Trying so hard - but my images are still mainly unsharp! ;o(

[DiskoJoe]

Wonder if that's a great excuse to buy a new lense? ;o)

I need a good portrait lense, good for doing shots with a still model and crazy running kids! ;o) Any recommendations?

Although my guess is that it is more technique than equipment.

You need to learn how to hold your camera steady before you go spending money on more toys.

 

[CanonJim]

As if you need another .02 cents thrown in here... Pretty much everything above is excellent advice. I also own the 50 f/1.8 (as do about 30 million other Canon shooters) and I've found that it's best between f/6 and f/13 or so, in my experience. For $100, you get what you pay for. The other snippets are all good - use a tripod when you can, with remote shutter release and mirror lock-up, to remove ALL possible camera shake fuzziness. Take off any crappy filters (which you say you don't use, so that's good). Use the CENTER focus point only. If you use the viewfinder to focus manually make sure the diopter is correct. The AF systems in most cameras look for high contrast, reflectivity, and brightness areas, as others have noted. When choosing between a face and a wet rock, they'll always focus on the rock.

99.99% of all perceived "out of focus" stuff is due to too wide an aperture combined with an incorrectly chosen focus point(s).

 

[littlenomad]

Thought I had it sorted but it appears that's not the case. ;o( I understand the f stop thing, but if I increase that too much (to about 5-6) I don't get any background blur anymore. Why would I use the centre focus point only? Generally I use the focus point closest to my subject and focus on the eyes.
I was taking photos alongside my friend who was taking them at 2.8f. She got all hers sharp, mine were hardly. I wonder if it is also camera shake, but does that mean that unless I use a tripod I'll never be able to get any decent focus as I am not that steady? ;o(

 

[Maneef]

This Might Help you a bit

twiching: Basic Tips for Getting Tack-Sharp Photos

 

[tedyun]

The center point uses cross-type sensor, where it uses information from the vertical and horizontal axes to achieve focus. The other 8 points are either vertical or horizontal, so the center point is most accurate.

What kind of camera does your friend have?

I was having the same sort of issues with my 50 f/1.4 and on my Rebel T2i (550D). If shooting wide open, it helps to use the center point. Any other point seems to be inaccurate, so I have to decrease the aperture.

If you use the same settings and use Live View to autofocus, are the images sharp?

Thought I had it sorted but it appears that's not the case. ;o( I understand the f stop thing, but if I increase that too much (to about 5-6) I don't get any background blur anymore. Why would I use the centre focus point only? Generally I use the focus point closest to my subject and focus on the eyes.
I was taking photos alongside my friend who was taking them at 2.8f. She got all hers sharp, mine were hardly. I wonder if it is also camera shake, but does that mean that unless I use a tripod I'll never be able to get any decent focus as I am not that steady? ;o(

 

[littlenomad]

She has a Mark 2? Some of her pictures ended up the same as mine. Most didn't. But then I can't use a tripod all the time if that's the issue!

Liveview does weird things on my camera so I never use it.

 

[pgriz]

It comes down to four things:
1) you need enough light to get adequate DOF (via aperture) and shutter speed (above the handshake level),
2) you need enough DOF to have all of your subject sharp (which is determined by aperture)
3) you need to have the focus on the right spot so that your subject is within the DOF range (whether done by manual focus or AF)
4) you need to have the right "quality" of light to bring out the shape and texture of your subject matter.

In addition, you've already been told that the sharpness of your lens (actually all lenses) depends on the aperture - each lens has a "sweet spot" range where it is sharpest. The cheap lenses have a narrow range, and the really good lenses have a wide range.

As for using/not using the Liveview function - it's a tool. It needs to be learned to be used effectively. When used properly, it's very good (in some situations, indispensable) at getting the focus where it needs to be.

Most of the advice given to you in this thread touched upon one or more of the four things I mention above. So, have you been able to apply this advice to get the sharpness you were looking for? If not, what exactly are you doing different from the advice you've gotten?

 

[tedyun]

I think this may be part of the answer. The autofocus on the 5D Mark II is better than the 600D.

I would try to compare shots with the autofocus points and doing the same points using live view (you can move around the focus rectangle with the 4 directional keys). If you get differing results between Live View and the viewfinder, it might be an issue with the autofocus.

If that's the case, you don't really have much of a choice except to decrease the aperture to get a wider depth of field. If you are at f/1.8, you (or rather the autofocus) don't have much margin of error. You should also try using the center point as it is the most accurate (which limits your ability to compose the shot).

The other thing you can do is to install Magic Lantern. It has some manual focus assist tools where it flashes the pixels red for the area that is in focus. You have to have a very stationary subject (which it looks like you do), and you have to use Live View.

Or you could do what I did, and upgrade! I started taking more "sports" shots since my kids started soccer, and I got so frustrated with the autofocus on my 550D. I moved to a 7D, and the autofocus rarely misses.

She has a Mark 2? Some of her pictures ended up the same as mine. Most didn't. But then I can't use a tripod all the time if that's the issue!

Liveview does weird things on my camera so I never use it.