Reading mode: Light Dark

XC 15-45mm softness/blurriness?

Go to last post
K

keraladelicacy

Member
Messages
38
Reaction score
29
Hello All,

This is probably a noob question and would appreciate any help I can get.

I have noticed that some of the pictures taken using my XC15-45mm lens appear to be soft. See below picture as an example. This was a shot taken on a tripod after I had set a 2 second timer set. Weather conditions were normal (i.e. not windy). I am pretty certain the mountains were in focus when I took the picture. However, if you were to zoom in a bit on the three peaks, they look a bit blurred. I am curious to know:

(1) if I am pixel peeping or

(2) if its the weather conditions up in the peaks that could be making the mountains look a bit misty/blurry or

(3) could this actually be a lens issue?



bf0beaec521147488d8d5dd08b273662.jpg
 
It looks like the focus point is the frozen water on the lake (way in the front). Also F16 may cause defraction.
 
keraladelicacy said:
(1) if I am pixel peeping or

(2) if its the weather conditions up in the peaks that could be making the mountains look a bit misty/blurry or

(3) could this actually be a lens issue?

bf0beaec521147488d8d5dd08b273662.jpg
Click to expand...
Hi!

Thanks for sharing.

IMO if the lens does deliver sharper results under well lit conditions (e.g. on a sunny day), then there could be just two reasons:
  • unstable tripod - e.g. some minor movement from pressing the shutter (external trigger or remote/app could help with that), where 2 secs was too short to compensate for or
  • diffraction kicking-in a lot at f/16 (although I think it would blur differently)
Judging by the blur type, I'm betting on the camera shake/tripod though.

Let's see what the other members will say - sounds interesting nevertheless
 
Last edited:
Interesting.

I believe this lens can go up to F22 and hence I avoid the last 2 stops to eliminate any diffraction. I thought F16 would be a safe bet but I guess not.....
 
That is too soft to blame diffraction, which isn't so marked at f16 on APS-C.

A long exposure like that does need a very strong tripod even if there is no wind.

I can't tell where the point of focus is.

The way ahead is to test the lens at fast shutter speeds focussed carefully on a distant view at about f8 and opened up gradually.

The image does come up reasonably well with Topaz Sharpen AI, not perfect, but useable.
 
Two numbers got my attention:

- 1.3 sec

- f/16

Looking at the image with the magnifier, I believe I'm seeing side to side movement so there is some soft of support issue, tripod, head, not locked down properly, soft ground, wind whiteout ballast.

- f16 might not be the best choice. You need to look at lens test or do you own to find the sweet spot.

Morris
 
keraladelicacy said:
Hello All,

This is probably a noob question and would appreciate any help I can get.

I have noticed that some of the pictures taken using my XC15-45mm lens appear to be soft. See below picture as an example. This was a shot taken on a tripod after I had set a 2 second timer set. Weather conditions were normal (i.e. not windy). I am pretty certain the mountains were in focus when I took the picture. However, if you were to zoom in a bit on the three peaks, they look a bit blurred. I am curious to know:

(1) if I am pixel peeping or

(2) if its the weather conditions up in the peaks that could be making the mountains look a bit misty/blurry or

(3) could this actually be a lens issue?

bf0beaec521147488d8d5dd08b273662.jpg
Click to expand...
Did you have OIS off? OIS can and will cause blur at 1.3 sec on a tripod.

I've had random issues with blur on my 15-45 when handheld. I believe it to be an interaction of shutter shock and OIS..or maybe just funkiness with the OIS itself if i take the pic too quickly. I tend to take redundant photos with that lens. Sometimes I'll get one tack sharp and one blurred.
 
Thanks Andrew,

Seems like running a few tests starting at F8 makes sense. I am pretty certain the tripod is sturdy enough but can't tell if there is a way to ascertain this. I generally set up my tripod very low to the ground and so hard to think it can be unstable enough to cause this issue. Nonetheless, its something for me to keep an eye out for.
 
Thanks Clive, I didn't even realize I could turn off the OIS for the lens.

I need to dig into this. Would this be through the camera menu?

It could explain the issue at hand.
 
Thanks Morris, lens test it is!

Additionally, I'll keep a close eye on the tripod to see if it could be the culprit here.
 
Then test the lens without a tripod, and at short exposures, say 1/250th
 
keraladelicacy said:
Thanks Clive, I didn't even realize I could turn off the OIS for the lens.

I need to dig into this. Would this be through the camera menu?

It could explain the issue at hand.
Click to expand...
Yes it is in the menus. You most definitely want to turn it off.
 
keraladelicacy said:
Thanks Morris, lens test it is!

Additionally, I'll keep a close eye on the tripod to see if it could be the culprit here.
Click to expand...
I agree with Morris. Additionally, at 18mm even F4 (which might not be the best choice) will give you pretty much 7 feet to infinity in focus if you use the HFD. Stopping down to F16 is probably overkill at wide angles.
 
John Keiffer said:
keraladelicacy said:
Thanks Morris, lens test it is!

Additionally, I'll keep a close eye on the tripod to see if it could be the culprit here.
Click to expand...
I agree with Morris. Additionally, at 18mm even F4 (which might not be the best choice) will give you pretty much 7 feet to infinity in focus if you use the HFD. Stopping down to F16 is probably overkill at wide angles.
Click to expand...
You're right..but the blurriness is more severe than the results of diffraction at F16. That's not the problem. I'd be almost certain it's the result of OIS on a tripod at 1.3 sec. It looks to me like there may be evidence of motion blur on the ridgeline where there should be a sharp edge.
 
Facepalm. I should have thought of that. I've always thought the effect of leaving IS on when using a tripod was modest.
 
keraladelicacy said:
Thanks Andrew,

Seems like running a few tests starting at F8 makes sense. I am pretty certain the tripod is sturdy enough but can't tell if there is a way to ascertain this. I generally set up my tripod very low to the ground and so hard to think it can be unstable enough to cause this issue. Nonetheless, its something for me to keep an eye out for.
Click to expand...
It's a potentially a wonderful image. Vis the tripod, is it one where one elevates a central column above the tripod's neck (or collar)? That single pole is a point of wobble and vibration. I have removed my central column and only ever use the tripod with the ball head sitting on the tripod's neck. If the column cannot be removed, just do not elevation it. It is less stable elevated and conversely more stable when not elevated.

Hope that helps.
 
I hope the OP is still reading and hope no one is offended by offering this, which isn't a re-editing of a file which I know is frowned upon. It isn't a suggestion that taking sharp images is pointless but it is a useable result.

This is after Topaz Sharpen AI and a little bit more USM.







--
Andrew Skinner
 
This is not a sample that allows any conclusion

Set ISO to 200 not 80 and shoot in areasonable light with a shutter speed 1/15sec 1/30sec. Use a frame where there are elements that can show a potential lack of sharness. Try to shoot your computer screen whowing apage of text then pixel peep
 
Hi,

That's exactly the type of tripod that I have (one with a column that extends above the neck/collar). But on this occasion, I was setup low and didn't need to extend that single pole. Nonetheless, this is very useful to know. I had no idea that extending could result in wobble! Thanks!
 
keraladelicacy said:
Hi,

That's exactly the type of tripod that I have (one with a column that extends above the neck/collar). But on this occasion, I was setup low and didn't need to extend that single pole. Nonetheless, this is very useful to know. I had no idea that extending could result in wobble! Thanks!
Click to expand...
Ok, I may have exaggerated a little when using the word 'wobble' but it is less stable when extended.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

E
X-S20 IBIS + OIS Weird behavour with XC 15-45 lens
Replies
4
Views
15K
emoratinos
E
dartymix1
Challenge 372 Wildlife RESULTS
Replies
5
Views
8K
Chuvarsky
Chuvarsky
C
Struggling mightily to achieve tack sharp image quality on wildlife, especially birds in flight
2 3 4
Replies
60
Views
34K
HicHic
HicHic
S
Weekend with Tamron 50-400
2
Replies
21
Views
49K
BrentSchumer
BrentSchumer
R
Checklist for reducing shutter shock and other sources of unsharpness?
Replies
1
Views
8K
lehill
lehill

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top