I can't shoot people. Example included.

[Lightsped]

So often I am taking a photo of a person and the person's face comes out blurry, but the background comes out sharp. I have three different bodies, and many different lenses. This seems to happen way to often no matter what equipment I am using.

For example, I just made this photo. 1/8000, f1.4, ISO100. I am using single point AF and the AF point is up two spaces from center. The single AF point is on his face during the time of the photo. D800 with 50mm 1.4g. This photo is completely unedited. Notice how the bush is sharp, but the person is not. I made several identical photos in this shoot and they all came out the same. This happens very often with me no matter the body or lens combo.

Please help.

 

[Derrel]

The active focus point probably hit the garage. At f/1.4, there is not much of a depth of field band at this close a distance. A smaller aperture would have helped. Although I can understand that you might have had the active AF point aimed at his head, very often the AF indicators in the viewfinder are not super-accurate; it is quite common for enough variance between the indicators and the ACTUAL AF sensing area that in instances like this, with a small target, the bracket might be on the target, but if even a little bit of it moves off the target, the focus will be placed BEHIND the subject.

Thom Hogan had an article a few years back on AF bracket areas and focus accuracy, using an outdoor laundry line and pole as targets...it was instructive. Again, the in-viewfinder AF brackets sometimes are not precise enough for critical situations; The AF sensing area in not "always" right in the middle of the bracket--it might be a bit off to one side.

A good rule in a shot like this is to aim for the CHEST, not the head, when the head is so small a target, due to either distance, or short focal length. With say an 18mm focal length, his head would be rendered very small in the frame: aiming for the head would be a risky proposition: a better target would be the torso. The shorter the focal length, the more easily mis-aimed an individual focusing bracket can be. At wide settings, the bracket area is quite imprecise.

f/1.4 at 1/8000; f/2 at 1/4000; f/2.8 at 1/2000; f/4 at 1/1000; f/5.6 at 1/500; all offer equivalent exposure, but the f/5.6 at 1/500 second choice would have had more depth of field, but in this specific case, it's pretty clear: this is a classic example of back focusing; the AF system has focused on a target well in back of the desired target area.

 

[bribrius]

put it on the smiley setting.

 

[Designer]

lightsped; if you start out better, your chances of achieving better results will be higher.

Your choice of camera body was not the problem. Your choice of lens might have been o.k. of you had chosen a smaller aperture. I can't imagine why you would choose f/1.4 for this shot. Your total DOF was about 0.36 feet. Pretty thin.

Considering the depth of subject (car bumper to garage), I'd guess you need about 25 feet of depth, and considering how close you are to the car's bumper, your aperture probably should have been more like f/32. But even at that, your DOF is going to be only about 15 feet, total, so still not enough. So wrong lens, in other words.

What lens, then? Let's have a look at one of my favorites; the 18-55 set to the wide end of the scale.

So at f/5.6 you're still getting about 113 feet for the DOF, so your entire subject will be in focus.

I plugged in a different focal length, which is fairly close to your choice of the 50mm. I chose to set my zoom at 40mm, and got this: at f/22, I got this:
Subject distance 6 ft

Depth of field
Near limit 3.41 ft
Far limit 24.9 ft
Total 21.5 ft

So now you get the entire subject in focus at 40mm. Howzat?

 

[bribrius]

does this help?
Focal Length 4.9mm
Exposure 1/200
F Number f/10
ISO 200

 

[Lightsped]

Thanks for the replies! Yes, I suppose I should be placing the single focus point on his chest instead of his head. I'd like to read that Thom Hogan article if I can find it.

My desired results for this photo was that the car and background be out of focus. That is why I chose the 50mm 1.4g. I guess using a smaller aperture would have helped.

This isn't the only time this has happened. I have three bodies and a few pro lenses. Seems to happen way to often, no matter the equipment....

With the subject standing still does it matter if I use AFS or AFC focus modes?

 

[Designer]

I kind of look at things differently, I guess. If the scene is deep, I always assume the photographer intends to include the subject, the foreground and the background as one composition. Therefore I assume if you are including the car and the fairly close background (garage) that you would want it all in focus.

Now, if for some reason you wish to forget about posing your subject with his car, and would like to throw the background out of focus (because it's not important) then get some more space between your subject and the inconsequential background so that you can get the background out of focus.

Even then you will want to keep your entire subject (his chin, his ears, his hair, etc.) in focus, so you're probably going to need a bit more DOF than just 0.35 feet. (that's about 4 inches) So even if you get his nose in focus, his ears will not be.

AF-S is for stationary subjects.

AF-C is for subjects that are moving.

 

[wfooshee]

With AF-C, if you move the camera after focusing, the focus changes, thus the term Continuous.

If you want to aim and focus, then compose by re-aiming, your focus mode MUST be AF-S and you will have to hold that half-press of the shutter button, or hold the AF/AE-lock button. Letting go of either forces starting over.

Your question about AF-S vs AF-C implies that you may have been in AF-C, not the right mode for what you were doing here.

On another note, foreground bokeh usually looks like a mistake, while background bokeh is a nice way of separating your subject from the background. In this shot, with a continuous line from foreground to subject (the car) foreground bokeh is not a good idea at all, I don't think. In my own opinion.

 

[BillM]

AF-S vs AF-C could make a big difference if you are moving even a little when working with less than 4 inches of depth.

 

[Bebulamar]

NO! You can't shoot people it's an extremely serious crime.

 

[Derrel]

Here's a very good article on the D2x's complicated AF system and how to use it, along with the body controls like the AF ON button; but take note of the (unexpectedly larger???) T-shape or Inverted T-shape of the actual focusing sensors, as opposed to the smaller brackets seen in the viewfinder....this is what I mean: the actual focusing area and the in-viewfinder indicators are NOT necessarily identical.
Nikon Nature Photography

 

[Lightsped]

Thanks again for the replies. As for the above photo. I was in AF-S mode with single point selected. Single point was centered (L to R) and about two positions up from center (Up and Down). I would have liked to position the subject and his car futher away from the background, but I was rushed. This was a last minute "hey can you take my photo real quick before I leave?" type of thing....

 

[Designer]

I was rushed. This was a last minute "hey can you take my photo real quick before I leave?" type of thing....

Being rushed has never worked well for me either.

 

[bribrius]

Thanks again for the replies. As for the above photo. I was in AF-S mode with single point selected. Single point was centered (L to R) and about two positions up from center (Up and Down). I would have liked to position the subject and his car futher away from the background, but I was rushed. This was a last minute "hey can you take my photo real quick before I leave?" type of thing....

Rushing doesn't work. A scene can only give what it can give. Even a few minutes of thought or prep can make a world of difference. That said, a difference lens. (but much more expense) may have cut that for you. Or you could blur it oof in post process still. Usually, you are better off just taking the shot the correct way to start with and taking your time. For the "quick shot" i tend to go with the "either it works or it doesn't " philosophy and toss what doesnt make it. I have done similar shots and just tried to blur the background in post while reducing contrast, but it hardly ever is worth the effort and still doesn't come out as good as just shooting it the right way to start with. Last minute=candid. I took 15 minutes just setting up a bw film shot of my wife reading to my children the other day. Granted, film and all manual, but it took that long for me to figure out how i wanted it.

 

[psreilly]

1.4 is a very small margin for an f-stop. Like some of the others have said, just adjust that aperture and bump it up a little and you should be getting better results