Pin sharp images

I use an EOS 5D Mark II and have purchased an arsenal of L series lens.
I usually shoot wide open at either f/1.2-1.8 and f/2.8. Recently I have been looking at other professional images and I have realised they were pin sharp, where it be portraiture, landscape, studio work, still life, etc.


I've been attempting to achieve this by using f/8 or find the sweet spot for all my lens's and still cannot get it pin sharp.
I went to take pictures of my son using a 70-200 f2.8 IS II USM using MFD 200mm and reasonably fast shutter speed, ISO 100 and using f5.6 for that day.



Focusing was either centre or sometimes different depending where he would stand. Focus was always on his eyes.
Pictures looked sharp from the LCD even when zoomed in to check. I then quickly uploaded it to the iPad to check for sharpness and again, when I enlarge the image, the details are never there.


Even in studio lighting using sekonic light metering to use the correct aperture, ISO and shutter speeds, tripod and remote firing, I still couldn't get the subjects full details out. Always looks a bit grainy.



Tried micro adjustments and didn't make any difference so reverted back to default.



Lenses used were 24-70, 50 f1.4 and 1.2, 85 f1.2, 70-200 f2.8 and f4, 16-35 f2.8



Please help!



Regards,



Jonathan

Hi Jonathan, welcome to the forums mate. That's a pretty nice kit you've got there.


To be honest with you I can't fault anything in your process so there's no obvious reason why you wouldn't be achieving sharp results. I also shoot with the 5d Mk II and a few L lenses and I get very sharp results.


Remember, when looking at images on your monitor often you are zooming in to see the fine details, a lot of the time (especially in print, magazines etc) professional images are not viewed at that level of detail so you won't pick up those deficiencies in the image as easily. I always find that photos look much better printed anyway.


If you haven't already, apply a sharpening filter in post. I personally like the smart sharpen filter (Photoshop 7/ CS4) at around 0.4 - 0.7 radius and 80-100%. That will really bring out the fine details and anything you don't want super sharp you can just mask out.


Hope you have some luck.


Cheers, Ben.

Hi Jonathan,


Could you post some examples and EXIF data? That might give us a clue to figure out what is wrong.





Joël

Hi Ben and Joel,





Thanks so much for your replies, I really appreciate this if someone can point out a problem.


Her's a picture taken during the day with of camera flash lighting setups.


Camera: EOS 5D Mark II


Lens: EF 85mm F1.2L @ f1.2, 1/800, ISO 100


If you enlarge the image right to the eye, it looks grainy, I thought the 21MP 5D Mark II was suppose to enable me to even blow up to the face and still have crisps sharp images?








[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.46.49/_5F00_MG_5F00_8132_2D00_Edit.jpg[/img]

Sorry guys, image is too large. But if I resize will you guys see the issue?





Edit: Actually you can just download the image to see. Thanks all

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jho288

Lens: EF 85mm F1.2L @ f1.2, 1/800, ISO 100

---

You can't expect much more than a thin sliver of the frame to be in focus as f/1.2. That, combined with the fact that very few lenses are completely sharp wide open (the 85L not being one of them), and I'd guess that your results are typical for that lens. Just figured out how to view the shot, looks like about what I'd expect at f/1.2.


I don't know what you're looking for in terms of sharpness, but this shot was taken with my 5DII and 27-70L (btw, this is not a crop, I positioned myself as to have her face fill the frame, thus using far more pixels per inch than if I had shot much wider and had to crop down to this composition. If this were a crop of a larger image, I couldn't rightly expect tack-sharp focus to this extent)


http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1390/...25dfa00a_b.jpg



<table id="Inbox" cellspacing="0" width="100%"]
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="30%"]Camera:</td>
<td>[b][url="/cameras/canon/eos_5d_mark_ii/]Canon EOS 5D Mark II[/url][/b]</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="30%"]Exposure:</td>
<td>0.005 sec (1/200)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="30%"]Aperture:</td>
<td>f/5.0</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="30%"]Focal Length:</td>
<td>70 mm</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>


ISO Speed:
</td>
<td>


100
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>






As you can see, the area around the eye is in sharp focus, but her nose isn't. I was shooting pretty close to the MFD to get the composition I wanted, but shooting at f/5 gave me the sharpness I wanted. If I had shot at f/2.8, I'd probably have lost most of that sharpness.


You have to remember, as somebody else pointed out, you are almost never going to view a shot as large as you can on a computer screen. Try getting prints of a few of your tack sharp shots and see that sharpness "disappear", then get a print of one of your non-tack sharp shots and compare. I'd be willing to bet they will make very similar prints, depending on the size.


Prints can't display at the same insane resolution as a 100% crop on a compute screen can. Looking at a grab at 100% on a screen would essentially be the equivelent of putting your nose up to an 11x16 print. Prints (like televisions) are meant to be view at a distance, combined with the "loss" of resolution when in print, and that tack sharp shot isn't quite as important.


I think that subject framing is also a major factor. In my photo above, it is important that her eye be in sharp focus because her eye fills far more of the frame than in your shot. I would assume that in my shot, having the eye larger in frame also makes it easier to achieve that tack-sharp look.



<div>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jho288

Sorry guys, image is too large. But if I resize will you guys see the issue?

---

Which is exactly my point. Pixel peeping is fun, but it can get out of hand IMO. Sometimes reminds me of little boys in the middle school locker room. Tack sharp does matter, but only to an extent, and only in certain situations. In the photo you provided, your subject rather small in the frame, and you shot wide open (typically the softest part of the lens), so yes, she isn't tack sharp. But when it comes down to it, does she need to be in this shot?
</div>

Thanks so much for your reply and your photo looks great!


My wife just said it is very sharp and that's what I want to achieve too. Perhaps I need to go back and re-look at my choice of aperture. That's probably my problem.


I'll upload another one of my son and not sure if it was hand shake or what.





Thanks alot for your input

After looking through some of my photos from that same shoot, it is clear to me that the size of thesubjectin frame andapertureselection make a huge difference in sharpness.





This shot is at f/2.8 and is a comparable subject framing as the shot you uploaded. As you can see at 100%, it isn't tack sharp, but when looked at medium or even large, it is quite acceptable. The same would go for your shot.


http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1339/4731047902_c3af123905_o.jpg


In this one, the subject's face is a very small portion of the frame, shot at f/5.6. As you can see, her face is not tack sharp at 100% (not even close), but when you click on medium or large, the shot is still in focus. So, even stopping down the aperture isn't the whole ball game, it would seem.



<meta charset="utf-8" />
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1420/4730413933_e26f524250_o.jpg


Now, if you had filled the frame with your subject's face, and dialed down a few stops on the aperture, you should get some extremely sharp shoots, especially with that 85L of yours. Keith B had some amazingly sharp shots of one of his friends up not to long ago with his 85L, similar tight framing, and shot at about f/5.6. You could see the pours on his subject's face in perfect detail, and the eyes weremesmerizing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jho288

If you enlarge the image right to the eye, it looks grainy,

---

First of all, that's an excellent photograph. Nice work!


Second, it does look very "grainy" to me too -- but the grain I'm seeing is compression artifacts. Theuploaded image is so highly compressed (21 MP in just 750 KB) that it has completely fallen apart.



<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="content-type" />



Could you upload the same image with less compression? (About 10 times less would be nice.) Web sites like "yousendit.com" allow for uploading very large files for free.


This highlights how important post processing is for nailing sharpness. Some raw converters do better than others (e.g. Lightroom 2 throws out detail on high ISO shots).



<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="content-type" />

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jho288

I thought the 21MP 5D Mark II was suppose to enable me to even blow up to the face and still have crisps sharp images?

---

Well, I wouldn't put it that way, but it is certain possible when the conditions are right.

Hi there,


Wow that's great, new insight. So basically from what I'm reading and linking these back to my usual shots, is the aperture and the size of the subject that fills the shot.


For portraiture, achieving sharp shots would be easier to obtain as the subject's size is bigger, great example with the f/5.0 shot. (and great picture too)


I see what you mean, I'll dig up some photos too to see if the sharpness is deeply related to size of the subject.


What about if your using 70-200 and shooting at MFD 200mm, i suppose it will also depend on the size of the subject against the frame.


I'll probably try a test shot light metered to obtain the correct fstop. Hopefully something comes up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jho288

I see what you mean, I'll dig up some photos too to see if the sharpness is deeply related to size of the subject.

---

Take the simple example of focusing on an eye. Perceptively, 'eye sharpness' is often (and most easily) judged by how easy it is to distinguish the eyelashes from one another. If the subject is closer (or you're using a longer focal length), the eye takes a larger portion of the image. That means there's more physical separation of the eyelashes based on where they fall on the sensor, and thus it will appear sharper.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel Browning

First of all, that's an excellent photograph. Nice work!

---

Thanks so much for your comment

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel Browning

Second, it does look very "grainy" to me too -- but the grain I'm seeing is compression artifacts. Theuploaded image is so highly compressed (21 MP in just 750 KB) that it has completely fallen apart.


Could you upload the same image with less compression? (About 10 times less would be nice.) Web sites like "yousendit.com" allow for uploading very large files for free.


This highlights how important post processing is for nailing sharpness. Some raw converters do better than others (e.g. Lightroom 2 throws out detail on high ISO shots).


Well, I wouldn't put it that way, but it is certain possible when the conditions are right.

---

I'll try the site you mentioned about.


My work flow is &gt; Take shots &gt; upload to computer &gt; Import into Lightroom 2.7 &gt; fine tune in Lightroom &gt; edit in PS CS4 &gt; Saved as 16bit TIFF &gt; then back in Lightroom export to JPEG


However as mentioned above, perhaps this picture's subject is too small and the aperture 1.2 doesn't provide sharpness in the eyes. So I might have to look for a picture that I didn't shoot at 1.2 (which isn't much because I have a habbit of using 1.2 - 2.8 for a while now) Also spending that money on a 1.2 makes me hesitate and not adjust to anything small LOL.


BTW, you guys reply really fast :) Thanks so much for the efforts. It's great to talk and share photography ideas with everyone.





Regards,


Jonathan