New Lens - Learning Curve?

[egritz]

My husband just surprised me and bought me the Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM lens for our upcoming Christmas trip to DL (less than 3 weeks to go!) I got it today and took a few snap shots, but they all seem out of focus (which is my ongoing saga with my shaky hands). Just curious if there is typically a "learning curve" for new lenses that I should expect? I'm an amateur, describe myself as "I know enough to be dangerous"

Thanks.

 

[nbaresejr]

Without more information i am going to assume it could be the following thing(s):

You are using Full Auto (green box).
- this is picking all the camera settings for you, including aperture and point selection. Usually a 2.8 lens picks 2.8 to shoot at which is a really thin Depth of Field meaning only certain parts of the photo will be in focus. If you look at the image i am sure something is crystal clear. It may not be the object you want in focus but there will be something in focus.
- When the camera picks a focus point it usually focuses on a point of high contrast or the closest object to you. This also may not be what you want to focus on.

There are probably a few more things i could mention but i am sure fellow posters will point out.

So to answer your original question there usually is not much of a learning curve with new lenses. If you know how to use your DSLR and all its settings it should be just mount, adjust your settings for the pic you are taking and fire away. I really think the full auto mode is causing some issues with this lens. The 17-55 2.8 is probably the best lens you can buy for the Canon Crop sensor camera.

I am sure you will get some great advise on this thread. Keep practicing, read the manual and you will get some great pics in Disney in a few weeks.

 

[havoc315]

As said, it sounds like a narrow DoF issue. With a large aperture such as 2.8, you need to select your focus point very carefully. Try setting the camera to spot focus. If you want more of the picture in focus, you need to stop down the aperture (increase the number).

 

[mom2rtk]

Are you sure the switch didn't get moved to manual focus?

I really did not have a learning curve with this lens. And I have very shaky hands too. The lens is heavy enough that shouldn't be an issue, especially with IS.

Do let us know what you figure out the issue was!

I shoot at 2.8 with this lens a LOT. One of the benefits is that this lens is still very sharp at 2.8. Depth of field is another matter, SOMETHING should be in focus.

 

[egritz]

Thanks for the replies. I shoot in Manual mode 90% of the time (the other 10% is aperture or shutter priority if I'm out & about at an event).

I was shooting at the f/2.8, but I have a 50mm f/1.4 that I'm used to using as well, so I didn't think DoF would be an issue. BUT it was night and inside, so I'm hoping it was just bad lighting (ISO was at 1600).

Here is just one of the pictures from last night, my focus point was on my daughter:

 

[mom2rtk]

Thanks for the replies. I shoot in Manual mode 90% of the time (the other 10% is aperture or shutter priority if I'm out & about at an event).

I was shooting at the f/2.8, but I have a 50mm f/1.4 that I'm used to using as well, so I didn't think DoF would be an issue. BUT it was night and inside, so I'm hoping it was just bad lighting (ISO was at 1600).

Here is just one of the pictures from last night, my focus point was on my daughter:

You probably know this, but just to be sure. I'm not talking about shooting in manual mode. I'm talking about having the lens on manual focus. I'd double check that. Anytime I have focus issues it's the first thing I check.

And if you are used to shooting with a 1.4 lens then the 2.8 really shouldn't be giving you issues.

 

[nbaresejr]

You probably know this, but just to be sure. I'm not talking about shooting in manual mode. I'm talking about having the lens on manual focus. I'd double check that. Anytime I have focus issues it's the first thing I check.

And if you are used to shooting with a 1.4 lens then the 2.8 really shouldn't be giving you issues.

I agree. Without knowing your level of experience I was guessing at simple things that could have been the issue.

 

[havoc315]

Thanks for the replies. I shoot in Manual mode 90% of the time (the other 10% is aperture or shutter priority if I'm out & about at an event).

I was shooting at the f/2.8, but I have a 50mm f/1.4 that I'm used to using as well, so I didn't think DoF would be an issue. BUT it was night and inside, so I'm hoping it was just bad lighting (ISO was at 1600).

Here is just one of the pictures from last night, my focus point was on my daughter:

Looks to me like your daughter was in focus. I would attribute a bit of softness to noise reduction due to the 1600 ISO.

I find it hard to compare focus at high ISO, where noise and noise reduction get in the way of sharp images.

 

[egritz]

Mom2rtk - yes I'm on AF, sorry, was responding to nbaresejr's question of whether I was shooting in full manual mode.

This weekend we are doing Thanksgiving with my in-laws, so I'll take a bunch of pics and play with it to see what come up with. Lighting stinks in their house on a good sunny day, so maybe I'll bring my speedlight along and see how they look.

 

[mom2rtk]

Mom2rtk - yes I'm on AF, sorry, was responding to nbaresejr's question of whether I was shooting in full manual mode.

This weekend we are doing Thanksgiving with my in-laws, so I'll take a bunch of pics and play with it to see what come up with. Lighting stinks in their house on a good sunny day, so maybe I'll bring my speedlight along and see how they look.

I'm really not an expert. But I think that photo is soft too. I'll be curious to see what others think.

Could you post your EXIF data?

 

[Pixel Dust]

I was shooting at the f/2.8, but I have a 50mm f/1.4 that I'm used to using as well, so I didn't think DoF would be an issue. BUT it was night and inside, so I'm hoping it was just bad lighting (ISO was at 1600).

Here is just one of the pictures from last night, my focus point was on my daughter:

I'm leaning towards what havoc said. Low light and high ISO could be softening the photo some. What camera do you have? That might be a limiting factor with high ISO.

Also, is this photo an example of the focusing issue? It's a bit hard to tell from this photo, between the ISO and highly compressed file. But it seems like the focus is correct. Can you do a 100% crop of the area you tried to focus on?

 

[egritz]

I can do the crop tonight & get the EXIF data tonight when I get home from work.
I have a Rebel T2i, which I am thinking of taking in for a cleaning next week so it is fresh & clean for our trip in just under 3 weeks.

 

[nbaresejr]

I have the same camera. Looks very soft to me also. Interested to see the rest of the EXIF tonight. Its puzzling me right now as to what caused this. 1600 on that camera generally looks ok on that camera.

 

[mom2rtk]

I have the same camera. Looks very soft to me also. Interested to see the rest of the EXIF tonight. Its puzzling me right now as to what caused this. 1600 on that camera generally looks ok on that camera.

I agree. I have the same camera and do much better. I take even indoor low light photos with that lens and always am happy with how sharp they are. Even wide open at 2.8. It's one of the things I like about that lens. It's totally usable wide open, while others might need to be stopped down a bit.

 

[egritz]

I wasn't rushing the shot either - I think I had my Shutter Speed around 1/80 to let in more light, I know my f-stop was 2.8 and I'm pretty sure ISO was 1600 (which is what I tend to use when indoors at night). I'll get complete info tonight though and see what you guys think.

 

[Skywise]

I've got that lens and used it on a T2i and a T4i.

Are you shooting in RAW then post processing to JPG or was that shot directly to a JPG?

The focus looks correct to me but it's hard to tell from the grain which looks like either high ISO noise or T2i's in camera JPG processing (or both).

(Also is it just me or does the blanket in the lower left look sharper?)
(Edit - That's shot TO a JPG! )

 

[mom2rtk]

I've got that lens and used it on a T2i and a T4i.

Are you shooting in RAW then post processing to JPG or was that shot directly from a JPG?

The focus looks correct to me but it's hard to tell from the grain which looks like either high ISO noise or T2i's in camera JPG processing (or both).

(Also is it just me or does the blanket in the lower left look sharper?)

You know what, I think it does. I wish I could see it larger!

 

[egritz]

Yes it is in RAW, then processed/converted in PSE11. This particular is resized down to 800 pixels wide

 

[egritz]

1/100, f/2.8, ISO-1600
Exposure bias 0 step
Focal Length 48mm
Max aperture 3
Metering Mode Spot

Here is the 100% crop on the face area:

And just for kicks I did the blanket area some thought might be the actual focus point:

 

[havoc315]

Focus looks ok to me, but there is some noise disrupting the image.

Did you brighten the shadows or up the exposure in post?