-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
blurry images, awful out-of-focus rendering
- Thread starter reach0775
- Start date
-
- Tags
- fujifilm x-t20
ikaika777
Senior Member
- Messages
- 2,632
- Solutions
- 3
- Reaction score
- 1,808
Definitely blurry. Before you send the camera in have you ruled out the lens? Have you tested the camera with a different lens?Hi,
Equipment: X-T20 + XF 18-55mm F/2.8-4 R LM OIS
before people jump on me: I have shown many of my RAW files to my local dealer (who is a Fuji enthusiast) and he confirms there must be an issue. He suggests to send the brand new camera in for repair.
Why I'm posting this is because the issue is so weird:
I have some pictures which are out of focus, which barely could be (landscape, long time to compose, big DOF, very short exposure times) but many more, if not all pictures where everything which isn't right in focus just looks awful. Like a bokeh from hell. Details like grass, leafs, wooden textures makes you want to rub your eyes. It's not out of focus, but somehow blurry.
The weirdest thing is that this mostly happens just to parts of the pictures. I have thought of
- a de-centered lens
- shutter shock
- defect OIS
- defect AF
- RAW converter issues
None of these would cause issues just in parts of the image. Except the last one, RAW converter, this I excluded by doing an in-camera conversion for some pictures - exactly the same result as in Lightroom.
It would make sense to experiment with a different lens, best a prime, but I don't have one at hand, so I first ask the community.
I could post hundreds of examples. Here is just one arbitrary one. 1/750, f5.6, ISO 200. See the full image for context and a crop of the left part of the image.
I found this thread https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4150729 which, as I believe is exactly MY issue. The example pictures aren't online any more, but from the text description, I'm sure it's the same. Unfortunately that guy didn't explain in detail what they repaired and how it improved.
--
After all is said and done and your photo is hanging on the wall, no one is going to know or care what camera, lens, or what post processing you used. All they care about is if the image moves them.
jhorse
Veteran Member
Hi,
This does look unnatural. As there are enough of us who do see a problem, myself included as one who until recently had the XT20/18-55, I would return and exchange it immediately. I would not want to live with it; it's sub-optimal.
You state that the dealer "suggests to send the brand new camera in for repair." if it is brand new, is it within your exchange period (I do not know which country you are in)? If it is and the dealer is suggesting a repair, then they are not honouring the exchange period (if that is applicable in the timeframe and country).
If I had seen that effect, which is a problem, I would change the whole outfit without hesitation. Good luck.
This does look unnatural. As there are enough of us who do see a problem, myself included as one who until recently had the XT20/18-55, I would return and exchange it immediately. I would not want to live with it; it's sub-optimal.
You state that the dealer "suggests to send the brand new camera in for repair." if it is brand new, is it within your exchange period (I do not know which country you are in)? If it is and the dealer is suggesting a repair, then they are not honouring the exchange period (if that is applicable in the timeframe and country).
If I had seen that effect, which is a problem, I would change the whole outfit without hesitation. Good luck.
Marco Cinnirella
Veteran Member
I'm not going to suggest shooting test charts, however, images like this do make it difficult to say 100% if there is a fault and what is the likely cause. For example, for de-centering just shoot something like a brick wall and make sure you are parallel and ideally use a tripod and timed shutter. For bokeh rendering and sharpness shoot a street sign or something similar wide open at max tele. Very 'busy' images are seldom great when it comes to diagnosing lens and/or camera issues. I'm afraid based on what is posted I am on the fence as to whether there is definately a problem and what it might be. Certainly a process of elimination is useful - try a different lens to identify if it is a lens or camera issue. Try with OIS on and off to see if it is a faulty OIS. Those are starting points. And don't get mad at people on here who are clearly just wanting to help you but can't necessarily do their best to help if the test images are busy. I have had my share of faulty lenses and occasionally faulty cameras, and the advice on here is good because if you have ambiguous test shots that not everyone agrees indicate faults, it is harder to make your case with the manufacturer.
--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/marcoc/
"When words become unclear, I shall focus with photographs. When images become inadequate, I shall be content with silence." Ansel Adams.
--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/marcoc/
"When words become unclear, I shall focus with photographs. When images become inadequate, I shall be content with silence." Ansel Adams.
Last edited:
Nice to get so much feedback!
What people don't seem to understand/acknowledge: the example picture was not meant for analysis or discussion (although I don't think it leaves much room for interpretation, however...)
It was meant to show you a good example of the awful out-of-focus rendering. Obviously you can only judge what you see, but since I'm not going to upload 100 RAWs (and I don't assume you have the time to watch them), it would be benefitial to just believe me that more than 50% of my pictures show a very similar pattern. All from different subjects, all from different shooting situations.
What I'm taking with me, even if some say differently:
- yes, this out-of-focus rendering is rubbish
- no, this is not a common X-T20 and/or 18-55 issue - which was more or less the main reason why I've asked this.
What people don't seem to understand/acknowledge: the example picture was not meant for analysis or discussion (although I don't think it leaves much room for interpretation, however...)
It was meant to show you a good example of the awful out-of-focus rendering. Obviously you can only judge what you see, but since I'm not going to upload 100 RAWs (and I don't assume you have the time to watch them), it would be benefitial to just believe me that more than 50% of my pictures show a very similar pattern. All from different subjects, all from different shooting situations.
What I'm taking with me, even if some say differently:
- yes, this out-of-focus rendering is rubbish
- no, this is not a common X-T20 and/or 18-55 issue - which was more or less the main reason why I've asked this.
Jerry-astro
Forum Pro
This post is absolutely spot on... very well said, Marco.
And let me emphasize one of Marco's points I bolded above. If you seriously want to get help here and not get put on a large number of ignore lists, you might consider being a bit more patient, particularly with people who are genuinely trying to help and offer constructive advice. Problems like this can be very difficult to root cause. It often takes numerous iterations and a variety of questions to figure out what the problem is and how to best deal with it.
Before committing to any new lens that I've purchased, I use a test chart with a fair amount of detail and a methodology for ensuring that the camera is dead center to the chart. Recently, this helped save me from the subsequent pain and misery of having to deal with a seriously decentered 10-24 lens. I was able to return it and get a replacement from the dealer and not have to resort to warranty repair. This is a far more reliable way of not only determining whether you have an issue, but more specifically helping you diagnose what the problem is.
Marco Cinnirella
Veteran Member
Well yeah, exactly ! Lots of very helpful people hang around on this and the other DPR forums, and there is a genuine desire to help others out and get to the root cause of issues. But we can't always get there unless the OP helps out with useful test images and further insight into settings etc. When OPs then react angrily to these requests it really results in a head-scratching 'why do I bother?!' kind of moment
--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/marcoc/
"When words become unclear, I shall focus with photographs. When images become inadequate, I shall be content with silence." Ansel Adams.
Last edited:
WhateverNickname
Senior Member
Not sure it was asked, did u try with OIS off?
Jerry, Marco,
the problem is, that some answers are neither helpful nore constructive, simply because the reader didn't bother to read the entire post. Some just watch at the posted picture and start to spread their wisdom.
I assume you are especially referring to my answer to Bill Ferris. His answer is not just an example of not having read the entre post, it's also factually wrong (10 ft distance? Corner softness!?) and hysterically weird (unsteady air!). And he tries to teach DOF, while even the thread header suggests that missing DOF isn't the issue. You are right, there might be people being more patient than me, but I'm doing hard keep being respectful in such cases. Guilty.
Unfortunately you Jerry didn't read the entire post either, else you wouldn't tell me about your de-centered lens. In my post I explained that I thought about this and other possibilities and why I excluded them.
I have also explained why I have decided to first ask this question, before I spend hours of research. This is what forums are there for. The chance would be pretty high that others have the same issue, potentially a solution, and so I could save my own research.
Erik Baumgartner
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 10,234
- Solutions
- 39
- Reaction score
- 14,241
There’s almost certainly nothing wrong with your camera. There may be something wrong with your lens, but I doubt it. It really just looks like your aperture/focal length weren’t well chosen if a deep and smoothly transitioning focal plane was your goal. It very much looks like too much sharpening was applied to make up for the lack of deep focus (which is easily seen in the should-be-soft background areas) and in doing so you exacerbated the admittedly unattractive, but normal, bokeh in the out of focus transitional areas. Looking at the whole image at a normal size, it looks like I would expect it to. With any lens, even the best ones, you can’t expect everything to look great in every situation, this is one of those situations. Maybe different images from this lens would tell a different story, but this one looks normal to me. With a different processing approach this image could likely look better, and probably more “normal” than it does now.
Reach, let me start that I really wish you find the cause for the images you are unhappy with. All posters here do.
You assume that people did not read your post. Maybe they did in fact read it, but interpreted it differently than you intended it to, or see different things in the image than you do. Please also consider that english is not necessarily the 1st or even 2nd language of many posters here, which can add to potential misunderstandings.
The bottomline is that people suggest a variety of tests, and you seem to dismiss this advice, as "this can't be the issue", the problem is "obviously there",...
Diagnosing a problem starts with an open mind re. the possible causes, and only rule these out when tested OK. In this thread, it does not seem this process was followed, and this makes it difficult to pinpoint the issue(s) at hand.
Jerry's example of a decentered lens is just an example to show what systematic testing can do. He is not implying your lens is decentered, but simply referring to what a systematic approach can do.
Peace!
You assume that people did not read your post. Maybe they did in fact read it, but interpreted it differently than you intended it to, or see different things in the image than you do. Please also consider that english is not necessarily the 1st or even 2nd language of many posters here, which can add to potential misunderstandings.
The bottomline is that people suggest a variety of tests, and you seem to dismiss this advice, as "this can't be the issue", the problem is "obviously there",...
Diagnosing a problem starts with an open mind re. the possible causes, and only rule these out when tested OK. In this thread, it does not seem this process was followed, and this makes it difficult to pinpoint the issue(s) at hand.
Jerry's example of a decentered lens is just an example to show what systematic testing can do. He is not implying your lens is decentered, but simply referring to what a systematic approach can do.
Peace!
This is a kit lens, a very good kit lens, but nothing more. Fuji has a zoom -- the 16-55 F2.8 -- that is superior to it in every way except size and OIS. Red badge is nothing more than an indicator of Fuji's top-line zooms. The "secret" is the quality of their output, which isn't so secret. To call the 18-55 "Fuji's top range for zooms" is silly.
Marco Cinnirella
Veteran Member
Agreed ! I often read hyperbole that the 18-55 is 'the greatest kit lens of all' etc., but I doubt thoe folks saying that are talking about things such as the quality of bokeh - they tend to be focusing on build, the performance of the OIS and resolution - on a good copy all of these can be good, but it's difficult to get nice, subtle, creamy bokeh rendering on an 18-55, even if it is a Fuji
Test shots from a tripod using a chart of some kind, or at least a considerably less fussy background than the one in your test shots, allows us to view a standardised image so we can determine what the optical error is that you're referring to, rather than trying to guess from the images you've shown, which aren't at all helpful.
But frankly after reading a few more of your responses to perfectly reasonable posts that are just trying to help you I stopped really caring about your problem, sadly.
Last edited:
I'm with Bill. OP has posted a photo full of messy detail, at a fairly wide focal length, an F-stop that doesn't lend itself to 'bokeh' and will leave a lot of detail in front and behind of the focal plane only *slightly* out of focus, and I don't see anything that stands out in the posted image as so utterly abysmal that it warrants OPs panic over it.
Also, I don't like OPs tone. Meh.
ikaika777
Senior Member
- Messages
- 2,632
- Solutions
- 3
- Reaction score
- 1,808
I’ll ask again in case you didn’t see my post, did you rule out the lens? And by that I mean did you take other photographs using a different lens that you rented/borrowed to test? If you haven’t I would try that first before sending in your camera for repair because if it’s the lens Fuji will just send you back the camera saying there’s nothing wrong with it and you’ll be even more frustrated. And Jerry the mod bought a Fuji 10-24 lens that was defective a short while ago so defective lenses happens sometimes. Anyway, it’s my humble 2 cents.
Brian Kimball
Leading Member
- Messages
- 759
- Solutions
- 2
- Reaction score
- 1,128
Respectfully, you don't get to dictate the terms of the discussion.
Clearly it's not a good example because many credible commenters are saying they see nothing wrong, and that the subject matter is a poor choice to demonstrate a possible problem.
You keep saying you have hundreds of examples. Multiple commenters have said this one photo is a poor example. Why haven't you posted any other examples? No one is asking for 100 raws.
C
Chris Dodkin
Guest
You seem more interested in arguing than putting in the work to solve your problem
--
Your time is limited, so don't waste it arguing about camera features - go out and capture memories
--
Your time is limited, so don't waste it arguing about camera features - go out and capture memories
Last edited by a moderator:
rwbaron
Forum Pro
As someone who has extensively tested every lens he's bought for the past 40 years I will say that from the images you posted your lens appears normal. If you don't believe me then find another sample and compare them under identical conditions on a tripod with remote release, manual exposure and focus and use focus bracketing. Shoot something stationary (not flowers) that has fine detail both in the plane of focus and then in the OOF areas. Hint; you will drive yourself to drink doing this and scrutinizing the results at 200% on screen when all you're looking at is the OOF rendering of a good zoom with a somewhat nervous OOF rendering (not uncommon for even some expensive zooms).
If you're concerned your lens may have a decentered or tilted element(s) then you'll need to carefully shoot a resolution chart under controlled conditions as others have said. You can accomplish the same using newspapers taped to a flat vertical surface but a good chart will make it much easier to see if a problem exists. I'll be happy to provide detailed instructions if you're truly interested.
Bob
If you're concerned your lens may have a decentered or tilted element(s) then you'll need to carefully shoot a resolution chart under controlled conditions as others have said. You can accomplish the same using newspapers taped to a flat vertical surface but a good chart will make it much easier to see if a problem exists. I'll be happy to provide detailed instructions if you're truly interested.
Bob
Jerry-astro
Forum Pro
Well, perhaps a bit more bluntness might help, since a lot of good advice and feedback so far seems to have "gone right in one ear and out the other." Your attitude will yield very little here except for controversy and a desire for people to quickly move on to threads started by people who are genuinely interested in solutions rather than simply arguing points.
This community is rife with people who have deep expertise both in photography and Fuji gear in particular. Assuming that people are simply ignoring your issues and don't understand the problem you're posing is borderline insulting, particularly when you clearly haven't spent sufficient time on this forum to get to know individuals here as well as their level of experience and expertise. BTW, if you're read my response properly, you'd have understood that my comment on decentering was simply an example, not a suggestion that this was the issue that you were having.
So, like others who've responded here, you've earned a position on my ignore list and I won't be bothering with trying to offer any advice or help. I'm no expert here (at least as compared to many of the people who've already responded within this thread), but I'd rather spend my time responding to people who genuinely are interested in getting some help and guidance rather than people such as yourself who simply like to argue and approach problems with a real attitude.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum