Blurred Images with 55-250mm lens

[joebranko]

I have been plagued with blurred images while using my 55-250 mm lens at the longer focal lengths.
Examples:



and


I suspected camera shake, but with exposure at 1/400" I discounted that.

I was somewhat frustrated because I had taken many shots that morning and had to dump many which were otherwise nice images. I did not think that I could be out of focus so many times so I looked for some other cause.

I noticed that shots I took at 55mm were quite clear.



So I suspected something with the lens' ability to focus at long focus lengths close to 250mm; although this did not sound too convincing to me.

I had mounted a CPL on this lens, as I had been shooting in bright sunlight, so today I tried a test of about 12 shots with the CPL and 12 without all at 250mm. The results were very clear sharp exposures:




So clear pics without the CPL at 250mm. Is the CPL affecting the ability of the lens to focus sharply?

[rpcrowe]

Some less expensive CPL filters impact the image quality achieved by a lens...

What was the exposure that you used for the unsharp and the sharp images...

[Black Pearl]

Looks like camera shake to me.

Your lens has the equivalent focal length of 400mm so 1/400s would be a suggested minimum shutter speed not one guaranteed to eliminate camera movement. I might also suggest your camera holding, steadying technique may not be perfect so the best way to test your lens would be to pop the camera on a tripod and try it with a static subject. If those turn out sharp then you could use a faster shutter speed and practice holding your still - Google suggestions for good hand-holding practices.

[Manfred M]

+1 to Robin's comment.

Try repeating the test, but use a sturdy tripod to hold the camera and shoot a stationary subject in order to remove any camera and subject motion from the equation.

[paintingwithlight]

Looks like camera shake to me.

If you look at the blurred swan image, the sides of the swan's neck are blurred (i.e., blurring in the horizontal axis) but the top of the swan's head in that same frame is not appreciably blurred (i.e., not blurred in the vertical axis). This is consistent with reasonably good focus (the top of the swan's head) but the camera was moving horizontally as the picture was taken. You can't tell if the motion was deliberate panning or just a random vibration/shake.

I believe you are shooting 200mm with a cropped sensor. When I shoot the moon at 300mm FL with my cropped sensor I find that I can get away with 1/320 s hand-held *only* if VR is enabled and *only* if I lean against the side of a structure and try really hard to brace the camera/not shake. Otherwise the image (after cropping/zooming in) is inevitably blurred if hand-held.

[rpcrowe]

Other factors that impact the sharpness of the image are the way that the camera is held. As an example, I cannot hold a camera as steady when I use live view as when I am shooting using the viewfinder. It's simply that the camera has a third point of solidity (my face) when I shoot using the viewfinder.

Additionally, my balance at the time of the shot is important to the sharpness of the picture. I shot a series of my friend Alesha yesterday and we were climbing around the rocks beneath a pier with the evening ocean tide coming in.



I was saying to myself that I was a damn fool for putting myself in this precarious position. I will be 77 in June and am too old to be climbing on wet rocks with the surf coming in. Anyway, I shot this at 144mm on a 1.6x crop camera (230mm equivalent) and shot it at 1/400 second with the IS of my 70-200mm f/4L IS lens on. The shot is quite sharp although on full face views I have softened the face somewhat to disguise a bit of old acne scarring. However, my shooting position was certainly not conducive to a sharp image. I think that if I had used the old 1/FL shutter speed rule or suggestion (about 1/150 second) that my shot would not have been this sharp.

Here's another shot from this series on which I worked to smooth out her complexion...



As mentioned above, I would do any testing of sharpness with the camera in a rock solid position. Tripod or beanbag on a rock would do that...

[inkista]

Agree with everyone else's comments. Review how you're holding your camera. And you can shift your left hand out farther to support the weight of the lens better. Be sure your feet are planted, and your elbows are tucked in, and that you're shooting between breaths. Think sharp shooting technique--you're basically holding your camera like a rifle. If not a machine gun. ;D But the 55-250 probably doesn't require "machine gun" hold.

Secondly, you're using very low ISOs on your blurry shots (100, 200). Bump it up at least to 400. This is why you got a big-sensor camera after, all. It can handle it. I routinely use IS0 settings in the 400-1600 range while shooting birds with my 400mm lens handheld on very sunny days here in Southern California to get my shutter speed up high enough (my lens has no IS and I'm not the steadiest handholder. Also, I'm too lazy to bring the monopod, and I like going after BiF shots). If you get a good exposure, noise won't be an issue.


white-tailed kite, Canon 50D, EF 400mm f/5.6L USM, iso 400, f/5.6, 1/3200s.

[Geoff F]

Is that the Canon 55-250 Joe?

There is a test result here

http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/41...5250_456is_50d

They give a noticeable drop in sharpness at the longer lengths so adding a thick bit of glass like a CPL as well would probably have a noticeable effect.

[Tronhard]

Hi Joe:

I may have missed this, so pardon if I did, but what version of the Canon 55-250 lens are you using? There are three versions in order of issue:

EF-S 55-250 IS 2007
EF-S 55-250 IS II 2011
EF-S 55-250 IS STM 2013

Apparently they have some significant variations, and as one would expect the latest, STM version is considered to be the best of the bunch.

Another obvious question perhaps is, has this issue of softness always been the case or was it sharper at one stage and had now degraded?

Also, on the technique side of things, on your avatar,( assuming it is you), it shows you shooting with a lens cap hanging on the end of a string that is secured near the front of the lens. If you do use a telephoto like that, the cap acts like a pendulum, gently swinging the lens VERY slightly. This effect will be magnified with focal length being shot, and the proximity of the point of attachment for the lens cap tether to the front element. If you are going to use a tether, I would suggest sliding the attachment back close to the camera body and preferably holding onto the lens cap to keep it still.

[Stagecoach]

I had mounted a CPL on this lens, as I had been shooting in bright sunlight, so today I tried a test of about 12 shots with the CPL and 12 without all at 250mm.

The results were very clear sharp exposures:

So clear pics without the CPL at 250mm.

Is the CPL affecting the ability of the lens to focus sharply?

Did your camera indicate that it had obtained focus on the not so sharp shots?

Does your software allow you to see if and where the focus point locked on? (Nikon software does so I suspect Canon also)

Is your camera set to allow it to take shots that are not registered as 'focused'?

[rpcrowe]

I don't see that the focus is off on the original images posted. When focus is off, there will be area within the image (in front or in back of the subject that are in focus. I see no specifically sharp area in these images.

This would mean either camera shake or some other deterioration of the image quality is the culprit.

[Ken MT]

Your circular polariser could be adding up to 2 stops to your exposure, eg the effective shutter speed could be as low as 1/100 sec, which may be causing camera shake. Can you check what the exposure was for both with and without the CPL.

[Black Pearl]

Your circular polariser could be adding up to 2 stops to your exposure, eg the effective shutter speed could be as low as 1/100 sec, which may be causing camera shake. Can you check what the exposure was for both with and without the CPL.

The EXIF shows 1/400s

[joebranko]

Some less expensive CPL filters impact the image quality achieved by a lens...

What was the exposure that you used for the unsharp and the sharp images...

Thanks Richard. the exposures for the unsharp images were between 1/400 to 1/2000

[joebranko]

Looks like camera shake to me.

Your lens has the equivalent focal length of 400mm so 1/400s would be a suggested minimum shutter speed not one guaranteed to eliminate camera movement. I might also suggest your camera holding, steadying technique may not be perfect so the best way to test your lens would be to pop the camera on a tripod and try it with a static subject. If those turn out sharp then you could use a faster shutter speed and practice holding your still - Google suggestions for good hand-holding practices.

Thanks Robin. However I have been able to capture sharp images at 250mm with this lens without the CPL.

[joebranko]

If you look at the blurred swan image, the sides of the swan's neck are blurred (i.e., blurring in the horizontal axis) but the top of the swan's head in that same frame is not appreciably blurred (i.e., not blurred in the vertical axis). This is consistent with reasonably good focus (the top of the swan's head) but the camera was moving horizontally as the picture was taken. You can't tell if the motion was deliberate panning or just a random vibration/shake.

Thanks Michael. I still don't understand why I am able to get sharp hand held shots repeatedly without the CPL.

[joebranko]

Agree with everyone else's comments. Review how you're holding your camera.

white-tailed kite, Canon 50D, EF 400mm f/5.6L USM, iso 400, f/5.6, 1/3200s.

Thanks Kathy.

[joebranko]

Is that the Canon 55-250 Joe?

There is a test result here

http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/41...5250_456is_50d

They give a noticeable drop in sharpness at the longer lengths so adding a thick bit of glass like a CPL as well would probably have a noticeable effect.

Thanks Geoff. very helpful info.

[joebranko]

Hi Joe:

I may have missed this, so pardon if I did, but what version of the Canon 55-250 lens are you using? There are three versions in order of issue:

EF-S 55-250 IS 2007
EF-S 55-250 IS II 2011
EF-S 55-250 IS STM 2013

Apparently they have some significant variations, and as one would expect the latest, STM version is considered to be the best of the bunch.

.

Thanks Trev. Not sure which version of the lens I have. Probably the 2011 version as it was purchased in 2012, certainly not the STM version.

[joebranko]

Did your camera indicate that it had obtained focus on the not so sharp shots?

Does your software allow you to see if and where the focus point locked on? (Nikon software does so I suspect Canon also)

Is your camera set to allow it to take shots that are not registered as 'focused'?

Thanks Grahame.

Camera indicated it had obtained focus on the non sharp shots.

I don't know if my software indicates where the focus point locked on. Not aware of this.

My camera will not expose if it has not achieved focus.