dissapointed 6d 100mm f2 and 24mm 2.8 (non l)

[weixing]

Hi,
May be it's the high temperature that cause the issue?? I once going for birding under a very hot afternoon and most of my shots come out either soft or out of focus, so when I use live view to try to focus, I realize that it's the heat wave that cause the problem... can clearly see that the image in and out of focus in quick succession... like shooting through a wave of water.

Have a nice day.

 

[Marsu42]

so you shouldnt take a photo at f10 for a landscape shot?

You should the aperture that covers the depth of field you want to have in focus (2/3 in front, 1/3 behind the focus you tell the camera) - if it's f10 that's what it is, diffraction only really shows at much smaller apertures depending on the lens maybe f16+ ...

... but if you have the choice or want to evaluate sharpness take the shot at the aperture your lens is sharpest at, and that very much depends on the lens but is afaik always <f10 even on lenses that need to be stopped down. In your shot, I don't think f10 was necessary, because the both subjects quite far away so the area covered by the dof will be large ... cheaper or older cameras even have an a-dep mode to tell you what aperture you need.

i should have added, i did use a cokin CPL on a lot of these shots including this one.

I'm hesitant to use a cpl as a general color pop filter, but for removing haze (your shot) or reflections - esp. with wider angles you quickly get sky color differences that are impossible to remove in post, ymmv.

 

[mb66energy]

Not enough info so far to give much useful advice beyond what Mt. Spokane offered. but one thing I've learned is never to take off on an important vacation with a brand new camera. I have sometimes needed a thousand or more exposures to figure out how to use a new camera body, even with my old lenses.

+1 !

I am just learning to use my 40D right and get the most out of it - I bought it in 2008 ! O.k., I am no professional shooter but I do reflect what I am doing deeply and have some extended knowledge about technical details of photography, electronics, etc. (as every physicist).
For me it is a joy to use an instrument over half a decade or a decade because I learn to master the tool - instead of being masterd by the tool ...

 

[Loswr]

i did use a cokin CPL on a lot of these shots including this one.

I see...in that case, a little softness at f/10 (which should be quite sharp, otherwise) doesn't come as a surprise.

 

[Canon-F1]

i suggest you do a bit of reading about RAW files.

RAW files need to be EDITED to look good.
it´s no suprise an unedited RAW will look flat and colorless.

there are a few good books and tutorial videos out about RAW editing.

uninspring..

well no camera will help you with that.

 

[hgraf]

i suppose it is the focus, i only used the centre point and recomposed, but so many the focus is off, i was in egypt so light wasnt a problem, and i was also trekking in uganda and the landscape shots just lack punch. the colours and contrast just seem a bit wrong. out of 1000 pictures and some extensive sharpening, there arnt that many im happy with!

id upload a few shots but frankly im embarresed. i feel a bit cheated out of money spent. im gonna have to rent an expensive l lens and compare, but at the moment, im really disheartened.

OK, there are 2 issues here.

First is focus: you mention alot of light, were you shooting wide open? It's possible your focus and recompose is affecting your focus if you're shooting wide open, especially for objects that are closer.

As for "punch", are you just looking at the raw images? Those will lack punch and contrast, that's something you adjust in post. You posted a short of the pyramids and yes, that lacks "punch", but then you didn't do any post on it, so it's what I'd expect.

When you open a "raw" image it will seem quite flat, that's normal.

Can you upload a few of the raw images so we can have a look? If your landscapes are being shot at narrower apertures and they still look out of focus I'd say the problem is probably the equipment.

 

[hgraf]

so you shouldnt take a photo at f10 for a landscape shot?

As with everything it depends.

On the one side, at f10 with a FF camera you are starting to hit the diffraction limit, so there might be a little more softness in your image then at f8 or f5.6. Of course there are a TON of other factors at play here, your lens is one of them.

OTOH if you need to have a wide DOF you don't really have a choice, it depends what you're doing. If you taking a pictures of mountains in the distance and want the grass field in front of you to be in focus you might have to sacrifice some sharpness to get the DOF wide enough to catch everything.

 

[bear]

It is impossible to take picture in hot air at big distance. Even perfect camera, lens, focus and exposure will not help. Wait for colder weather or wake up early morning to take better picture on places like this.

 

[ishdakuteb]

i should have added, i did use a cokin CPL on a lot of these shots including this one.

what type of cokin did you use? (i.e. cokin a, p or z)

 

[Marsu42]

OTOH if you need to have a wide DOF you don't really have a choice

You do - use focus stacking.

 

[Frodo]

I remember disappointment going from my 20D to a 5D (mkI). The RAW files needed a fundamentally different approach to get the best out of them. I suspect it is the same with your 400D / 6D comparison. As others have said, RAW files need processing, otherwise they will be flat.

I doubt very much that it is a focus problem (unless you have a really sick camera). The 24/2.8 is not one of Canon's best lenses, but the 100/2 is very good. So I doubt it is your gear. Spend a little more time in processing.

 

[hgraf]

OTOH if you need to have a wide DOF you don't really have a choice

You do - use focus stacking.

Depends. If you're subject is changing, focus stacking might not give you the result you want (i.e. grass waving in the wind). Sometimes the only way to get the shot is to increase the DOF.

 

[Marsu42]

Depends. If you're subject is changing, focus stacking might not give you the result you want (i.e. grass waving in the wind). Sometimes the only way to get the shot is to increase the DOF.

Correct, I just didn't want to elaborate on focus stacking but just mention that it isn't only good for macro shots but you can do nice 100% dof landscapes with it, too - in many cases when something is in motion you might get lucky and the software will figure it out and still assemble the shot correctly w/o artifacts.

 

[pdirestajr]

OTOH if you need to have a wide DOF you don't really have a choice

You do - use focus stacking.

Depends. If you're subject is changing, focus stacking might not give you the result you want (i.e. grass waving in the wind). Sometimes the only way to get the shot is to increase the DOF.

ANY image like the one the OP posted should basically be completely in focus regardless of the camera's focusing system when shooting a 24mm lens at f/10. He doesn't even have to have his camera in AF or even look through the viewfinder as long as he's focusing a little beyond the hyperfocal distance. There is nothing significant in the foreground of his shot, so I'm assuming he's focusing somewhere at least beyond 8"- which would give him focus from 3'7" to infinity.

Not sure why focus-and-recomposing as an issue or the 6D's inferior focusing system came into play on this thread, or solutions like focus stacking with a distant landscape shot.

 

[RLPhoto]

^I'm sure that the OP took more photos than just a distant landscape... :

 

[jimjamesjimmy]

yeah i took lots of different shots, there are 1000 photos! but alot of them are landscapes, and i was trying to experiment with different settings, wide/small apertures, tripod,mirror up, polarisers,and a nd grad , but im still generally disappointed with the results. they were quite hard shots, big landscapes, sunny/steamy weather maybe the 24mm lens just wanst up to it, maybe i wasnt up to it , but i expected to get at least get lucky enough a few times! ive used photoshop and raw processers alot before so its not like im forgetting to process, 3 years ago i went to mexico with a 400d and a 50mm 1.8 and i came back with so many sharp good looking pictures, this time around it was a complete failure on my part!!!! im very confused!

 

[Marsu42]

maybe i wasnt up to it , but i expected to get at least get lucky enough a few times! this time around it was a complete failure on my part!!!! im very confused!

I'm also rather new to photography, but in this limitied experience I'd say that "semi spray'n pray", i.e. having some clue but also relying on luck, heavily depends on daily form (I hope I got the correct word, I'm not a native speaker).

On some days, I'm just producing crap shots, no matter how many shots I take. This is indeed confusing but I have learned to recognize this and settle back accordingly. I understand this separates an amateur like me from a pro who can take good shots in any situation no matter what.

Still, you can learn from it - after calming down look through the shots, try to identify what you can recover in post and what you did wrong while shooting, read up on composition and then do better next time w/o relying on lucky shots

 

[DJL329]

heres an example, consider i was using a tripod, i think the picture, though i like th ecomposition , the results form the lens and camera are uninspring, uneditied raw lightroom jpeg export , f10 iso 100 24mm.

The first thing that I noticed was all the empty space in this photo. With the 24mm at that distance, the pyramids look rather small, which IMHO is why they look uninspiring. Did you try the 100mm from that location or get closer to them?

Also, when shooting in the middle of the day, the sun makes your subjects look flat, which is why you don't see much detail. Shoot earlier in the morning or later in the day, when the sun is lower in the sky, to get better lighting and warmer colors.

 

[jimjamesjimmy]

theres lots of space because its a desert! thats what i was trying to get across. i have hundreds of different pyramid photos, but this is sadly one of the more successful captures.

 

[skitron]

theres lots of space because its a desert! thats what i was trying to get across.

A bit off topic I suppose, but depending on what you plan to do with the output, another thing you might play with is cropping at different aspect ratios to emphasize the horizontal vastness. I kinda like 2.66:1 (cinema) to 3:1 aspect ratios for shots like you posted. Might make for an interesting framed/matted print - or might not be your cup of tea - just tossing out an idea. Below is a cinema (2.66:1) crop.