Don't think i am using my Canon PowerShot SD700 IS properly

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by gaikokujinkyofusho@gmail.com, Mar 18, 2007.

  1. Guest

    I recently bought a Canon PowerShot SD700 IS after scouring all the
    review sites comparing prices etc and functionality wise I am happy
    with it but. The pictures are killing me (which is "kinda" important).
    I have read though the manual and tried a myriad of settings (and
    combinations of settings) but my pictures still seem a bit blurry. I
    picked a camera with Image Stabilization specifically so blurry/fuzzy
    images would be less of an issue so this is particularly frustrating.
    It is most problematic when I try to take panoramic photos as the
    stitching becomes really obvious when putting together two photos that
    are of a different fuzziness. I have even tried holding my breath as I
    take these pictures and still get blurry images sometimes.

    I have posted some pictures I have taken as examples, they are fairly
    clear but then again they don't seem as clear as they should be and I
    wanted to see if I could get some opinions about if my standards are
    too high (I'm not even an amateur photographer and I have taste to
    match so i don't think it is pickiness) or the camera, or the settings
    I am using.

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/gtinn/tags/test/

    To the right of each picture you can click on: "Taken with a Canon
    PowerShot SD700 IS.
    More properties" to view the EXIF info.

    Any feed back would really be appreciated!

    Cheers

    -Gaiko
    , Mar 18, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. <> wrote in message
    news:...

    > I have posted some pictures I have taken as examples, they are fairly
    > clear but then again they don't seem as clear as they should be and I
    > wanted to see if I could get some opinions about if my standards are
    > too high (I'm not even an amateur photographer and I have taste to
    > match so i don't think it is pickiness) or the camera, or the settings
    > I am using.
    >
    > http://www.flickr.com/photos/gtinn/tags/test/


    I looked at the first of your photos, and it is greatly reduced in size from
    the original. In other words, it's not the same as the photo that came from
    the camera.

    For that reason, it is impossible to determine from what you posted whether
    there is any problem with the camera. In order to make it possible, you
    need to put the unmodified, original photos somewhere that people can see
    them.
    Andrew Koenig, Mar 18, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. ASAAR Guest

    On 18 Mar 2007 08:21:14 -0700, wrote:

    > I recently bought a Canon PowerShot SD700 IS after scouring all the
    > review sites comparing prices etc and functionality wise I am happy
    > with it but. The pictures are killing me (which is "kinda" important).
    > I have read though the manual and tried a myriad of settings (and
    > combinations of settings) but my pictures still seem a bit blurry. I
    > picked a camera with Image Stabilization specifically so blurry/fuzzy
    > images would be less of an issue so this is particularly frustrating.
    > It is most problematic when I try to take panoramic photos as the
    > stitching becomes really obvious when putting together two photos that
    > are of a different fuzziness. I have even tried holding my breath as I
    > take these pictures and still get blurry images sometimes.


    You have it right when you say that IS makes blur less of an
    issue. But it's still an issue since IS doesn't eliminate blur, it
    can only reduce it, and the amount of blur you get will vary from
    shot to shot depending on how well you can hold the camera. The
    smaller the camera, the harder it is to hold motionless, but for
    panoramas you shouldn't even try. They should be taken with the
    camera mounted on a stable tripod, and the IS function should
    probably be turned off. Check the EXIF data of your pictures if you
    don't know what shutter speed was used. You might have used a video
    mode that provides a small aperture to get a large depth of field,
    but that would produce a slower shutter speed that increases the
    effect of camera movement. Try taking some shots, if not with a
    tripod, at least with the camera resting on a solid surface. Many
    photographers carry a small beanbag for this purpose, or you could
    fill a sock with some dry rice, or something similar. It's easily
    carried and allows the camera to be quickly positioned. Then see if
    the pictures you take are sharp enough. If not, your camera may be
    defective. I the pictures come out nice and sharp, you just have to
    use the cameras best settings and either improve your technique
    (learning how to hold the camera more stably) or use a tripod.
    Using a faster shutter speed should help, and using a higher ISO is
    one way to manage this, if the added "noise" it produces isn't
    objectionable. Panorama shots can use a shutter speed as long as
    needed, but don't wait too long between shots, as anything moving
    within the frame can cause problems, be they people, pets, vehicles
    or clouds. Unless you have a massive tripod, it would probably be
    best to use the camera's self timer, as pushing the shutter can
    cause the camera to vibrate enough on most lightweight tripods to
    cause noticeable blur.
    ASAAR, Mar 18, 2007
    #3
  4. On 18 Mar 2007 08:21:14 -0700, <> wrote:
    > I recently bought a Canon PowerShot SD700 IS after scouring all the
    > review sites comparing prices etc and functionality wise I am happy
    > with it but. The pictures are killing me (which is "kinda" important).
    > I have read though the manual and tried a myriad of settings (and
    > combinations of settings) but my pictures still seem a bit blurry. I
    > picked a camera with Image Stabilization specifically so blurry/fuzzy
    > images would be less of an issue so this is particularly frustrating.
    > It is most problematic when I try to take panoramic photos as the
    > stitching becomes really obvious when putting together two photos that
    > are of a different fuzziness. I have even tried holding my breath as I
    > take these pictures and still get blurry images sometimes.
    >
    > I have posted some pictures I have taken as examples, they are fairly
    > clear but then again they don't seem as clear as they should be and I
    > wanted to see if I could get some opinions about if my standards are
    > too high (I'm not even an amateur photographer and I have taste to
    > match so i don't think it is pickiness) or the camera, or the settings
    > I am using.
    >
    > http://www.flickr.com/photos/gtinn/tags/test/
    >
    > To the right of each picture you can click on: "Taken with a Canon
    > PowerShot SD700 IS.
    > More properties" to view the EXIF info.


    Hmmm. Of those three shots, one has a fairly fast shutter speed so it
    should be sharp even without IS. The other two are down in the 1/60s
    range, which is right in the middle of the range where IS really helps.

    It's hard, though, to tell how blurry the shots really are, because all
    we can see are the fairly small versions that you've put up on flickr.

    One way to check whether the camera is bad is to mount it on a tripod,
    turn off the IS, turn on the 2-second self timer, and take some pictures
    that way. If you are still seeing fuzziness under those conditions, you
    might have a hardware problem.

    -dms
    Daniel Silevitch, Mar 18, 2007
    #4
  5. On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 12:13:38 -0400, in rec.photo.digital ASAAR
    <> wrote:


    > You have it right when you say that IS makes blur less of an
    >issue. But it's still an issue since IS doesn't eliminate blur, it
    >can only reduce it, and the amount of blur you get will vary from
    >shot to shot depending on how well you can hold the camera. The
    >smaller the camera, the harder it is to hold motionless, but for
    >panoramas you shouldn't even try. They should be taken with the
    >camera mounted on a stable tripod, and the IS function should
    >probably be turned off. Check the EXIF data of your pictures if you
    >don't know what shutter speed was used. You might have used a video
    >mode that provides a small aperture to get a large depth of field,
    >but that would produce a slower shutter speed that increases the
    >effect of camera movement. Try taking some shots, if not with a
    >tripod, at least with the camera resting on a solid surface. Many
    >photographers carry a small beanbag for this purpose, or you could
    >fill a sock with some dry rice, or something similar. It's easily
    >carried and allows the camera to be quickly positioned. Then see if
    >the pictures you take are sharp enough. If not, your camera may be
    >defective. I the pictures come out nice and sharp, you just have to
    >use the cameras best settings and either improve your technique
    >(learning how to hold the camera more stably) or use a tripod.
    >Using a faster shutter speed should help, and using a higher ISO is
    >one way to manage this, if the added "noise" it produces isn't
    >objectionable. Panorama shots can use a shutter speed as long as
    >needed, but don't wait too long between shots, as anything moving
    >within the frame can cause problems, be they people, pets, vehicles
    >or clouds. Unless you have a massive tripod, it would probably be
    >best to use the camera's self timer, as pushing the shutter can
    >cause the camera to vibrate enough on most lightweight tripods to
    >cause noticeable blur.


    If you had looked the exif data posted shows the shots were taken at f/2.8
    1/60, f/5 1/80 and f.5.6 1/250 .

    To the OP, IS is not magic and it still takes a steady hand to get sharp
    results at slow shutter speeds. Not knowing your background in photography
    we don't have any idea on your technique. Just holding your breath means
    nothing if you yourself are not still. You need to talk about technique,
    such as the most simple question, are you using the viewfinder or composing
    the shot using the lcd and therefore holding the camera at arm's length,
    which obviously is not recommended?
    --
    Ed Ruf ()
    http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html
    Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!), Mar 18, 2007
    #5
  6. ASAAR Guest

    On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 12:38:09 -0400, Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN
    SIG!) wrote:

    > If you had looked the exif data posted shows the shots were taken at f/2.8
    > 1/60, f/5 1/80 and f.5.6 1/250 .


    I didn't look because I suspected that the problem was one of
    technique, the OP could easily verify it or determine by following
    my suggestions if a defective camera might be responsible, and
    downloading multiple images isn't practical with my dialup
    connection. Asking the OP to check his own EXIF data would be more
    beneficial to the OP than if I did it for him, and I did provide a
    few clues pertaining to what should be examined. At least he was
    aware that EXIF data exists, but he needs to learn to understand
    what it can tell him.


    > To the OP, IS is not magic and it still takes a steady hand to get
    > sharp results at slow shutter speeds. Not knowing your background
    > in photography we don't have any idea on your technique . . .


    Our replies are two peas in a pod. Heckle and Jeckle. Not Laurel
    and Hardy. I notice a bit of Three Stooges slapstick taking place
    in a nearby low light thread. I also notice several there that
    often complain about argumentativeness being their usual
    argumentative selves, dishing out eye-pokes and tossing plenty of
    gooey pies. Nyuk, nyuk nyuk nyuk nyuk. <g>
    ASAAR, Mar 18, 2007
    #6
  7. Guest

    Doh! I am very sorry, i forgot that the full sized pictures can only
    be seen by flickr members. Here are separate links to the full
    pictures:

    Taken w/ a Tripod (3 ft away)
    http://www.geocities.com/gaikokujin_kyofusho/pictures/IMG_1054.jpg

    Taken w/o Tripod
    http://www.geocities.com/gaikokujin_kyofusho/pictures/IMG_1021.jpg
    http://www.geocities.com/gaikokujin_kyofusho/pictures/IMG_0969.jpg
    http://www.geocities.com/gaikokujin_kyofusho/pictures/IMG_0947.jpg


    On Mar 18, 12:08 pm, "Andrew Koenig" <> wrote:
    > <> wrote in message
    >
    > news:...
    >
    > > I have posted some pictures I have taken as examples, they are fairly
    > > clear but then again they don't seem as clear as they should be and I
    > > wanted to see if I could get some opinions about if my standards are
    > > too high (I'm not even an amateur photographer and I have taste to
    > > match so i don't think it is pickiness) or the camera, or the settings
    > > I am using.

    >
    > >http://www.flickr.com/photos/gtinn/tags/test/

    >
    > I looked at the first of your photos, and it is greatly reduced in size from
    > the original. In other words, it's not the same as the photo that came from
    > the camera.
    >
    > For that reason, it is impossible to determine from what you posted whether
    > there is any problem with the camera. In order to make it possible, you
    > need to put the unmodified, original photos somewhere that people can see
    > them.
    , Mar 18, 2007
    #7
  8. Guest

    On Mar 18, 12:13 pm, ASAAR <> wrote:
    > On 18 Mar 2007 08:21:14 -0700, wrote:
    >
    > > I recently bought a Canon PowerShot SD700 IS after scouring all the
    > > review sites comparing prices etc and functionality wise I am happy
    > > with it but. The pictures are killing me (which is "kinda" important).
    > > I have read though the manual and tried a myriad of settings (and
    > > combinations of settings) but my pictures still seem a bit blurry. I
    > > picked a camera with Image Stabilization specifically so blurry/fuzzy
    > > images would be less of an issue so this is particularly frustrating.
    > > It is most problematic when I try to take panoramic photos as the
    > > stitching becomes really obvious when putting together two photos that
    > > are of a different fuzziness. I have even tried holding my breath as I
    > > take these pictures and still get blurry images sometimes.

    >
    > You have it right when you say that IS makes blur less of an
    > issue. But it's still an issue since IS doesn't eliminate blur, it
    > can only reduce it, and the amount of blur you get will vary from
    > shot to shot depending on how well you can hold the camera.


    touche, however it still seems to me that i get a bit of blur even
    when using a tripod (though admittedly not as much). I was not under
    the impression that IS would be a panacea for the blury picture but i
    have made it a point to hold it pretty darn still.

    > The
    > smaller the camera, the harder it is to hold motionless, but for
    > panoramas you shouldn't even try. They should be taken with the
    > camera mounted on a stable tripod, and the IS function should
    > probably be turned off. Check the EXIF data of your pictures if you
    > don't know what shutter speed was used. You might have used a video
    > mode that provides a small aperture to get a large depth of field,
    > but that would produce a slower shutter speed that increases the
    > effect of camera movement. Try taking some shots, if not with a
    > tripod, at least with the camera resting on a solid surface. Many
    > photographers carry a small beanbag for this purpose, or you could
    > fill a sock with some dry rice, or something similar. It's easily
    > carried and allows the camera to be quickly positioned. Then see if
    > the pictures you take are sharp enough. If not, your camera may be
    > defective. I the pictures come out nice and sharp, you just have to
    > use the cameras best settings and either improve your technique
    > (learning how to hold the camera more stably) or use a tripod.
    > Using a faster shutter speed should help, and using a higher ISO is
    > one way to manage this, if the added "noise" it produces isn't
    > objectionable. Panorama shots can use a shutter speed as long as
    > needed, but don't wait too long between shots, as anything moving
    > within the frame can cause problems, be they people, pets, vehicles
    > or clouds. Unless you have a massive tripod, it would probably be
    > best to use the camera's self timer, as pushing the shutter can
    > cause the camera to vibrate enough on most lightweight tripods to
    > cause noticeable blur.


    noted, I'll try some of your tips. thanks.
    , Mar 18, 2007
    #8
  9. Guest

    On Mar 18, 12:38 pm, "Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!)"
    <> wrote:
    > On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 12:13:38 -0400, in rec.photo.digital ASAAR
    >
    >
    >
    > <> wrote:
    > > You have it right when you say that IS makes blur less of an
    > >issue. But it's still an issue since IS doesn't eliminate blur, it
    > >can only reduce it, and the amount of blur you get will vary from
    > >shot to shot depending on how well you can hold the camera. The
    > >smaller the camera, the harder it is to hold motionless, but for
    > >panoramas you shouldn't even try. They should be taken with the
    > >camera mounted on a stable tripod, and the IS function should
    > >probably be turned off. Check the EXIF data of your pictures if you
    > >don't know what shutter speed was used. You might have used a video
    > >mode that provides a small aperture to get a large depth of field,
    > >but that would produce a slower shutter speed that increases the
    > >effect of camera movement. Try taking some shots, if not with a
    > >tripod, at least with the camera resting on a solid surface. Many
    > >photographers carry a small beanbag for this purpose, or you could
    > >fill a sock with some dry rice, or something similar. It's easily
    > >carried and allows the camera to be quickly positioned. Then see if
    > >the pictures you take are sharp enough. If not, your camera may be
    > >defective. I the pictures come out nice and sharp, you just have to
    > >use the cameras best settings and either improve your technique
    > >(learning how to hold the camera more stably) or use a tripod.
    > >Using a faster shutter speed should help, and using a higher ISO is
    > >one way to manage this, if the added "noise" it produces isn't
    > >objectionable. Panorama shots can use a shutter speed as long as
    > >needed, but don't wait too long between shots, as anything moving
    > >within the frame can cause problems, be they people, pets, vehicles
    > >or clouds. Unless you have a massive tripod, it would probably be
    > >best to use the camera's self timer, as pushing the shutter can
    > >cause the camera to vibrate enough on most lightweight tripods to
    > >cause noticeable blur.

    >
    > If you had looked the exif data posted shows the shots were taken at f/2.8
    > 1/60, f/5 1/80 and f.5.6 1/250 .
    >
    > To the OP, IS is not magic and it still takes a steady hand to get sharp
    > results at slow shutter speeds. Not knowing your background in photography
    > we don't have any idea on your technique. Just holding your breath means
    > nothing if you yourself are not still. You need to talk about technique,
    > such as the most simple question, are you using the viewfinder or composing
    > the shot using the lcd and therefore holding the camera at arm's length,
    > which obviously is not recommended?
    > --
    > Ed Ruf ()http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html


    I have tried using both, admittedly using the LCD more often than not
    but i have gotten similar results using the view finder. Also, i know
    the IS is not magic (would be nice though) but i expected it to
    compensate somewhat for what little shake there is when i take a shot.
    I make it a point to be very still, some times using the view finder
    or resting my elbow on the table etc. I feel like i am getting the
    same picture that i got with an old Minolta Dimage5 that didn't have
    IS.
    , Mar 18, 2007
    #9
  10. ray Guest

    On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 08:21:14 -0700, gaikokujinkyofusho wrote:

    > I recently bought a Canon PowerShot SD700 IS after scouring all the
    > review sites comparing prices etc and functionality wise I am happy
    > with it but. The pictures are killing me (which is "kinda" important).
    > I have read though the manual and tried a myriad of settings (and
    > combinations of settings) but my pictures still seem a bit blurry. I
    > picked a camera with Image Stabilization specifically so blurry/fuzzy
    > images would be less of an issue so this is particularly frustrating.
    > It is most problematic when I try to take panoramic photos as the
    > stitching becomes really obvious when putting together two photos that
    > are of a different fuzziness. I have even tried holding my breath as I
    > take these pictures and still get blurry images sometimes.


    IMHO - best route to panoramas is to use a tripod and turn the IS off.


    >
    > I have posted some pictures I have taken as examples, they are fairly
    > clear but then again they don't seem as clear as they should be and I
    > wanted to see if I could get some opinions about if my standards are
    > too high (I'm not even an amateur photographer and I have taste to
    > match so i don't think it is pickiness) or the camera, or the settings
    > I am using.
    >
    > http://www.flickr.com/photos/gtinn/tags/test/
    >
    > To the right of each picture you can click on: "Taken with a Canon
    > PowerShot SD700 IS.
    > More properties" to view the EXIF info.
    >
    > Any feed back would really be appreciated!
    >
    > Cheers
    >
    > -Gaiko
    ray, Mar 18, 2007
    #10
  11. Joel Guest

    Daniel Silevitch <> wrote:

    <snip>
    > Hmmm. Of those three shots, one has a fairly fast shutter speed so it
    > should be sharp even without IS. The other two are down in the 1/60s
    > range, which is right in the middle of the range where IS really helps.


    Fast shuttle speed usually help with moving subject to be in forcus but
    not really mean sharpness.

    > It's hard, though, to tell how blurry the shots really are, because all
    > we can see are the fairly small versions that you've put up on flickr.


    The photos are way too small to see small detail, and I think a little
    contrast should give them a little sharper look.

    > One way to check whether the camera is bad is to mount it on a tripod,
    > turn off the IS, turn on the 2-second self timer, and take some pictures
    > that way. If you are still seeing fuzziness under those conditions, you
    > might have a hardware problem.
    Joel, Mar 18, 2007
    #11
  12. Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!), Mar 19, 2007
    #12
  13. UC Guest

    On Mar 18, 11:21 am, wrote:
    > I recently bought a Canon PowerShot SD700 IS after scouring all the
    > review sites comparing prices etc and functionality wise I am happy
    > with it but. The pictures are killing me (which is "kinda" important).
    > I have read though the manual and tried a myriad of settings (and
    > combinations of settings) but my pictures still seem a bit blurry. I
    > picked a camera with Image Stabilization specifically so blurry/fuzzy
    > images would be less of an issue so this is particularly frustrating.
    > It is most problematic when I try to take panoramic photos as the
    > stitching becomes really obvious when putting together two photos that
    > are of a different fuzziness. I have even tried holding my breath as I
    > take these pictures and still get blurry images sometimes.
    >
    > I have posted some pictures I have taken as examples, they are fairly
    > clear but then again they don't seem as clear as they should be and I
    > wanted to see if I could get some opinions about if my standards are
    > too high (I'm not even an amateur photographer and I have taste to
    > match so i don't think it is pickiness) or the camera, or the settings
    > I am using.
    >
    > http://www.flickr.com/photos/gtinn/tags/test/
    >
    > To the right of each picture you can click on: "Taken with a Canon
    > PowerShot SD700 IS.
    > More properties" to view the EXIF info.
    >
    > Any feed back would really be appreciated!
    >
    > Cheers
    >
    > -Gaiko



    You thought it was an anal probe?
    UC, Mar 19, 2007
    #13
  14. Jack Mac Guest

    On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 20:04:51 -0400, "Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!)"
    <> wrote:

    >On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 16:19:24 -0600, in rec.photo.digital ray
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >>IMHO - best route to panoramas is to use a tripod and turn the IS off.

    >
    >Care to supply the evidence to back this up?
    >
    >Here are some handhelds to advocate the other side:
    >http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/dSLR/pano/index.html
    >http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/Z_750/misc/index.html


    Over the years my biggest problem with blurred pictures has been the
    way I release the shutter. I've had a tendency to jab the shutter release
    rather than gently squeezing it. This is especially true with small cameras.

    Jack Mac
    Jack Mac, Mar 19, 2007
    #14
  15. ray Guest

    On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 20:04:51 -0400, Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!)
    wrote:

    > On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 16:19:24 -0600, in rec.photo.digital ray
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>IMHO - best route to panoramas is to use a tripod and turn the IS off.

    >
    > Care to supply the evidence to back this up?
    >
    > Here are some handhelds to advocate the other side:
    > http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/dSLR/pano/index.html
    > http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/Z_750/misc/index.html


    It's a stated opinion. And I've yet to see handhelds that were better than
    you'd get with a tripod.
    ray, Mar 19, 2007
    #15
  16. Double-Aces Guest

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6h3G-lMZxjo&mode=related&search=




    "Joel" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    Daniel Silevitch <> wrote:

    <snip>
    > Hmmm. Of those three shots, one has a fairly fast shutter speed so it
    > should be sharp even without IS. The other two are down in the 1/60s
    > range, which is right in the middle of the range where IS really helps.


    Fast shuttle speed usually help with moving subject to be in forcus but
    not really mean sharpness.

    > It's hard, though, to tell how blurry the shots really are, because all
    > we can see are the fairly small versions that you've put up on flickr.


    The photos are way too small to see small detail, and I think a little
    contrast should give them a little sharper look.

    > One way to check whether the camera is bad is to mount it on a tripod,
    > turn off the IS, turn on the 2-second self timer, and take some pictures
    > that way. If you are still seeing fuzziness under those conditions, you
    > might have a hardware problem.
    Double-Aces, Mar 21, 2007
    #16
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Scot Gardner
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,149
    Scot Gardner
    Sep 2, 2003
  2. Replies:
    4
    Views:
    405
    bitwisebob
    Jul 29, 2006
  3. Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,383
    Fred McKenzie
    Aug 4, 2006
  4. Guest

    Canon SD700 IS?

    Guest, Sep 2, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    17
    Views:
    593
    Guest
    Sep 3, 2006
  5. Replies:
    5
    Views:
    3,326
    jkdood
    Nov 25, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page