Troubleshooting: unable to take a sharp shot with Canon EOS1200D

bobbysafety

TPF Noob!
Joined
Apr 22, 2017
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

Last summer, I bought a canon EOS1200D (rebel T5) as a replacement for my 50$ point-and-shoot Samsung. After a trip to California, it appeared that most (approx 90%) of the pictures where a little out of focus. I took hundreds of other shots since then with that camera, tried all the different modes (from full-auto to manual) and replaced the two stock lenses with a better Canon 15-85 USM, which cost me a pretty penny.

I realize this is not the best camera out there, but the results should not look like some aquarelle painting. Because I am quite new to photography, I might be doing something wrong. Otherwise, it has something to do with the camera body, since all the other parts were replaced. Using a tripod did not solve the problem.

Attached are a few shots from my latest trip to Cornwall.
smrel3.jpg

and
t9z9l0.jpg


These pictures are not wildly wrong, but they are not sharp enough. Both were taken using one of the auto or assisted modes (landscape mode for the second for sure). All of my pictures are like this, including portraits, etc.

Please let me know if you think I am doing anything wrong or if I should blame it on the gear.

Thank you very, very much!

B.
 
A few thoughts:

1) Auto modes are somewhat hit and miss. They work, but they don't actually know what you're taking a photograph of; so they weight their settings based on commonly used settings for those scenes. So for example sports tries to get a faster shutter speed; whilst landscape a smaller aperture (bigger f number). In good light they tend to work decently well, but can trip you up.

In both your photos above you've the following setting:
Photo 1
Aperture f4 - decent depth of field and should be sharp
Shutter speed 1/800sec - more than fast enough for walking people, light breeze motion and for handholding for most people. So should be sharp.
ISO 160 - Low ISO value and thus should be pretty noise free unless you had to seriously boost the brightness in editing.

Photo 2
f5 - another good aperture not far from f4 in performance; but a little more depth of field.
1/400sec - again plenty fast enough for handholding and for light breeze motion.
ISO 100 - base ISO and thus should give its best noise performance so long as you didn't brighten a lot in editing

In this case auto settings have worked well and should produce a sharp shot.

2) You've posted resized versions which causes two issues. Firstly resizing reduces sharpness; which means that you've likely lost some sharpness to these shots. Typical resizing in editing software often requires sharpening the shot after resizing (and before) to restore that lost clarity of detail. Some website hosts which produce their own resized versions based on your fullsize upload do sharpen - however its crude because its only a default value applied equally to all photos (thus not as good as you doing it yourself).

Secondly a resized version means we can't see the fullsize detail that you are seeing. You can take the fullsized version and crop it (ergo cut out a segment) and save that under a new name and upload that to let us get a view of what your seeing or you can upload fullsized versions to websites quite easily today - flickr easily lets you upload and show fullsized versions if you want (many photographers don't because it allows others to freely print those full photos and increases potential for theft )
 
Definitely.not right.. do you have cheap UV filters.on the lenses?
 
Thanks both for your input!

I do not have any filters on. The results are the same with two other (stock) lenses. So spending 300$ on this USM thingy did not make any difference really.

I cannot find a way to anonymously link photos with flickr. Will keep looking through it. However, the full-size format will not look better, sadly.
 
If you have the camera set to make JPEG file type images the camera is doing more than the usual amount of image processing.
To get from the Raw file the camera makes when the shutter is released to the JPEG file type involves a reduction in the image bit depth and compression of the image file. I can't find if on Canon's web page if your 1200D's analog-to digital converter outputs 12-bit or 14-bit Raw files.
Bit Depth
Tutorials – The RAW File Format

Plus most DSLR image sensors have a filter in front of them called an anti-aliasing (AA or low pass) filter.
How aggressive that filter is varies from camera model to camera model.
The more aggressive the filter is the less sharp the images that model of camera can produce.

There are 2 types of auto focus focus points - regular and cross-type.
Regular AF points detect either vertical or horizontal contrast while cross type AF point detect contrast both ways.
Of the 9 AF points your T5 has only the center AF point is a cross-type AF point.

Photographer skill and knowledge also play a large part in how well any camera/lens combo can perform.
There is good camera holding technique, bad camera holding technique , and in between camera holding technique.
What focus mode and focus area mode and focus point do you use mostly?
Understanding Camera Autofocus
 
The re-sizing has altered the original data quite a bit. As far as it goes....f/4 is not going to provide full depth of field on a scene that is "that deep"; some parts will be crisp, other parts will not be 100% sharp. Same with f/5...it might not create enough DOF.

But since this seems to be a systemic issue: maybe the camera's truly at fault. Perhaps the focusing system has an adjustment issue with it. I can NOT really tell from these tow rather small, size-reduced images. But I do see what is called high-frequency detail that is shown, that does show up, but not as clearly as it should show up; this is common when there's some type of minor issue, since the fineer detail ***is*** shown, but as I said, not 100% clearly.

Maybe the lens mount on the camera is out of specification; shims are often used to get them properly dpaced. OR, there is another spacing error,m like the mirror is not in 100% proper spacing, or the viewfinder screen is off by a few hunbdredths of an inch, etc..

It could also be that Image Sharpening in-camera is set to OFF, and that perhaps you are not familiar with the need to apply Unsharp Masking after the fact to all d-slr images. It could be that you are not 100% used to the needed small f/stops to get Infinite Depth of FIeld wirth a camera like this. DO you use in-camera imge sharpening? If not, the images will tend to look a slight bit fuzzy,due to the OLP or optical low-pass filter.
 
KmH and Derrel,

Thank you for this. Here are some more thoughts/comments:
- I believe I hold my camera appropriately, or at least pretty much;
- I do not know what this "unsharp masking" and image sharpening is, how do I change this?
- What Derrel mentions as "high-frequency detail" really does speak to me. That's the funny thing: there is quite a bit of detail available, but the picture still lacks sharpness, somewhat paradoxically;
- I have tried various focus modes, either the automatic or the manual settings;
- I have tried all the picture modes, from totally tailored to fully assisted. Nothing in particular works better, so I have just sort of given up on noodling around with the settings, because it never makes a difference;
- As for depth of field, the sharpness issue seems quite unrelated, whatever the depth, nothing works;

Could a software reset somehow help (if that's possible)? Could the issue be due to the SD card I am using?

Thanks again for your really precious help with this! It has been a while and I am happy to have help getting rid of these issues!

Edit: by the way, apart from flickr, what would be a good way to share the full size pictures with you?
And yes, I will try the RAW files!
 
Last edited:
Where as JPEG is edited in the camera, including sharpening among other edits whose values you can set in your camera, and is designed to be a ready-to-print file type, Raw files aren't.
Sharpening is a book length subject:
Real World Image Sharpening with Adobe Photoshop, Camera Raw, and Lightroom (2nd Edition)

You would have to sharpen your photos and do whatever post shot editing that is needed to wind up with a finished image.
Photos from Raw files destined for electronic display get somewhat different editing than Raw files destined for printing.

The Digital Negative: Raw Image Processing in Lightroom, Camera Raw, and Photoshop (2nd Edition)
The Digital Print: Preparing Images in Lightroom and Photoshop for Printing
 
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Try shooting in a cluttered environment (maybe your back yard) at say f11, ISO 200, 1/800 during the day (but keep an eye on your meter and adjust shutter accordingly or lower ISO to 100 if too bright). Now shoot those same settings at f4. Do you see the difference in the DOF? That "may" be your "sharpness" issue. Are you shooting in JPEG large? How do you feel about shooting in RAW and trying to do a bit of post editing in digital photo professional? You did NOT waste money on your new lens at all. Improving the glass is always a good step and you did try to troubleshoot with better glass which was smart if you find use in it. Do you shoot in manual at all or do you shoot in auto? Some of the settings in the camera "extras" like red eye reduction if you use flash, auto lighting optimizer, picture style and any other corrections or enhancements in the camera can effect the image as well. I turn them all OFF and apply them in DPP if I want or need them, but I also shoot RAW. I think the photo's may be compressed too much.
 
I take it that before you went to California the images were fine, and then after that trip you started noticing the problems.

The focus seems off to me. There should be something in focus in the image, but I don't really see it. The second shot has sort of fuzzy grass near the camera and then a fuzzy barn off to infinity with the area in between slightly better but never really what I would expect it should be even with the size of image posted.
 
Unsharp Masking is a post-processing step in which the original camera data is "sharpened", and that sharpening counteracts the slight blurring effect of the camera's low-pass filter. The low pass filter gives a slight fuzziness to the image, and prevents moire effects from showing up in high-frequency details. Normally this sharpening step is called USM application. There are other ways to sharpen an original digital image as well, to make it look very nice and crsipon a computer display, or for a nice, crisp printed-out image to be made, but applying USM is a very common software processing step when using Photoshop or similar image editing software.

Looking at the top image with the trees: I see a fair amount of purple color fringing where the tree branches are seen against the sky: this is farily common, and can be either birefringence or chromatic aberration, an optical fault that many lenses exhibit, and which lowers apparent sharpness.

The fact is that MOST d-slr images straight out of camera are NOT 100% sharp and crisp, but have a very fine,fine "veiling" of the high-frequency detail; USM removes that thin veil of fuzz, and creates a mathematically sharpened, amazingly CRISP! looking images. Look for some on-line articles about sharpening images. Again, as stated, if your are shooting JPEG images with the camera, you will very likely want to set the In-Camera Sharpening control to a level of about 7 of 10 on a numerical scale, or to Medium-High in a verbal scale; about that level will look decent. If the In-Camera Sharpening is set to LOW, or to OFF, then straight out of camera (SOOC) JPEG images will look ever-so-slightly soft.
 
Dear all,

Thank you very much for the messages. I have tried to modify in-camera sharpening, but am not sure my camera has many options in this respect. I am quite surprised that there appears not to be a "general" settings menu, but just a menu that varies with each mode selected.. I will try to see if there is a firmware update that might help.

I bought the camera in California. I discovered the issue when I came home and was looking forward to looking at those nice Bay Area pictures, but no.. It also means I cannot send it back to Canon.

I have tried using the manual mode, changing the ISO, aperture, etc. Provided the picture "works", i.e. looks okay, the sharpness problem is always there. I did notice though that the problem is very obvious with landscapes and portraits. I did manage to get some sharper, more normal, pictures of small objects (birds, etc.) using the tele-objective (stock 55-300). Out of the approx 2 thousand pictures I took, maybe 10-20 are good.

Regarding RAW files, I can do this, but it seems like quite a strenuous process to correct all the pictures one-by-one and have to use software whenever I just want to look at my random holiday pictures.
 
.. it has something to do with the camera body..
Unfortunately, that could be the case, but in order to know for sure, you will have to investigate methodically. I suggest that you first obtain one of those focus-checking targets. If you have a laser printer (not an ink-jet) you can find one online. Or purchase one for a few pounds.

Then take your camera to a camera store that carries your brand of camera and ask to try one of their lenses. Talk to the owner/manager and explain your purpose. Do everything correctly when making your photograph, including using a tripod and good lighting. Upload the image to your computer and zoom in to verify the focus. If that lens is good, then it may be your lenses, if it is not good, it could be the body. Send the body to the factory or an authorized Canon repair facility along with some sample files showing the OOF problem.

It either gets fixed at a reasonable cost, or it won't, but at least you'll know.
 
Thanks Designer for this.

I tried something similar, because I tried 4 different lenses and then tried all four of these lenses in my girlfriend's body. They worked with her, same settings, but not with my body, with a few exceptions (especially the tele-objective). Does this make sense or do you recommend your test nonetheless?

As for sending it back to the shop, Canon has a bad reputation re. speed and costs here in Switzerland. So I am a bit reluctant, especially because this body is not worth very much money, relatively speaking.

I will attempt a firmware update as I don't seem to have the latest version.
 
Does this make sense or do you recommend your test nonetheless?
I see you have done a good test already. If your camera does not have the capability for fine-tuning the focus, then you are stuck with the problem. The firmware update won't take long, and it is fairly easy to do. Good luck!
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top