Billy Bloggs
(K=51043) - Comment Date 8/12/2009
|
There's a number of factors that come into play here, I think. Apart from the sometimes necessary use of manual when shooting low contrast or dark scenes, I still like to use manual focusing because it feels more 'organic', like I'm more in charge of the process and not the camera, and it's much quieter, at least on a Pentax. Having said that, I suffer from presbyopia, which is a deterioration in focusing closer objects < 1 metre, so autofocus definitely works better for me at that distance. You shoot a lot of portraits so I'm surprised your autofocus isn't matching your own eye. Maybe some calibration of your camera is needed, or your lens is back or forward focusing?
Regards, Gary
|
|
|
|
Saad Salem
(K=89003) - Comment Date 8/12/2009
|
Hi Bolloten,
I have understands that your main problem is that your shots are not that sharp, right ?
sharpness is not due to manual or auto focus,it is due to many factors,accurate focus is one of them,but it depends mainly on the aperture and the type of lens you use,and adds to that the setting of your camera as regards for sharpness,
so to get sharp and crisp image you have to use Good quality lenses,for Canon the L series,the kit lenses are good but not that sharp enough,
use smaller aperture,do an accurate focus whether auto or manual,and set your sharpness in the camera setting for the desired level,in your case maximum I assume.
one thing to add,most photographers do increase their shots sharpness during post processing using the available software,and have to remember that I assume your camera is free from any defect.
for my self I use auto all the time,except in selected cases where the camera can not focus.
hope this will help,
my best,Saad.
|
|
|
|
John Bolloten
(K=-266) - Comment Date 8/12/2009
|
Thank you so much for your replies which I especially appreciate because both of you have commented regularly on my pictures already. I always use autofocus unless it cannot lock on. I'm using a Canon 1000D with a 18-55 kit lens, a 55-250 lens and a 50mm 1.8 lens. Apart from a few bad ones when I look at them on the computer, when I view at 100% a lot of them appear to be really sharp. I put the sharpening in the camera at about 90% and then I sharpen afterwards also. So when I view again at 100% they look very sharp. When I post many here though they just don't look that sharp and I'm viewing them on at least 3 different systems (2 PCs and 1 laptop).
I tried something else out once. I really oversharpened one pic and at 100% it looked terrible, full of noise etc. When I checked it here (it was only up for a few seconds, just a test), it was really sharp indeed but the pic was ruined really - it just looked good on the PC itself.
I know I am very new and I'm trying to learn a lot, especially from some of the great people here and looking at their superb work, so I recognise that my technique etc will not be that developed anyway. Maybe I need better equipment for better results but I want to master the basics first before upgrading anyway.
But thank you for your opinions very much, I really value to read your words and thanks for taking your time to share your expertise.
|
|
|
|
Dave Arnold
(K=55680) - Comment Date 8/13/2009
|
I'm a little confused. Your question regards whether to auto or manual focus but your complaint is how the photos turn up seemingly out of focus once they hit the net. Is that right? Because those are two totally different problems or questions.
And in your reply, you mentioned everything is fine with the photo at 100% viewing. It isn't until you've downloaded it to a site that you have a problem. Since you did not specify your technique of going from camera to web, I am going to assume you send the photo over to a site at 100% of its roginal size. You just can't do that. You can't expect an auto compression of your photo either by software (windows file system) or by the site itself and not expect to lose sharpness.
You must do the downsizing on your own. There are various methods endorsed by various people. Some say to stair-step the downsizing while at the same time, unsharp masking it as you go. Others say, just downsize it all in one swoop and then unsharp mask it. Either way, the important part is to unsharp mask it when you are done.
And when downsizing for a certain page, you should downsize it to the largest size the site accepts. I forget what UF max is but for conversation sake, lets say it is 700 pixels at its longest side. You would not want to send it over at 1000 pixels and let the site do your downsizing. You'd have it ready and send it already unsharp masked at the viewable size of 700.
I venture to say that your problem is not whether to use auto or manual focus but, rather, how to properly prepare a photo for a web site.
Then there is also the issue of why some web sites change up the colors on a photo once you submit it. Usually when you have a highly saturated photo, it loses a lot of the saturation once uploaded. And it only happens on certain sites I use. I'm still scratching my head on that one and searching for answers. I suspect it is the operating system of their servers that cause it but that's only a guess.
|
|
|
|
John Bolloten
(K=-266) - Comment Date 8/14/2009
|
Thank you very much Dave, your reply was very enlightening and I think you hot the nail on the head. You're confused and I'm confused but after reading your post and the 2 previous replies from Saad and Gary, I feel a lot less confused now. I will make a change to how I upload here and see if there is any difference - I think I just need to really sharpen the images for here, much more than I would normally and that should do the trick. But the other replies/suggestions were helpful too and I have learned a lot just from you three. Thanks to you all.
|
|
|
|
José Azevedo
(K=9845) - Comment Date 10/2/2009
|
Hi,
most of the times the problem with sharpness is a slight micro camera shake. So, I suggest you use a monopod. I haave no AF bodies and some AF lenses. As you can see I prefer manual focus. I find it easier since you can concentrate on the subject and focus, not focus sensor, focus lock, recompose, lose the picture.
Many times I focus on the worng eye, but I can live with it and it's a risk when shooting wide open 1.4 ~ 2.0 range. Oh, I shoot film.
Since AF lenses have a small focus ring "turn movement", I also suggest you try it more until you get used to it. The results you want'll come fast, you'll see.
My best,
José Azevedo
|
|
|
|
Rashed Abdulla
(K=4136) - Comment Date 1/31/2010
|
Good Evening John Bolloten , thank you for rising this question.
I usually use manual focus when I shoot stationary objects, specially using medium or large format cameras, I also use some other aids to help me focus correctly, on my Mamyia RZ I use a finder magnifier and on Hasselblad I use chimny magnifier, while on my DSLR I try my best to focus manually unless I am shooting a moving objects, thats where it is hard for me to trace the subject and or following it , auto focus there comes a must for me.
Thank you again and wishing you all of the best.
|
|
|
|
José Azevedo
(K=9845) - Comment Date 6/8/2010
|
Hi John,
I looked at your images here and, for the kind of pictures you shoot, I suggest you try manual focus. With it you knowwhat you're focusing, don't depend on an electronic sensor - which might be very helpful in many situations, but not exactly on the kind of imge you do.
I only have mechanical bodies - the exception being the Nikon F3. I began photographing in the 70's, when AF was probably only an idea. Well, I'm used to it and fine tuned my Nikons to it by changing their focusing screens to matte ones. Its very easy, fast and accurate.
I've also a TLR Rolleiflex and its MF is amazing, smooth and very precise. Until my eyes allow, I'll stick to MF for the pleasure of it.
If your photos aren't sharp enough, try a monopod. I did and the results show. MF will only help you know on what you're focusing. AF may be fooled sometimes or use a sensor to focus on wht it thinks is what you want. So, for example, eyes may be slightly defocused but something must be in focus. If it's not, then it probably is due to camera shake.
Regards,
José Azevedo
|
|
|
|
José Azevedo
(K=9845) - Comment Date 6/9/2010
|
Guys,
I've been away for so long I didn't remember I've already answered this post... D'uh! At least I maintained the same line in both answers, hah! I'm not that crazy yet.
Keep shooting! Film!!
My best,
José Azevedo
|
|
|
|
|
