Blurred Images with 55-250mm lens

[joebranko]

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.

Thanks Richard.

[joebranko]

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.

Thanks Ken.

With CPL exposures ranged from 1/400 to 1/2000
Without CPL exposures were 1/2000

I would have thought that it would be the actual exposure, ie the actual time the shutter was open, that allow an image to blur as the camera moves. I did not think that the effective shutter speed could cause that.

[paintingwithlight]

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

Hi Joe,

Others have commented on your EXIF data - I can't seem to see that using Chrome on my Mac. So if my next comment seems idiotic it is only because I can't access the EXIF data.

Is it possible that because the CPL is causing less light to reach the sensor, as a result your camera is shooting at a lower shutter speed in those situations (you are shooting in aperture priority) because you have selected a maximum ISO above which you don't want to shoot? You indicated your shots were taken between 1/400 and 1/2000. Is it possible that the blurry shots were at 1/400 at FL 250mm?

Have a great one.

Michael

[joebranko]

Hi Joe,

Others have commented on your EXIF data - I can't seem to see that using Chrome on my Mac. So if my next comment seems idiotic it is only because I can't access the EXIF data.

Is it possible that because the CPL is causing less light to reach the sensor, as a result your camera is shooting at a lower shutter speed in those situations (you are shooting in aperture priority) because you have selected a maximum ISO above which you don't want to shoot? You indicated your shots were taken between 1/400 and 1/2000. Is it possible that the blurry shots were at 1/400 at FL 250mm?

Have a great one.

Michael

Thanks Michael:
I experienced blurry shots at the following exposures: 1/400, 1/500, 1/800 and 1/2000 all with 250mm and the CPL attached.

[Stagecoach]

Thanks Michael:
I experienced blurry shots at the following exposures: 1/400, 1/500, 1/800 and 1/2000 all with 250mm and the CPL attached.

Joe,

Was the 'blur' specific to parts of the image that could possibly be moving or parts of the image that would have definitely been static.

I think there are too many variables and unknowns at present and your next step is to undertake controlled tests with the camera on a tripod with a static subject.

[FootLoose]

In the 2nd shot of the swan the floating object appears to be in sharper focus than the swan. Exif indicates this image was shot at f/5.6 and 250mm. Could this be a depth of field problem? How far away was the swan? Did you focus and recompose?

[Manfred M]

Joe - what focus mode are you using to take these shots? I find that anything other than single point focus when using a long focal length can end up fooling the autofocus system and it selects the incorrect focus point. While this is not always the case, I find it does happen a lot.

The other thing I find interesting is that the only image that appears to be properly exposed is the first shot taken without the polarizer. The remaining shots appear to be a lot darker, and that should not be the case as the camera's metering system should be compensating. The only time I have seen this effect is when a linear polarizer, rather than a CPol was used.

[samnnb7]

I want to ask some thing to you Mr grumpy may I

Sent from my Micromax A311 using Tapatalk

[george013]

Maybe it's an issue or maybe not. Due to the use of your filter and the s-program the camera went to the maximum aperture, 5.6.
Maybe compare images at the max. focal length and a max aperture.

I'm not sure, but is that floating object in the blurred picture sharp or not?

George

[Manfred M]

I want to ask some thing to you Mr grumpy may I

Sent from my Micromax A311 using Tapatalk

The best way to ask it to either post a question in one of the forums or to send me a PM.

[DickyOZ]

#2 looks to me like you missed focus on the swan - the buoy seems to be in reasonable focus so I suspect the camera focused on the water rather than the swan.

I can't see the Exif data so I don't know what focus modes and area you were using. Can you select just a single point? Even with a single point I find it very easy to miss my intended target at the long end of a zoom. The camera will take the shot because it has indeed found focus - just not quite where you intended - and with the shallow DOF of a long lens.....

If you have the option to select AF + MF I find it invaluable; when the camera finds focus I tweak the MF ring (and use a 3X magnification of the target) to verify I've really got focus on what I want.

[DanK]

Even the version 1 is capable of images taken at 250mm that appear sharp and well focused, particularly at this low resolution.

I too suspect motion blur. Note the the example you posted of a clear shot without a CPL was taken at 1/2000. If the problem were focus, there would be a plane either in front of or behind the subject that is sharply in focus. Not the case in your second shot.

[miatab]

I cannot give any explanation for Jobranko's blurring in his bird image, but I understand rpcrowe's problem better than he does, because I'm older; he said," too old to be climbing on wet rocks with the surf coming in." That's only half of it. Doing anything at all on wet rocks under a pier with a beautiful girl is likely to cause very shaky results, and especially so at seventy-six.

[Tronhard]

Having looked through the backwards and forwards of the discussion so for, from what I can understand (correct me if I'm wrong) that this issue occurs only when you have a CPL filter involved. Is it always the same CPL filter?

If that is so, logic suggests to me that you take a set of test shots of the same object,using the same settings and under the same conditions, with and without the CPL, with and without a tripod. Vary your SS and F-values as you will but match them in each case.

A few questions about the CPL. What make and type (EG Hoya Pro Multi Coated), how old is it, what condition is it in? Is it absolutely pristinely clean? Is there another CPL you can put on the camera in its place, or can you put the filter on another, known good, lens?

[rpcrowe]

Manfred mentioned something worth commenting on. Years ago, I shot with a Canon FD SLR camera. The exposure and focusing of that camera was not impacted by the use of a linear polarizing filter. I later purchased a Pentax ME and both the focus and the exposure were off when I used my polarizer.

I asked a Tiffen representative about this problem and he said that it resulted from using a linear polarizer and gave me a Circular Polarizer which took care of both focus and exposure problems.

I occasionally see linear polarizers on sale at eBay or on craigslist so they are still out there. It might be worth checking whether your polarizer is linear or a CPL...

[joebranko]

Joe - what focus mode are you using to take these shots? I find that anything other than single point focus when using a long focal length can end up fooling the autofocus system and it selects the incorrect focus point.
The only time I have seen this effect is when a linear polarizer, rather than a CPol was used.

Thanks Manfred
I was using single point focus.
My POlArizer has no Manufacturers name, only the sales company ( Henry's). It has no information on it only "C-P.L". Does this identify it? I don't really know.

[joebranko]

this issue occurs only when you have a CPL filter involved. Is it always the same CPL filter?


A few questions about the CPL. What make and type (EG Hoya Pro Multi Coated), how old is it, what condition is it in? Is it absolutely pristinely clean? Is there another CPL you can put on the camera in its place, or can you put the filter on another, known good, lens?

Thanks Trev.
You are correct. The issue only occurs when the CPL is attached.
There is no Manufacturers name on it.
It is clean.. Pristine? Perhaps not.
It is about 4 years old!
I don't have another one to replace it with.

[joebranko]

I cannot give any explanation for Jobranko's blurring in his bird image, but I understand rpcrowe's problem better than he does, because I'm older; he said," too old to be climbing on wet rocks with the surf coming in." That's only half of it. Doing anything at all on wet rocks under a pier with a beautiful girl is likely to cause very shaky results, and especially so at seventy-six.

Best laugh I had all day. Thank you Ken!

[joebranko]

Manfred mentioned something worth commenting on. Years ago, I shot with a Canon FD SLR camera. The exposure and focusing of that camera was not impacted by the use of a linear polarizing filter. I later purchased a Pentax ME and both the focus and the exposure were off when I used my polarizer.
It might be worth checking whether your polarizer is linear or a CPL...

Thanks Richard. I will check that out.

[Tronhard]

The fact that there is no manufacturer's name on your CPF is, to me, a bit of a red flag. Quality filters of any kind have their manufacturer's name and type proudly emblazoned on the filter. My SUSPICION therefore, is that you may have a generic filter, which could mean poor quality optics.

I would still consider doing what I suggested with regards testing if you are in any doubt, but if you really want to take that variable out of the equation I would suggest getting a name brand, glass multi-coated filter. Having spent good money for a camera and lens, it is a big risk to put a piece of cheap glass or plastic in front of it.

Everyone will have their own opinions, but I have Hoya Pro MC filters, or Kenko (I believe they are a Hoya subsidiary) for smaller dia lens they will not break the bank. If you were putting a piece of L glass behind them maybe B+W... If you still aren't sure, take your camera to the store that sells filters and ask if you can try the filer on in their shop before you buy. Shoot with and without the filter and get them to put the result up on one of their screens. If they are a good store they will be happy to do so.

Thanks Trev.
You are correct. The issue only occurs when the CPL is attached.
There is no Manufacturers name on it.
It is clean.. Pristine? Perhaps not.
It is about 4 years old!
I don't have another one to replace it with.