Non Sharp Images from G2

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by David Lewis, Aug 30, 2003.

  1. David Lewis

    David Lewis Guest

    Greetings,

    I can't seem to get nice crisp sharp images from my Canon G2 and wonder if
    others have the same experience.

    I have tried increasing depth field,shutter speed, fiddling with autofocus
    and manual focus and using highest resolution raw image settings. I am
    coming to suspect it is 1) a lens quality problem 2)inherent limitation of
    the focussing capabilities or 3) Canon's intention to produce "soft" photos.

    Interestingly I read a review on the digital SLR EOS 10D
    http://www.digicamera.com/reviews/03aug-canon-eos10d.html that also
    complained of similar problem.

    All Advice,information or suggestions appreciated as I am lost on this one
    :-(

    --
    Kind Regards,
    David
    David Lewis, Aug 30, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. David Lewis

    Mick Ruthven Guest

    Where/how do you perceive the G2 images to be not sharp? Prints? Viewing a
    full-size image on a computer monitor? Or?? I have a G2 and I'm impressed
    with the sharpness I can achieve even in 12x18 prints.

    "David Lewis" <> wrote in message
    news:_vS3b.72181$...
    > Greetings,
    >
    > I can't seem to get nice crisp sharp images from my Canon G2 and wonder if
    > others have the same experience.
    >
    > I have tried increasing depth field,shutter speed, fiddling with autofocus
    > and manual focus and using highest resolution raw image settings. I am
    > coming to suspect it is 1) a lens quality problem 2)inherent limitation

    of
    > the focussing capabilities or 3) Canon's intention to produce "soft"

    photos.
    >
    > Interestingly I read a review on the digital SLR EOS 10D
    > http://www.digicamera.com/reviews/03aug-canon-eos10d.html that also
    > complained of similar problem.
    >
    > All Advice,information or suggestions appreciated as I am lost on this one
    > :-(
    >
    > --
    > Kind Regards,
    > David
    >
    >
    >
    Mick Ruthven, Aug 30, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. David Lewis

    Ed Ruf Guest

    On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 09:03:29 GMT, in rec.photo.digital "David Lewis"
    <> wrote:

    >problem.....especially noted at low lighting levels where large apertures
    >are required and precise focussing is required. The manual focus is very


    Could also be slight motion blur caused by slow shutter speeds in low light
    situations.

    ________________________________________________________
    Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 ()
    http://members.cox.net/egruf
    See images taken with my CP-990 and 5700 at
    http://members.cox.net/egruf-digicam
    Ed Ruf, Aug 30, 2003
    #3
  4. David Lewis

    Mick Ruthven Guest

    1. As someone else said, one thing could be slow shutter speeds with low
    light levels. And of course take care with slower speeds to not move the G2
    which is much lighter than 35mm cameras. I've had to train myself to note
    the shutter speed if the light is a bit low and raise the ISO if necessary
    to get an adequate shutter speed. That will increase noise, especially at
    ISO 400, but that's another subject (NeatImage can help a lot with that).

    2. You need to make sure the yellow square in the LCD changes to green to
    indicate an autofocus lock.

    3. The G2 focuses best on a vertical edge with reasonable contrast
    (horizontal edge if the camera is turned 90 degrees for a vertical format).

    4. Forget manual focus. Focus lock, however, can be useful to autofocus on
    something then press focus lock, then shoot other shots of same-distance
    subjects without needing to focus.

    The G2 produces quite smarp images for a lot of users.

    "David Lewis" <> wrote in message
    news:BLZ3b.72807$...
    > Mick Ruthven wrote:
    > > Where/how do you perceive the G2 images to be not sharp? Prints?
    > > Viewing a full-size image on a computer monitor? Or?? I have a G2 and
    > > I'm impressed with the sharpness I can achieve even in 12x18 prints.

    >
    > On 1024 x 768 TFT Monitor using XP inbuilt viewer ....and also when

    printed
    > using Canon S820 Photo quality printer at standard sizes. Some images are

    OK
    > but others are plain fuzzy. The latter improve somewhat if manipulated in
    > Photoshop but also introduces digital noise. There must be an auto focus
    > problem.....especially noted at low lighting levels where large apertures
    > are required and precise focussing is required. The manual focus is very
    > clumsy, moving from 1m to 5m in one step. My best guess is that you have

    to
    > learn to use the G2 within its limitations,which appear to be
    > significant.Unless someone knows the answer to this problem then I guess I
    > need to upgrade. BTW the one thing I keep on hearing about Nikon cameras

    is
    > the quality and clarity of their optics...I wonder whether this is the
    > answer??
    >
    > --
    > Kind Regards,
    > David
    >
    >
    >
    Mick Ruthven, Aug 30, 2003
    #4
  5. David Lewis

    David Lewis Guest

    Mike,

    Thanks for detailed and considered answer.I will attend to these shooting
    modifications and see how I go. I wonder also ,in low lighting...but not
    enough to automatically induce the flash, how it would go if I intentionally
    reduce aperture plus increase shutter speed BUT force the flash to
    operate----kind of a 'fill in' flash variation?This would not overcome any
    focussing problems (but could use autofocus lock) but would overcome
    problems with depth of field and shutter speeds.
    --
    Kind Regards,
    David


    "Mick Ruthven" <> wrote in message
    news:mI24b.7567$...
    > 1. As someone else said, one thing could be slow shutter speeds with low
    > light levels. And of course take care with slower speeds to not move the

    G2
    > which is much lighter than 35mm cameras. I've had to train myself to note
    > the shutter speed if the light is a bit low and raise the ISO if necessary
    > to get an adequate shutter speed. That will increase noise, especially at
    > ISO 400, but that's another subject (NeatImage can help a lot with that).
    >
    > 2. You need to make sure the yellow square in the LCD changes to green to
    > indicate an autofocus lock.
    >
    > 3. The G2 focuses best on a vertical edge with reasonable contrast
    > (horizontal edge if the camera is turned 90 degrees for a vertical

    format).
    >
    > 4. Forget manual focus. Focus lock, however, can be useful to autofocus on
    > something then press focus lock, then shoot other shots of same-distance
    > subjects without needing to focus.
    >
    > The G2 produces quite smarp images for a lot of users.
    >
    > "David Lewis" <> wrote in message
    > news:BLZ3b.72807$...
    > > Mick Ruthven wrote:
    > > > Where/how do you perceive the G2 images to be not sharp? Prints?
    > > > Viewing a full-size image on a computer monitor? Or?? I have a G2 and
    > > > I'm impressed with the sharpness I can achieve even in 12x18 prints.

    > >
    > > On 1024 x 768 TFT Monitor using XP inbuilt viewer ....and also when

    > printed
    > > using Canon S820 Photo quality printer at standard sizes. Some images

    are
    > OK
    > > but others are plain fuzzy. The latter improve somewhat if manipulated

    in
    > > Photoshop but also introduces digital noise. There must be an auto focus
    > > problem.....especially noted at low lighting levels where large

    apertures
    > > are required and precise focussing is required. The manual focus is very
    > > clumsy, moving from 1m to 5m in one step. My best guess is that you

    have
    > to
    > > learn to use the G2 within its limitations,which appear to be
    > > significant.Unless someone knows the answer to this problem then I guess

    I
    > > need to upgrade. BTW the one thing I keep on hearing about Nikon cameras

    > is
    > > the quality and clarity of their optics...I wonder whether this is the
    > > answer??
    > >
    > > --
    > > Kind Regards,
    > > David
    > >
    > >
    > >

    >
    >
    David Lewis, Aug 30, 2003
    #5
  6. David Lewis

    Mick Ruthven Guest

    Of course without using the flash at all (flash turned off), you can use the
    largest lens opening (smallest f stop, in Av mode) to get the fastest
    shutter speed possible for that light and ISO. If you want to force the
    flash, you can. In Tv mode, assuming the shutter is slower than 1/250,
    you'll get the same shutter speed and f stop as with the shutter off, so it
    is like flash fill. In Av mode, if the shutter speed would have been slower
    than 1/60 with no flash, with forced flash it will set the shutter to 1/60
    so areas not in the flash's range will be darker than without flash.

    These kind of variations are very easy to test. You don't even have to
    download the pictures, just watch what happens to the shutter speed and f
    stop as you turn the flash off and on.

    "David Lewis" <> wrote in message
    news:Wp84b.73719$...
    >
    > I wonder also ,in low lighting...but not
    > enough to automatically induce the flash, how it would go if I

    intentionally
    > reduce aperture plus increase shutter speed BUT force the flash to
    > operate----kind of a 'fill in' flash variation?
    Mick Ruthven, Aug 31, 2003
    #6
  7. David Lewis

    David Lewis Guest

    Mick Ruthven wrote:

    > If you want to
    > force the flash, you can. In Tv mode, assuming the shutter is slower
    > than 1/250, you'll get the same shutter speed and f stop as with the
    > shutter off, so it is like flash fill.


    An interesting exercise. If shutter speed is set faster than 1/250 it
    defaults back down to 1/250 presumably for flash synchronisation purposes.
    Curiously as you set shutter speed faster and faster, the corresponding f
    stop increases.Why?

    > In Av mode, if the shutter
    > speed would have been slower than 1/60 with no flash, with forced
    > flash it will set the shutter to 1/60


    Again this seems counter intuitive.There is no problems with slow shutter
    speeds and flash synchronisation and if prevailing light demands the slower
    shutter speed why noy use it and have the flash as a fill in?


    --
    Kind Regards,
    David
    David Lewis, Aug 31, 2003
    #7
    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. Silverstrand

    Sharp develops 'two-way viewing' LCD

    Silverstrand, Jul 25, 2005, in forum: Hardware
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    1,855
    XhArD
    Sep 12, 2005
  2. shiv
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    2,829
  3. Inform me

    Preserving Digital Images (Non Yellowing)

    Inform me, Jan 28, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    358
    Albert Nurick
    Jan 29, 2004
  4. Guest
    Replies:
    61
    Views:
    1,347
    Patrick Boch
    Mar 18, 2005
  5. why are some images sharp and others not

    , Aug 17, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    39
    Views:
    718
Loading...

Share This Page