Why is this OOF?

What is the distance between camera and the target? That will determine the DOF value. F stop number alone does not tell. I see that the background is quite blur.

Regards.

Vernon D Rainwater said:

Hans von der Crone said:

Gonna try some MA on this lens too. My 17-55 and 50mm/F1.8 need both about +12, so maybe my camera needs +12 for the whole range.

Click to expand...

You mentioned taking a series of 4 to 5 exposures. If your camera is set to single exposure (and Center point focus) you would then have to press the shutter release 4 or 5 times. If this is correct, only the first exposed image would be in accordance with the Focus/Re-Composure and the additional exposures will focus wherever the center focus point is when you press the shutter the 2nd through the 4th or 5th time. If you used Focus/Re-Compose for each exposure, then disregard my comments.
Hope this makes sense for you.
--
Vernon...

Click to expand...

This is the way I see it too, Vernon. He would have to focus and recompose again, holding the 1/2 press shutter button each time in order to hold focus.

carolyn
--
Ranger a.k.a chammett
http://www.pbase.com/chammett

'elegance is simplicity'

Think it was about 10 meters

If it is 10 meters (no 10 feet) then this theory may not hold. The sharp range should be about 11 inches in front of the object and about the same behind the object. Scratch this theory but if it is about 10 feet or so the that is a different story.

Regards.

That's what I did

I don't see anything wrong with the shot Exif in DPP, one of three things happened, focusing and recomposing threw off your intended focus, you moved too much while recomposing the shot, or there is a calibration issue with your Sigma lens... Instead of recomposing for your shots, why not play around with the Zone AF functions, at least this will make it so you do not have to recompose your shots...
--
http://www.photofroggy.com

I had an 18-200 sigma that just wouldn't consistently shot sharp. I got rid of it.
--
T---
http://www.crosman.org
http://www.portfolio-shots.com

On my DOF calculator 10 meters distance, f6.3, 200mm is .6 meters (about 2 feet). In combination with other suggestions re focus/recompose and photographer/subject movement, that could be a contributing factor, given apparent distance between bushes in focus and subjects.

I'd still check the lense

Best,

--
'There is no un-suck filter.'

• David duChemin

Which is too bad, because I could sure use one.

Hans von der Crone said:

Just went to a park with my wife, daughters and neece. Shot a couple of nice pics with my Sigma 18-200 but I'm puzzled about a series of pictures which are completely OOF. Used center AF, one shot AF. Focussed on their faces and then recomposed. Shot about 3 series of these, 4-5 in a row. And all of them are oof. Other pics are ok (other oof ones are my own fault).

Curious why this one is oof. You can check the original unedited picture too.



(original file: http://www.flickr.com/photos/hansvondercrone/4865737287/sizes/o/in/photostream/ )

Click to expand...

Hans, where was your Focus Point before RE-Composing. You of course know that using software it can indicate focus point of the actual exposure but NOT the point of original focus before Re-Composing. This information may be in one of your posts but since I read the posts at different times, I don't recall seeing it.
I tried to get to the original image but it doesn't seem to work.
--
Vernon...

My original focus point was on the face of my wife, and then I (with the half shutter pressed) recomposed.

I owned the same Sigma lens a few years ago and it did focus properly at all distance and focal length. I did end up selling it to buy a better lens.

Maybe I'm just anal but when I buy a new lens or body I run it through lots of focus tests of my own. When I buy a new lens I will run it through out the focal length. Example on my 70-200 I will do a focus test at 70, 100, 135, and 200mm wide open and do and MA if needed.

Here is a example of what I do. I print a focus chart and tape it to a box. I use a inclinometer to set the angle at exactly 45'. The distance from camera to chart is what I would normally shoot from no 25 or 50x of focal length.





These other samples the image is cropped to filled the screen.

















Through out the focal range the lens should focus on the center line. Some people think it normal for a zoom to be soft at one end. That is not true, the reason for this is that the lens will actually front or back focus at one end and owners think this is normal. When you actually do a proper focus tests on that lens you will then realize it front or back focusing at the focal length.

Once that is done I will also do a outdoor focus tests by shooting a close photo and then a few distance photos. If the lens does not pass all these tests properly I will send it in for calibration.

Took this with a 50D as a example for my distance shots a car way across the street.









100%crop of above photo.





Good luck.

--
Canon 5D II, 7D, 50D, & Fuji 31fd

Hans von der Crone said:

My original focus point was on the face of my wife, and then I (with the half shutter pressed) recomposed.

Click to expand...

Hans, thanks for your feedback. You used the logical method.

It appears the "Best in focus area" is the Vegetation in front of their legs. One thing I failed to ask is to which specific (point or area) did you move the Center Focus point TO when you did the Re-Compose. I am trying to evaluate the "Focal Plane" difference of that point and your Wife's Facial area where you originally focused.

A Suggestion: In order to try to get the image to be more usable (even though I don't see an excessive amount of "out of focus" for your Wife or Little Girl), suggest you apply (USM) Unsharp Mask to the entire image (using Photoshop) using settings of 30-20-0 since (for the posted size image) this seems to work well without destroying the Highlights (close or to 255).

Suggest you apply to the (original) full size image and see what you think of the results.
--
Vernon...

I opened up the image in Photoshop and applied some Smart Sharpening and it's very crisp.

Pictures will lose crispness when you resize down. They have to be sharpened after resize.

What kind of post processing do you do?

Isabel
--



http://www.pBase.com/isabel95
http://isabel95.zenfolio.com/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipets/

On my DOF calculator 10 meters distance, f6.3, 200mm is .6 meters (about 2 feet). In combination with other suggestions re focus/recompose and photographer/subject movement, that could be a contributing factor, given apparent distance between bushes in focus and subjects.

Plus 1/250 at 200mm ...

Best,

Isabel Cutler said:

I opened up the image in Photoshop and applied some Smart Sharpening and it's very crisp.

Pictures will lose crispness when you resize down. They have to be sharpened after resize.

What kind of post processing do you do?

Isabel
--



http://www.pBase.com/isabel95
http://isabel95.zenfolio.com/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipets/

Click to expand...

Isabel, your finding is somewhat like I commented above and also the reason for suggesting the specific USM type sharpening.

I didn't do a print test but have NO doubt that it would print a very good 8 x 10 when using the original image (larger size) to apply the USM post processing.
Even the small (posted image) accepts the suggested sharpening very well.
--
Vernon...

If you zoom in on the ladies hair look close, they were moving, the hair barrette shows it. I can see 2 distinct outlines of it. That's not all wrong here I also feel it's front focused slightly myself but they were moving when you shot and that will kill it unless you have a very fast shutter speed.

I know sharpen does help to make that photo better but its still comes down to a focus or image problem.

If the Sigma lens was not the 18-200 OS then it could have been too low a shutter speed and motion blur.

I would not be happy with that kind of results out of the camera with no sharpening looking like that.

Look at this huge photo cropped to 4284x3714 and how sharp it is with min smart sharpen at 40% at full resolution. On my down size I use even less sharpening on average between 25-35.





Opps, dpreview shrunk the image



--
Canon 5D II, 7D, 50D, & Fuji 31fd

It's the people you want to be sharp.

I alwyas make feathered selections inside the edges of my subjects and then sharpen.

Isabel
--



http://www.pBase.com/isabel95
http://isabel95.zenfolio.com/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipets/

Shot a lot of pictures today, indoors but well lit (daylight, very large windows), almost 80% of my shots are oof. Tried micro adjusting (this is with the 50mm/f1.8) but results seem inconsistent depening on the distance from the subject (mind, this is not at all at f1.8, but even at f5.6 or higher)

Thinking about just sending my body back to Canon (for the 2nd time). This micro adjustment thing is annoying the hell out of me. My best friend used my 17-55 and 50mm for a few days and he reports that both are amazingly sharp and in focus on his 40D. I let him shoot some with my 7D, results were bad to say the least (using center AF for all shots). I grabbed his 40D, and took about 200 shots in the same conditions as the 7D... about 99% were in focus. Sigh. I would really love to love this 7D but so far it has been a huge disappointment to me. I do get some nice shots from time to time, but when 80% of my shots are good for the "reject" bin...

When viewing your full image at 100% the people look soft; however, when viewed at the size you initially posted, the people are rightly within the acceptable depth of field and are considered in focus. Learn DOF and know that you don't always need the focusing to be exact to get a pleasing photo.

Think of it this way, if this were shot with a film camera/SLR the image would look great because you would have a 4"x6" print in your hand instead of "blowing up" the image to a huge size as what a 100% view of digital files are on your computer screen!

Stop 100% views on your computer screen and you'll be much happier about your photos I bet!