First 400D pics - possible sharpness issue

[FlexiPack]

I've not had much chance to test drive my new 400d and lenses (28-135mm IS USM & 50mm f/1.8) with the weather being so bad here in the UK. In the last couple of days there has actually been some sunshine so i've been out snapping. Im a beginner but i've been shooting exclusively in Av, Tv & M. In fact i've not even tried the auto modes. I figure if im going to learn this is the way to do it, so there has been a lot of photo's going in the trash as a result.

I'm wondering if there's a focus issue with either my lens or the camera. I could be over reacting but some shots lack sharpness even though they are focused.

Take this example of a full size and cropped version...

EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM - f5.6, 1/50, ISO 400, W/B auto
http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d185/Mcflynnster/Fly-Trap.jpg

Up close it doesn't look so sharp...

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d185/Mcflynnster/fly-trap-cropped2.jpg

The fly trap on the right side seems out of focus to me. Maybe im being over analytical of it but i would've thought with an aperture of 5.6 there would be sufficient DOF for it to be in focus. I haven't got any decent photo's taken with my other lenses for a good enough comparison yet. The barrel distortion on the 28-135mm seems quite bad too...

EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM - f/11, 1/50, ISO 400, W/B auto
http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d185/Mcflynnster/Barrel-Distortion.jpg

and...

EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM - f8, 1/4000, ISO 400, W/B shade
http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d185/Mcflynnster/Barrel-Distortion2.jpg

Other than that i'm very happy with my new kit :D Here's just a few of my best images so far, nothing spectacular but im still learning.

EF 50mm f/1.8 MK II - f1.8, 1/30, ISO 800, W/B auto
http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d185/Mcflynnster/Bauble.jpg

EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM - f8, 1/80, ISO 400, W/B auto
http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d185/Mcflynnster/Flowers.jpg

[TenD]

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l287/Casaflyr/fly-trap-cropped2.jpg

Digital SLRs have very little sharpening applied in the camera compared to a point and shoot digital, especially Canon SLRs. USM is applied in post processing to the photographers taste. I applied 2 passes of USM(unsharp mask), one at a large radius and small strength then another at a small radius and large strength. The photo gained some artifacts because the original was pretty small, but you get the idea.

[sun5150]

I just got the 28-135 IS and I am not very impress by it. The pictures seems to be soft and not very sharp.
I'm thinking of retuning it.

[FlexiPack]

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l287/Casaflyr/fly-trap-cropped2.jpg

Digital SLRs have very little sharpening applied in the camera compared to a point and shoot digital, especially Canon SLRs. USM is applied in post processing to the photographers taste. I applied 2 passes of USM(unsharp mask), one at a large radius and small strength then another at a small radius and large strength. The photo gained some artifacts because the original was pretty small, but you get the idea.

Thanks for the info, I was hoping not to have to spend a lot of time in photoshop as a) im crap at it and b) i enjoy taking the photos, not the PP. But it is better with the USM. Although the fly trap on the right is the one i was more concerned about. That seems quite fuzzy.


I just got the 28-135 IS and I am not very impress by it. The pictures seems to be soft and not very sharp.
I'm thinking of retuning it.

Yes im finding this too but i wasn't sure if it was just me. I wonder if i've just got a bad lens and replacing it would help. I don't really want to get rid of it as i love the IS.

[Nickcanada]

1/50 sec is quite long, even for IS, depending on your focal length. I have a 28-135mm I don't mind it, not bad for the price for sure. I probably wouldn't have got it if I could do it over, it's not wide enough for me and I didn't get the kit lens.

Sharpening tools can go along way in PP

[cdifoto]

1) All dSLRs need some post work unless you shoot strictly JPEG and maximize all the parameters settings. Even then they might not be what you think of as "sharp" if you're coming from a P&S that overcooks all the images in-camera.

2) The 28-135 isn't the sharpest lens around.

3) OP you focused on the left trap. The right one is out of the plane of focus. Buy the book "Understanding Exposure" by Bryan Peterson.

4) That lens is fine.

[FlexiPack]

That book is already on my wish list ;) If you think the lens is fine i'll trust your judgement as you've far more experience than but i'm going to monitor it just to make sure - im anal about these things!


1/50 sec is quite long, even for IS, depending on your focal length. I have a 28-135mm I don't mind it, not bad for the price for sure. I probably wouldn't have got it if I could do it over, it's not wide enough for me and I didn't get the kit lens.

Sharpening tools can go along way in PP

In the fly trap pic the focal length was 28mm. I will do some experimenting when its bright enough for faster shutter speeds, that should eliminate camera shake if there is indeed a problem. I have quite a few photos where even the focus point doesn't look as sharp as it should.

[snap]

The color looks good to me, and PP sharpened up the images. I had the 28-135 and did not like it. I gave it away.

[Honest Gaza]

Going from the Panasonic FZ-20 to the Canon 400D I was left wondering the same question.

When capturing in JPeg, I now have the camera sharpness set at "4" (personal preference).

[EOS Man]

One thing for these lenses which are unsharp, like the 75-300 non-IS at 300 mm can be a bit soft, is to stop them down to f8 - f11 if given the chance (when shutter speed allows). The difference in my eyes are subtle yet noticeable.