Night shots, failure, please advise

Hello,

After viewing a lot of very beautiful night shots I thought to give it a go myself. I drove to the beach, only to fail miserably :)

Using a Canon 650D with stock lens. Used manual focus, maybe I went totally wrong there as all the pictures I took seem out of focus. Next to that the lights are all big blops of light...


Here are the pictures, maybe someone can give me advise on how to get them better.

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8199/8...3fe6c7e7_c.jpg
Scheveningen_Kurhaus_IMG_1552 by Co'tje, on Flickr - Settings: 1.6 sec ƒ/3.5 ISO 100 20 mm



http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8069/8...cd242f94_c.jpg
Scheveningen_Kurhaus_and_Beach_IMG_1552 by Co'tje, on Flickr - Settings: 25 sec ƒ/7.1 ISO 100 29 mm

Tried several settings on this one from 1 second to the one above, being 25 seconds.


Thanks in advance for any tips!

Marco van Eck
The Netherlands

On a tripod?
Using live view to focus? Or through the viewfinder? Both pics are out of focus.

The lights are nice perfect balls, not trails, so that discounts camera movement, shake, etc. It looks like a nice solid tripod was used. It simply looks like the focus was off. For manual focus, try using live-view with 10x view mode.

agree looks like a failure to focus

With a 20mm and 29mm lens at those distances shouldn't something have been in focus though.

I agree that the focus was off. Is it possible that you have accidentally moved the dioptric adjustment knob at the top corner of the viewfinder?

Try using Live View to focus on something then, without refocusing, look through the viewfinder and adjust the dioptric knob until the image appears sharp.

If you can, look at the EXIF data to check the distance that you were focusing. You can do this in Windows by opening the image in Windows Photo Gallery, right click the image and select Properties, then scroll down to see the focus distance.

I also think your problem is a focusing problem. The photos aren't moved(or at least not much), but they are simply wrongly focused.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marco van Eck

Next to that the lights are all big blops of light...

---

The light blops are actually something that a lot of photographers like to achieve in their background. They are just out of focus highlights.
In your case doing manual focus on these two items shouldn't have been too difficult using live-view. Magnify your screen 10x and aim for a lightsource. Because the rest might be too dark to focus on. Adjust the focus untill the lightsource is as small as it can be. Because if a lightsource gets out of focus(either too close or too far focused) it will turn into a blop.
Also you could try smaller apertures to get more into focus, but to be honest I think this one was focused into infinity.

Hope you have better luck next time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy Stringer

I agree that the focus was off. Is it possible that you have accidentally moved the dioptric adjustment knob at the top corner of the viewfinder?

Try using Live View to focus on something then, without refocusing, look through the viewfinder and adjust the dioptric knob until the image appears sharp.

If you can, look at the EXIF data to check the distance that you were focusing. You can do this in Windows by opening the image in Windows Photo Gallery, right click the image and select Properties, then scroll down to see the focus distance.

---

Yep check the Exif data for focus distance - it appears to have been very short as w/ such wide lenses infinity setting would have a lot more clarity somewhere.

The 1st photo it would appear at 29 mm and f7.1 infinity would have worked for a big portion of the scene, ideally you would have focused short of infinity and let the DOF take it out to infinity.

The second shot of the building at f3.5 is going to have a narrower DOF - but at 20 mm it would still be fairly deep.

I just scanned this quickly and everyone is giving great advice on tripod and live view focus, but this might not be the issue. If your using the kit lens (lens the camera came with) it has IS. The kit lens, I'm sure doesn't have the technology to be tripod sensing. Give this another try with tripod, live view focus, and make sure the IS is turned off on the kit lens and I think you'll have some winners.

Good luck!

Not sure if the 650D/T4i records focus distance. My T3i doesn't.
Edit: If it had been recorded, I believe it would be visible on Flickr, but it is not there, so I think it is not recorded at all

Jayson, the IS kit lens is tripod sensing, AND automatic panning detecting, according to Bryan's review.

Just something that may not have occurred to anyone:
Make sure you take all the photos before going to Crazy Pianos, not after (because everything looks blurry after coming out of there)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ahab1372

Not sure if the 650D/T4i records focus distance. My T3i doesn't.
Edit: If it had been recorded, I believe it would be visible on Flickr, but it is not there, so I think it is not recorded at all

---

I don't think Flickr shows it. If you use something like Exiftool you'll see fields for Focus Distance Upper and Focus Distance Lower. I believe LR uses those to estimate a distance.

I'm sure your camera records it, assuming the lens supports it (and most Canon lenses do, including the 18-55mm and even some MF lenses like the wide TS-Es and the MP-E 65mm) - that info is used for the E-TTL II flash exposure calculation.

I remember seeing it in Flickr on photos by others. But it might have been omitted by some of the software for processing. Or I might be hallucinating :confused: I guess now I have to go look for an example or doubt my sanity

Wow, thanks for all input and advise folks, it's very much appreciated!


I've used a pretty heavy tripod on these pictures. Used the live view LCD display to focus but didn't know I could zoom in there...:o Will have to try that!

Being at work I downloaded the images from Flickr but nor Windows nor ExifTool is showing anything that reassembles the focus distance. I'll try getting that info from the RAW file and DPP when I'm back home.

My stock lens (Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II) has AF and IS. I did turn off AF to manually focus but left IS on. I'll also try turning IS off next time I'm using the tripod.

And Dr. Croubie, I took these before having fun at the Crazy Pianos ;)


Thanks again all, will get back on the focal distance later.

Marco

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DavidEccleston

Jayson, the IS kit lens is tripod sensing, AND automatic panning detecting, according to Bryan's review.

---

Thanks David. I know my old one wasn't so I wasn't sure if the new model had been updated with that tech. Appreciate you digging a little deeper. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marco van Eck

Being at work I downloaded the images from Flickr but nor Windows nor ExifTool is showing anything that reassembles the focus distance. I'll try getting that info from the RAW file and DPP when I'm back home.

---

Flickr strips it out. DPP won't show it. Different cameras do display different data in a full EXIF dump from the .CR2 file, such as you get with Exiftool. For example, 7D and 5DII images have Focus Distance Upper and Lower, whereas a 1D X image has a Subject Distance field instead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

Flickr strips it out. DPP won't show it. Different cameras do display different data in a full EXIF dump from the .CR2 file, such as you get with Exiftool. For example, 7D and 5DII images have Focus Distance Upper and Lower, whereas a 1D X image has a Subject Distance field instead.

---

Thanks Neuroanatomist.

Like you said, no info from DPP. With ExifTool I found a wealth of information under section MakerNotes from the RAWs, amongst others :

First shot
FocalLength : 37120 mm
FocusDistanceUpper : inf
FocusDistanceLower : 81.91 m

Second shot
FocalLength : 35072 mm
FocusDistanceUpper : inf
FocusDistanceLower : 81.91 m

No idea why the Focus Distance values are exactly the same... There is a time difference of about 30 minutes between taking the two images.

I'm sorry to say that I don't have a real idea yet if these figures are good or bad.


Hope to be able to share some better night pictures with you all soon:)

Cheers,
Marco

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

Flickr strips it out.

---

I'm not sure if I understand you correctly, but in my case Flickr shows all the info off my photos including focus distance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marco van Eck

First shot
FocalLength : 37120 mm
FocusDistanceUpper : inf
FocusDistanceLower : 81.91 m

Second shot
FocalLength : 35072 mm
FocusDistanceUpper : inf
FocusDistanceLower : 81.91 m

No idea why the Focus Distance values are exactly the same... There is a time difference of about 30 minutes between taking the two images.

I'm sorry to say that I don't have a real idea yet if these figures are good or bad.

---

Marco, I'm not sure if this counts for everyone, but I noticed that the number shown in the Focus Distance in EXIF is actually "quite" accurate on some points. On my lenses the distance number shown in the small dial on your lens often mirrors what you will be seeing in EXIF. However: once you get beyond the largers number on your lens(to the point where the lens goes to infitnity) the focus distance number in your EXIF cannot be trusted anymore. In your case this might explain the weird, but constand FocusDistance value.
At least that's what I noticed in my case.

Jan is right about EXIF data in Flickr. If the information is embedded in the jpeg file by the raw converter, Flickr will show it (assuming the photographer has elected to share this information publicly). Most of the images in my photostream show a subject distance, apart from a few that were shot as jpeg only, or stitched panoramas.

I also agree about strange data being reported when shooting at or near to infintiy.

Marco, given that "Focus Distance Lower" is around 80m, I wonder whether you were focusing beyond infinity. The focus ring on most lenses will rotate beyond the infinity focus mark, which I think is only necessary if you are taking infra red photos with a film camera.

I hope you are able to get some better results next time, using a magnified Live View.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy Stringer

The focus ring on most lenses will rotate beyond the infinity focus mark, which I think is only necessary if you are taking infra red photos with a film camera.

---

Although that would not apply to an EF-S lens, since they don't work with film cameras, the ability to focus a little beyond infinity also allows for the effect of temperature (thermal expansion) on the focusing mechanism.

Good point, Neuro. I also forgot that some lenses don't even have a focus distance window or an infinity mark. I guess that's a consequence of being a long term sufferer of L disease.

Anyway, that wouldn't stop these lenses being focused beyond infinity. The lesson here is to avoid manual focus through the viewfinder in the dark if at all possible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy Stringer

I also forgot that some lenses don't even have a focus distance window or an infinity mark. I guess that's a consequence of being a long term sufferer of L disease.

---

Good point! The kit-lens doesn't have a focus distance window:p It might not change the behavior of the strange values though.

With all the advise given I went out today to some spots close by just to give it another go.

Below are the results, didn't crop or anything. IS off, AF off, heavy tripod, live view magnified x 10 on one of the lights and focused so the light was as small as possible. I'm happy with the results myself:D


http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8339/8...8a90d3b9_c.jpg
IMG_1567_Uden_Tronix_NightShots by Co'tje, on Flickr - Settings: 4 sec ƒ/9 ISO 100 27mm


Same position, cars passing by.
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8069/8...171d2943_c.jpg
IMG_1566_Uden_Tronix_NightShots by Co'tje, on Flickr - Settings: 1 sec ƒ/4 ISO 100 27mm


Photo of a bicycle path with green street lighting.
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8206/8...13409123_c.jpg
IMG_1568_Uden_Tronix_NightShots by Co'tje, on Flickr - Settings: 30 sec ƒ/9 ISO 100 24mm


Please let me know what you think.

I learned a lot, thanks again!!
Marco

That's much better, Marco. There is nothing wrong with the focus in these shots.

The effect of changing the aperture is also well illustrated. Compare the 'starburst' effect of the street lights in the first and last shots at f/9 with the more rounded light in the middle shot at f/4.

I think you can change the thread title to "Night shots, success!"

Looks like you figured it out, good job. You also found out how the smaller apertures (f/9) creates the star bursts around the lights.
I like the third shot. Would be interesting to see that one without the first lamp post in the picture.

Yes! Very nice... I like the car passing one and the third one.

Thanks!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ahab1372

I like the third shot. Would be interesting to see that one without the first lamp post in the picture.

---

Also took that one but missed the greenish light from the lantern so I didn't post it, here it is anyways :)

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8207/8...cf12edf4_c.jpg
IMG_1570 by Co'tje, on Flickr - Settings: 30 sec ƒ/11 ISO100 46mm

Haven't figured out what I like more myself, the sturburst effect or the rounded lights.

Cheers
Marco

Nice shots Marco. You definitely got it right. I like the lighting in the 3rd photo.
It's also nice of you to present a good demonstration between multiple apertures and how it affects the lights. I knew about it, but never really seen the effect in two similar photos;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marco van Eck

Haven't figured out what I like more myself, the sturburst effect or the rounded lights.

Cheers
Marco

---

Starburst is my preference.

Looks like you nailed it with the changes you made...strong work there! This is such a great sharing site to learn some tricks of the trade. I've found this post to be a great example of how photography blogs should operate. Erno