Sharpness Priority - What is your secret?

[ORourkeK]

Shutter speed is one of the most important settings in assuring your subject is sharp. Because of this, I like to start by setting my shutter speed. I like to set my starting point at about 1/80. If my subject is moving I will increase it accordingly. I do not like to go below 1/60.

I try to maintain no lower than 1/125sec. I'll turn off VC/VR if I start to get about 1/500.

Next is aperture. For a nice shallow DOF I like to keep my aperture as close to 2.8 as I can. The more people added to the photo, the higher I go. This actually helps with the low light problems my D3100 has.

You want to stop the lens down to maintain the best sharpness throughout, however that lens is pretty sharp wide-open. But you'll have a narrow DOF. I suggest starting at f/5.6 unless you need the extra light.



800 ISO is fine on the D3100. I often took it to 1600--Above that is gets iffy for sure, but still complete usable. This was shot at ISO 2800 with a D3100 using the cheap 55-200mm and it's fine: https://www.flickr.com/photos/80607199@N08/9527687182/sizes/l

Dont worry so much about ISO if it means you need a very slow shutter that will capture your motion or your subject's. While ISO 100 is great for quality, modern cameras handle high ISO values pretty well if you have to sacrifice.



Not a horrible process. But I try, even at short focal lengths, to stay about 1/125sec. Working on your method here helps as well. I have very sharp images with the Tamron at 1/30sec.

Next is focus. You can’t have a sharp subject if your focus is poor. I have been using my focus points to choose what I want to focus. I am going to start using the two step shutter for focusing and see if that helps. I read that it is more effective than selecting a different focus point. Anyone have experience with this?

not quite sure I understand this.

After going through these steps, I still cannot get my subjects as sharp as I would like sometimes. This probable had a lot to do with the lens I was using, and hopefully my new Tamron 24-70 will help. I see some pictures where the subjects almost seem like they are jumping out of the picture they are so sharp. I have yet to be able to achieve this. Am I expecting too much from my 3100? Or am I just not skilled enough yet? Maybe my thought process is completely wrong and someone can point out my mistake.

D3100 and a sharp lens (85mm @ f/2.8): https://www.flickr.com/photos/80607199@N08/9647214582/

It's not the camera; it's the user. I also post all my images and apply sharpening. *This is a must*

My D600 is sharper for sure, but it's not noticeable unless you're looking at full size pictures, then it become apparent. But I've seen MUCH worse...

Cool. Thanks for the info. I will make sure I get myself out of the habit of not going above 800 ISO. I also have to learn how to apply sharpness properly in LR.

 

[KmH]

For shooting portraits hand-held, absolute minimum shutter speed of 1/100, and 1/500 is even better.

If you want sharp portraits use a good camera stand. Not a tripod, a camera stand.
Manfrotto 806 Mini Salon 190 Camera Stand with Counter-Balanced Cross Arm (Black)

 

[TWright33]

All I read was the first post and I want to touch on one thing.

I keep seeing people talking about degradation of there images due to ISO values.

ISO 1600 and under on nearly every modern DSLR is a very usable image.

Not using ISO over 400 is a bit ridiculous.

If there were a couple ISO values under 100 then people would start complaining about ISO 100 being grainy.

 

[minicoop1985]

Also, do some research and find some reviews/tests on your lens. Every lens has a "sweet spot," and the antithesis. For the Tamron 17-50 f2.8, for example, it's pretty much useless at 17mm wide open. f5.6 and 30-40mm or so would be what I would say is its sweet spot. I mean it's good pretty close to everywhere, but every lens has its strong and weak points. Learn them and you can use them to your advantage.

 

[Vince.1551]

First ... Let me take a selfie lol

Jokes aside you probably want to look at DXOMark for a portrait lens that gives you the best sharpness for your camera.

 

[ORourkeK]

For shooting portraits hand-held, absolute minimum shutter speed of 1/100, and 1/500 is even better.

If you want sharp portraits use a good camera stand. Not a tripod, a camera stand.
Manfrotto 806 Mini Salon 190 Camera Stand with Counter-Balanced Cross Arm (Black)

I am assuming the advantage of this over a tripod is the sturdiness? I will check this out. Thanks

 

[ORourkeK]

All I read was the first post and I want to touch on one thing.

I keep seeing people talking about degradation of there images due to ISO values.

ISO 1600 and under on nearly every modern DSLR is a very usable image.

Not using ISO over 400 is a bit ridiculous.

If there were a couple ISO values under 100 then people would start complaining about ISO 100 being grainy.

Yeah this point has been repeated in most of the comments. I am going to get myself out of the habit of not going over and ISO of 800.

 

[Vince.1551]

Btw you only need to have a shutter speed longer then your focal length to prevent any camera shake plus to freeze a walking pedestrian 1/60 is all you need ;-)

I shot at ISO 50 and don't find any graininess as with ISO 100. Again it largely depends on your camera sensor, processor and general setup. Careful not to regurgitate what you read from google searches ...

 

[SnappingShark]

You wanna pass some idiot going EXACTLY 64.5 MPH in the middle lane on the freeway??? You'll never do it tached out in 1st gear...drop her into third gear and TACH it out till you revv up to near the red-line, then catch 4th and make your pass.....Zooooooooom!!!!!!!!!

I knew you overtook me on the 205!!

 

[WayneF]

I will leave you all with the question, how do you all make sure your subject is nice and sharp? *What is your secret?*

Simply provide enough light so that I don't have to suffer with slow shutter speed, wide aperture, or high ISO.

 

[Derrel]

I will leave you all with the question, how do you all make sure your subject is nice and sharp? *What is your secret?*

Simply provide enough light so that I don't have to suffer with slow shutter speed, wide aperture, or high ISO.

Translation: MOVE to Texas, Southern California,Arizona, New Mexico, Florida, etc.!

Seriously though: if you want 3-D or real sharpness consistently, you NEED a fast shutter speed, and a good lens performance. The suggestion above about 1/60 second being adequate is fine for short lenses and static subjects...but once you start REALLLLLLY being critical, the old 1/over focal length rule, or 2x over focal length rule falls flat on its azz. You really need about 3x to 4x focal length to make things totallty,totally "frozen sharp" with longer focal lengths. And that....in much of the USA, for much of the year, means that ISO 100 is a really baaaaad idea.

 

[minicoop1985]

I will leave you all with the question, how do you all make sure your subject is nice and sharp? *What is your secret?*

Simply provide enough light so that I don't have to suffer with slow shutter speed, wide aperture, or high ISO.

Translation: MOVE to Texas, Southern California,Arizona, New Mexico, Florida, etc.!

Seriously though: if you want 3-D or real sharpness consistently, you NEED a fast shutter speed, and a good lens performance. The suggestion above about 1/60 second being adequate is fine for short lenses and static subjects...but once you start REALLLLLLY being critical, the old 1/over focal length rule, or 2x over focal length rule falls flat on its azz. You really need about 3x to 4x focal length to make things totallty,totally "frozen sharp" with longer focal lengths. And that....in much of the USA, for much of the year, means that ISO 100 is a really baaaaad idea.

I've found sometimes ISO 1600 is required to achieve 3x focal length at 300mm, f10 or 11. Outdoors. On a normal day in Wisconsin. Sad, but true.

 

[Derrel]

My sensor's seldom clean enough to shoot at f/11...

just a frame from a 20-second, "Here, let me take your picture!" kinda deal with one of the field reps from TravelOregon.com, whom I met in the Columbia Gorge National Scenic area last month...we're up above the Columbia River on a hiiiiiiigh overlook, maybe 1,000 feet above the river, with gusting 15- to 20 MPH winds coming out of the Columbia Gorge from the east...the f/5.6 aperture and 260mm focal length is to give foreground/background separation and the 1/1250 second shutter was to stop the moving hair that was flying around in the gusting conditions. Sot on AUTO ISO at ISO 400 under solid,gray overcast skies.

traveloregon_D3X_7792_Aelisa.jpg photo - Derrel photos at pbase.com

What makes this shot "sharp" is the 1/1250 shutter speed and a 260mm focal length on the 70-300 VR-G, a $329 used pawn shot lens and a 24MP Nikon.

 

[bratkinson]

Perhaps the two biggest issues of 'sharpness priority' in my mind are accurate focus and necessary DOF. On this forum and elsewhere, too often someone new to photography posts some not-quite-sharp pictures and doesn't understand why. In almost every case, either they missed focus (ie, the camera focused on the wrong point) or their DOF was so thin one person was sharp and the person perhaps 12" behind and left/right of the first person is out of focus.

So, for almost all my people photography, my first consideration is DOF. How thin/wide must the DOF be to get all the subjects desired in focus? Shooting a small group of 4-5 people at f2.0, for example, is almost guaranteed to fail, even with my super-sharp 135 f2.0 L lens, as the DOF is likely less than a foot. Perhaps if they were all leaning against a wall and the camera sensor is perfectly parallel to the wall I might get them all in focus. If I were to 'move in' to intentionally get only 1 person in focus, my DOF could easily be less than 2 inches! His/her nose is in focus, but the ears aren't, and of course, everyone else is just a blur.

My next issue is ensuring the camera focuses on exactly where I want it to focus. Although my camera has 63 usable focus points available, I usually limit it to center focus point only to guarantee it will focus exactly where I want. Unless I know which of several focus points the camera will likely choose (if I allow it to do so), the camera will most often pick the closest object, which may not be the one I wanted it to choose.

I sometimes resort to focus and recompose, but then a too-thin DOF will end up making the subject a tad out of focus as his/her location is no long inside the 'plane' of focus (sheet of plywood in my mind). So, for focus and recompose shots, I have to increase the DOF slightly to compensate (a half to full f-stop reduction).

My next concern is shutter speed. As 3 of my 4 lenses do not have Image Stabilization, I have to make sure that my old hands don't shake things up, so I generally shoot at 1/<focal length> and faster to compensate for any unsteadiness. While reasonably motionless people can be 'stopped' at 1/100th or so, that's usually my slowest shutter speed, unless 'really pressed' by low lighting situations. Somebody/something at walking speed, 1/250 and up. In low light, no flash, indoors shots, I'll always take some at 1/250 as 'insurance' against motion blur...mine or the subjects, with other exposure triangle settings adjusted to compensate. Outdoors in daylight, the same shutter speed issues apply to moving subjects. I just have more latitude in aperture and ISO settings.

But, there are times I care ONLY about the aperture/DOF, or the shutter speed. At a recent outdoor car show, I put the camera in Av and set my aperture at f8, and let it do the rest. I wanted at least the front half of each car(s) in focus no matter what, and with my 24-105 zoom usually at the wider end, that was no problem. And taking pictures from a moving train, Tv at 1/200th to stop the blur of everything except the closest 10 feet or so.

As you can see from my thinking, ISO speed is my least critical setting. Of course, depending on the noise limiting abilities of the camera sensor, there are practical limits of how fast one can go on the ISO speed before the noise is unacceptable or cannot be reduced enough in post processing. Many cameras 'top out' about 1600-2400. More recent cameras have acceptable levels of noise at 3200 and faster.

So, for those times when I would want to set my ISO speed too high, then starts the 'exposure triangle battle'. What tradeoffs am I willing to make to get the desired exposure? Open wider? - thinner DOF. Slower shutter? - subject blurring. Faster ISO? - more noise. What am I willing to sacrifice a little on to get that shot? Someone here called it 'an acceptable compromise' 8-10 months ago. And that's what it is...An acceptable compromise.

 

[sashbar]

Does D3100 have an Auto ISO mode with a shutter speed limit? If yes then I think the OP should try a completely different approach.
Try shooting in aperture priority mode. Make your priority the right DOF for the image.
Limit the minimum shutter speed to what you need. I would recommend, to start with, 1/125 for still objects and 1/250 for people.
And let the camera set the ISO. I think you should trust the camera more in this respect, Nikon has a good Auto ISO algorythm.
Other things that will help:
A good modern noise filter, like Topaz, it will give you another stop or two easily.
Unsharp Mask used very lightly