your shutter speed should be fine unless you move the camera a lot. To the right of the shed you can see a DOF variation.

I'll say this. I had a 55-200 non-VR lens at one time. It was a soft lens, ie not very sharp at all.
Can you retry with a different lens?

Camera: Nikon D5000
Lens: 55-200 mm f/4-5.6
Shot at 55 mm
Exposure: Auto exposure, Aperture-priority AE, 1/200 sec, f/4.5, ISO 400

Thank you for responding! Yes, I was in AF-S focus mode. I did place the focus point I believe between the boys, but perhaps I should have focused on just one?

I am hoping to get a 50mm lens, but still have some researching to do. I have the older body Nikon with autofocus so I am not sure which lens would be good for these types of shots. I do have the kit lens (18-55mm) but I don't care for it much. I would really like to learn how to get a clear photo and I do really love the blur (or Bokea). Would the 50mm help me achieve a clear photo?

Tbehl1214 · Oct 25, 2016

Tim Tucker said:
Though I understand that the modern trend is to look towards the technology for an answer, you must also not forget to look at the subject.

Sharpness, or the appearance of sharpness in an image is strongly linked to contrast (or more accurately, acutance). Hence the terms 'hard light' and 'soft light' because it really does make a difference.

Now all the images on this page where there is sunlight you have placed the kids in the shadow and pointed the camera into the direction of the light. This reduces the contrast in your subject considerably (and adds lens flare), it also decreases the levels of light you have to work with. With "Jack", for instance, his face is in shadow because the main diffuse light is from behind.

Try shooting a couple where the light is behind your shoulder and illuminating the subject rather that behind the subject so you're shooting into the shadows. See the difference.

EDIT: Here is the last shot you posted, as an example. See how you're pointing the camera into the direction of the light and placing your subjects into the shadow. You already have your subjects lit by the lowest levels of light and contrast. You are also committing yourself to bigger adjustments in your editing software inevitably increasing noise. I also can't help but notice that in editing you've recovered the detail in the sunlight parts of the image rather than giving the best renditioning of the subjects. With more careful subject placement the overblown highlights wouldn't be there so why edit you photo to them at the expense of the subject?

Original:
View attachment 129154

Edited more for the subject:
View attachment 129155

Thank you for responding! I have just started experimenting with photoshop, although I guess I need to avoid using it until I can get the "best" photo first. I've read that you are supposed to have the sun behind your subject. Should I have them face the sunlight instead? I prefer to shoot right before sunset, but still can't figure out how to get the best lighting while keeping the subjects clear. I also really like the blurry backgrounds, but can't seem to even get my photos sharp enough and that is what I am mainly concerned about right now.