Blurry photos with zoom lens

I have a canon xsi that takes lovely, crisp pics with the EFS 18-55 IS lens and a EF 50 1:1.4. I wanted a zoom to take pictures of sporting events like soccer, baseball, and horseback riding. I purchased Canon zoom EFS 55-250 1:4-5.6 IS. Every single picture I take with this lens is blurry. If a take a photo with a FL of 55 or 250, the image is blurry. If there is action or if I'm zooming in on a still object, the image is blurry. I have used the lens in great lighting conditions, and still blurry images. I have made sure the the settings for the lens include stabilizer "on". I have tried to trouble shoot, but have missed too many shots and need expertise. Not sure if there is more for me to do (operator error), or is this an issue with the lens?

The lens, in general, is a fine lens. It's possible that you got a bad copy. If it is truly "every single photo" then most likely this is the case. If you really mean, a lot of images are blurry then it could depend on many things. If you posted a few examples (with EXIF data) it would help us determine if it's the lens or user error.
In general longer lenses require faster shutter speeds to get sharp photos. But if you've taken photos in good light (i.e. fast shutter speeds) and it's still blurry then something is off. Hard to say what that something is without seeing images, otherwise we'll just have to guess. Common questions would be:
Are you able to manual focus and get good photos? Were you in autofocus at all? Did you get confirmation (beep) that AF locks? Is the image clear in the viewfinder? What is the shutter speed? etc.

Similar Messages

****Iphone 5 blurry photos with ios7 Update**** Please Help

Looking for some answers as to why my iphone 5 photos are now blurry after the ios7.2 update.
-Cleaned the lens
-No protective film on the iphone camera lens
The camera worked fine before the update.
Picture below [iphone 5 on left Blurry]

Take the case off - is the issue still there?

Blurry photos when saved

Okay so I use safari and I save photos to my iPod touch 8gb 2nd or 3rd gen and they are blurry. I tried the method with the re sync and it doesnt work because Im saving them and the pictures are not in my computer. Also, I dont like going to my computer every time and re sync them when I save pictures from safari.. Is there going to be a fix for this or what??

Firstly it doesn't matter what size the image is, even if it's the standard ipod touch screen size, it will still display blurry. It's a bug. This is a pathetic limitation and should be an embarrassment to the company.
Secondly, the issue happens even when you've saved the image from Mail. That being said, if you were to open up Twinkle, and share this blurry photo with the world, they will see it as clear and perfect as all getup. Then if you go and look at your photo in Twinkle you will see that the image is clear, and yet still blurred in your photo container on the ipod.
You're trying to tell me that this thing that can support running 3d applications and games is so inferior that it can't display a image without time traveling back to 1988?
Give me a break, Apple better fix this. It makes them look cheap.
<Edited by Moderator>

Photos with scale fx too blurry

I 'm still having the same problem with my photos, I've tried many ways, from changing the settings of my sequence, to reinstaling FCP....
I'm trying to show 8 seconds photos with a very slow and sutile zoom in. and it just plays back blurry and flickered.
If the photo stands still looks fine, but as soon as I apply the scale fx, disaster happens.

#2 Playback is blurry
Shane's Stock Answer #2:
ONLY JUDGE THE QUALITY OF YOUR MATERIAL ON AN EXTERNAL NTSC MONITOR, OR AT LEAST A TV.
1. Disable overlays on the canvas
2. Make sure you've rendered everything (no green bars at the top of the timeline
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=24787
DV footage requires large amounts of data and many computations. In order to maintain frame rate and be viewable at a normal size, only about one-fourth of the DV data is used in displaying the movie to the screen. However, the DV footage is still at full quality, and is best viewed thru a TV or NTSC monitor routed thru your camera or deck.
Shane

Photos look blurry in Aperture (Unknown Lens)

Hello,
I see a strange behaviour in Apple's Aperture (latest version).
When I import new pictures, taken by a Samsung NX1000 and open the pic the first time it looks sharp.
After less than a second Aperture does something and I see the picture changes from sharp to blurry.
When I open the pic in Mac Finder the picture looks great.
Maybe it has something to do that Aperture does not recognize my lens?
I see that the camera model is correct but with "Unknown Lens"
Hope you can help.
- Attached you see a picture in Aperture (left), and the same pic opened from the Finder.
- The picture on the right is much better. How is this possible? I just import the pic without
any editing into Apreture and get the mess.
LEFT > Aperture --- RIGHT > Same pic opened in Finder on Mac, look way better.
Regards,
Marc

Hi Griff W!
What is the relationship between sharpening and un-adjusted Images in Aperture? The article you cite says:
sharpening adjustments applied to the image may seem less apparent than they really are.
The OP specifies that the effect he is seeing precedes any adjustments made. Are you implying that the article you cite includes the sharpening controls in the RAW Fine Tuning adjustment as part of its definition of "sharpening adjustments"? This is important to know. Thanks for your insight.
--Kirby.

Hi, does anybody know how to merge photos in photoshop that were shot with fisheye lens?

There is a function "photo merge" through Bridge, it does good job with regular photos. However this function does not work when I try to merge images that are shot with fish-eye lens, since the images have exaggerated angles and dark vignette on the corners. I asked to support center, they have not answered. I found other software that does work for my purpose, but I wanted find out if photoshop has function for the type of work I am looking for. Thanks.

hi Chris,
It seems that Photoshop 5.0 does better photomerge with ordinary lens images.
When we merge regular photos, for instance to make 360 panoramic of the room interior, we photographed 36+1 images rotating camera every 10 degree... and more images result better for seamless photomerge. When I process 12+1 images (30 degree rotating), photomerge becomes into sections, not as one seamless piece, so I figured more overlappings give better reference points for photoshop to make perfect photomerge. And Yes, it does perfect seamless merge into one photo. However it takes long time, over 45 minutes to process 37 images into one room panoramic interior. So, our client has 80 rooms to photograph, then 80 x 37 shots, + processing time for photo merge became my concern.
Then, I used fisheye lens to photograph the interior and it reduces into no more than 8 images. Besides when they are correctly merged, it gives better panoramic effect when I plug into a different software. However, the function of photomerge in photoshop 5.0 does not work well with these exaggerated corners with high vignettes. It seems not finding the enough reference points to stitch together. It never make seamless one image, rather it merges into two-three sections. So I need to manually stitch them together, which is not efficient solution for 80 different interiors.
Please let me know how you did your crazy fisheye lens shot merged in photoshop, that requires no manual stitch, cuz I need to eventually process the multiples. I found the program PTGui and it does good job, but I wanted make sure if photoshop handles the fisheye lensed shots better or the same, before we purchase PTGui program.
I asked to adobe photoshop helpline, and I emailed images with my concerns but never got any reply yet. it has been a week. So it will be great if you could give me a tip. Thank you so much, Chris.
- Jessica (jungah)

Problem with soft, blurry photos in Slideshow mode in AB 2.1.1.9

Hello,
I downloaded the 2.1.1 update to AB which was supposed to take care of the blurry photo display in slideshow mode.
It is better than before, but the photos are still not nearly as sharp as they should be. When I display them in any other applications, e.g. xnview they are crisp and clear.
Is it only me, or do you also have this problem?
Is that going to be fixed for good in CS4? Has anyone played with CS4 AB beta?
Regards,
Kefir

Since 11/07 I am using CS3 and Bridge 2.1.1.9 with the slideshow option very sufficiently until Sunday. Since yesterday I try to display a file of 280 photos with filetype CR2 with partial bad effect. The first 40 slides are presented normally, then the next 60 photos but the photos are still not nearly as sharp as they should be which can be easily controlled using immediately CS3 with display mode of about 100 %. Afterwards the next 2 photos are ok. The next part of 10 photos are displayed wrong as before and so on. A short time before the first appearance of this problem I got a message that bridge has a problem but I don't remember which one.
I am using an 19" EIZO display with digital connection and a Matrox card which is really not slow. I would be happy for a solution of this problem.
Regards
Wolfgang G.

Fill screen with zoom for small photo sizes (as in slideshow)?

Front facing iPhone 4S camera sized photos are too small in iPhoto. Is it possible to set a default to fill screen with zoom for all photo sizes (as in slideshow)? Seems like the old iPhoto worked like this.

That's what I was afraid of! I wish it would still scale photos to fill the window also if they're smaller than the window size (not just 100%), like it used to in older versions of iPhoto. Especially irritating, since the problem photos are from an Apple product, the front facing camera of the iPhone4s. I already added my complaint to "feedback".
Thanks anyway.

For Sale: Sony SCL-Z18X140 FZ Power Zoom Lens

Bump!

Hello All, I am selling our SCL-Z18X140 - Sony's FZ Mount power zoom lens. I've owned it for less than a year and used it only a handful of times so it's basically in brand new condition. The glass is completely clean with no pitting or scratches of any kind, and the servos are all in great working condition. There are also zero scratches on the body or the lens to be found anywhere. All original boxes, manuals, lens caps and hoods are included. This is an awesome lens for f3, f5, and f55 users because of it's long focal range of 18-252mm, manual and automatic focus and aperture control, and image stabilization. I am selling because we will be upgrading. Asking $6450.00, $6750 if through e-bay. Thank you! Photos can be seen here: http://www.ebay.com/itm/131548772113?ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1558.l2649

Combination zoom lens as alternative to 18-55mm & 55-250mm lenses for my T3i?

I have a T3i with 18-55mm and 55-250mm lenses. Switching lenses while sightseeing is a nuisance. The shorter one is needed for close photos of museums, galleries, close up sites, ourselves and our friends, etc. Longer lenses are useful for many outdoor city and rural/mountain shots. Is there a reasonably priced combination zoom lens I should be considering? Is there somewhere I can sell my current lenses. My T3i and lenses are less than a year old. Thanks.
Solved!
Go to Solution.

Most photographers say to buy the best "glass" (lens) you can afford because they will last a lifetime. Good lenses are not cheap, so my advise would be to keep what you have right now, and learn all you can about them and the aspects of taking photos. While you are learning you can investigate the different lenses, determine what type of photography you are really wanting to take, and so have a better idea of what you NEED in a lens. Hope thgis helped a little.

Blurry images when zooming in Survey & Grid View

When I am in Survey View and hit the Z key, some of the previews are blurry. The same thing happens in Grid View. However, in Loupe View, the images are fine when I the 'Z' key. Using Survey View would make things go faster when making my picks. Any ideas why this happens?
I tried rendering 1:1 but the returns a mesage that says renders are up to date and rendering was done.

cppasm wrote:
This is definitely a bug. I can see it too, and it's little bit annoying. LR 4.1, Win7 x64.
To reproduce just select two images, render 1:1 previews to be shure they are present.
Then press 'N' to switch to Survey mode, and now press 'Z' to zoom in active photo.
It gets zoomed, but looks like LR zooms in standard (smaller) preview instead of using 1:1 preview - the result is blurry and a little pixelated, it definitely lacks resolution.
But when in the Loupe view (switch view using 'E') and zooming all work just fine - the image is at full resolution and is sharp.
And even if I switch from Survey to Loupe with zoomed in image - it still stays blurry.
To get sharp image I need to zoom out and then zoom in again.
So in short - it looks like 1:1 preview is used only when image is zoomed in from the Loupe view.
At least others seem to experience the same thing so I know it's not just me. I'd say it's more than a little bit annoying because it causes you to second guess yourself and you constantly have to switch to a view to see if the image is actually sharp or not. It really slows down the workflow.

IPhone 4S Blurry Photos w/Flash

My wife has a 64GB iPhone 4S; mine is the 16GB model. Mine takes great photos, with or without flash. Hers takes nice photos without the flash, but every shot taken with her flash turned on comes out blurry. Is there a setting somewhere we've not seen, or is it time for hers to have some work done on it?
Thanks, Jim

They did not exchange it. From what the genius told me is that HDR was on during low light situations and should be on. Not sure if it's BS or not. He said the 4S processes images differently because of the 5 lens, etc...
I never had this problem with the iPhone 4 though. I left HDR on all the time and thought it automatically turned it off during low light situations?
I havent tried anything since upgrading to 5.01 so I need to try taking low light pix.

Zoom Lens for Pano PV-GS180

We are a middle school that does a lot of video. We use the Pano PV-GS65-180 series (inexpensive 3CCD) for everything. I am looking for an inexpensive zoom lens that will work ok in low light situations for filming the school play etc. Does not need to have a real powerful zoom, just a litte boost.
Thanks for your support and expert advice.

Keep in mind that a telephoto converter will not zoom. It merely multiplies the camera's own zoom power. Also note that some cameras may not focus well with a converter in front of the lens.
So, the auto focus may not work well? Hmm, perhaps someone at BandH photo would know. We always use either tripods or monopods for filming. I gave up on hand helds with 13 year old videographers!
I am assuming the "telephoto converter" comes in different strengths? I don't need much, just a little boost!
I guess I could go to manual focus? What we want to do is to put the three cameras at the back of the gym. One camera has a wide angle lens (if needed) and on the other two I want more zoom ability. Then, when we edit in FCP we can get better closeups of the band, school play etc. Right now we use monopods and go right up on the stage behind the curtains etc for closeups but we are sort of looking at the side instead a frontal view. Plus, using the monopod in this situation isn't as ideal as setting the camera on a tripod.
Just trying to take your average middle school video production above and beyond.

Shadows in photos with Rebel T2i

Most of my indoor photos taken with my Rebel T2i have a shadow to the left of the subjects. I took the same photo with my Powershot s120 and did not get a shadow and am so very frustrated. I have tried with and without the hood and have ensured that the subject was not close to a wall. Any assistance would be greatly appreciated. I have samples but I do not see a way to upload them to this site.

Assuming you are using the flash, the lens, lens hood, a camera strap, your hand or fingers, etc. can all cause these sorts of things.
Make sure the camera strap is out of the way. While your right hand is unlikely to block the flash (because it's on the grip and pressing the shutter button) the left hand should be supporting the camera from below (hold the left hand with palm facing up, then "rest" the camera in your hand so that your fingers can control the zoom ring from below (an "under-hand" grip -- not an "over-hand" grip). That'll keep that left hand away from the flash (it's also a steadier way to hold the camera and allows you to shoot at lower shutter speeds.)
If you've got a lens-hood on your lens but are shooting with flash, you might want to remove that hood. Long lenses can also be a problem with just the built-in pop-up flash (an external flash puts the light source higher and farther away from the lens so that shadows are less likely to be a problem.
Remember that a point & shot like your Powershot has a fairly tiny lens and it's physically short. Your T2i's lens is comparitively much larger and depending on which lens you are using, does have the potential to create a shadow if the lens is large enough.
One last thing... if you are using the camera in one of the automatic modes, then the camera will control the shutter speed when using flash. If you are using a manual shooting mode, make sure you are selecting a shutter speed which is no faster than the camera's maximum "flash sync" speed. For your camera, that is 1/200th of a second (so anything 1/200th sec... or slower will be ok.) If you set a faster shutter speed then the shadow can be created by the internal camera shutter (at very high speeds the shutter only exposes a "slit" which sweeps across the imaging sensor to capture the shot... the "whole" sensor is never actually exposed at the same time. This means only the part of the sensor exposed when the flash fired will get the benefit of the flash. When you use 1/200th or slower, the camera is able to have the entire sensor exposed when the flash fires.
Tim Campbell
5D II, 5D III, 60Da

Photos with Sony HC-1

With the still photos being recorded onto the memory stick in 2.8Mega pixel in high definition, is there a difference in still picture quality compared to a SD video camera taking a 2.8mega pixel photo?? Cheers

As promised..
This is a relatively quick'n'dirty test, as I had SO much more to do today (..you can see by the progression of the watch-hands how long it took, plus writing it up..)
I've compared the best stills from the HC1 camcorder, a Fuji 3 megapixel stills camera, a Canon D300 ('Digital Rebel'), an Olympus E500 (..the Canon and Oly set to low resolution, to near-enough match the Fuji and the HC1..), a Sony 3-chip PDX-10 camcorder with a Memory Stick in it for stills, a Sony 3-chip TRV950 camcorder [..virtually the same as the 'professional' PDX-10..] and a Sony 1-chip Digital-8 TRV330 camcorder.
I shot a wristwatch on a table, in front of an open window, with sunlight coming in behind the watch, to give an idea of how good the various lenses are, too: cheaper lenses with fewer anti-reflection coatings within the zoom mechanism can bounce light around between the lens elements (bouncing back up to 2% of incoming light between each piece of glass or plastic) giving a much softer, less contrasty, 'weaker' and less clearly defined image.
I had to move most of the stills cameras closer to the watch, as although the Fuji has a 6x zoom, stills cameras generally don't have the longer zoom range of video camcorders (10x for the HC1, 12x for the PDX-10 and TRV950, 25x for the TRV330). This ensured that the size of the watch face stayed fairly consistent through all the pictures.
I opened up the apertures, or increased the 'backlighting' exposure in all pictures, so that the watch face was sufficiently bright to be seen against the backlighting, and this also gives a rough idea of how well each lens and imaging system gives a sharp image devoid of 'colour fringing' and other failings. (I used a 55-200 zoom on the Canon, as its usual 18-55 lens would have meant moving the camera too near to the watch to give a reasonable match to the other images).
The 1-chip HC1 shoots with 2m effective pixels in 16:9 and 2.7m effective pixels in 4:3 mode, as it uses the full height of the chip as well as the full width. In 16:9 mode it shoots 1920x1080 pixels, in 4:3 mode (which I used for these comparisons) it shoots 1920x1440.
The 3-chip PDX-10 and TRV950 shoot approx 1.07m effective pixels in hi-quality photo mode. The 1-chip TRV330 shoots approx .8m effective pixels in photo mode.
(I couldn't shoot any stills with the HC1's "big brother" 3-chip FX1 camcorder, as that doesn't shoot stills.)
[As a final test, I held a Leitz 90mm lens ..from an old Leica stills camera.. in front of the Olympus to see what kind of picture that excellent prime (i.e; not a zoom) lens would produce. But as I couldn't fit the Leitz lens deep enough into the Olympus body to focus at the appropriate distance, I had to move the camera and lens much closer to the watch to get a sharp image. This nearly filled the viewfinder, but I've included this and the cropped-down central area, just for a very rough comparison. As so much light flooded in around the lens itself, I used "auto levels" in Graphic Converter to reset the brightest and darkest areas to their optima. These "Oly-Leitz" pictures show some camera shake, as I was holding the lens in place by hand. All the pictures, with each camera, were taken in 'self-timer' mode, to avoid camera shake.]
I cut out from each picture the watch face and its immediate surroundings, and I also saved each full picture at a reduced size of 15% of the original ..to give an easy comparison of the relative sizes of the overall shots.
I used 'spot metering' on all of the images to get a clear watch face against the bright background, and then - as the watch faces were still dark - I used manual over exposure to get a clearer, brighter watch face. The Canon shots have still come out rather dark ..my fault. So I adjusted the 'levels' on the Canon shots to 'brighten' up the watch face more, and I've called these shots 'Canon crop2' and 'Canon 15pc2'.
All the series of photos are available from here onwards..
Of all of these pictures, the HC1 has given the largest shot. But don't forget that I scaled down the size at which the digital stills cameras took their pics, to get as near as poss to the HC1's 2.7 megapixel size. The best, or most pleasing, overall shot ..except for the Leitz fixed focal length lens (which was nearer to the watch, but which wasn't even attached to the camera, but just held in front of it against the lens mount!).. seems to be from the HC1, if you disregard the bluish colour fringing produced by shooting into the daylight.
So in this extremely rough-and-ready test, pitting movie cameras against stills cameras (which were set at small pixel counts), in harsh conditions (against bright sunlit backlighting), using a variety of different lenses, I'd say that the HC1 comes out pretty much at the top of the heap for detail, contrast, sharpness - though it does have that severe colour fringing at the top of the case, against the light ..as also do the other Sony movie cameras, especially the 1-chip TRV330.
Here's the original HC1 shot:
Here's the same HC1 shot, with its levels slightly tweaked in Graphic Converter for good brightness and contrast:
Here's the similar shot made with a Leitz (Leica) lens attached to an Olympus E500 digital camera body (also tweaked in Graphic Converter):
Here's the 3-chip PDX-10:
Here's the similar 3-CCD Sony TRV950:
Here's the single-chip Digital-8 Sony TRV330:
Here's the Fuji S602Z 3 megapixel stills camera:
Here's the Canon 300D ('Digital Rebel') stills camera ..slightly tweaked in Graphic Converter:
And here's the Olympus E500 digital stills camera:
I didn't have any other make of movie camera - no Panasonic, JVC, Canon, etc - to test against these Sonys. Sorry.
I saved a version of the cropped HC1 picture, with auto-adjusted contrast/brightness levels as "HC1 crop1L" (and the 15%-sized picture as "HC1 15pcL") and the adjusted picture probably comes closest to the Olympus pic taken with the Leitz lens ..except that the Leitz picture was taken from about three feet (1 metre) away, and the HC1 picture was taken zoomed in from across the room.
So, all in all, Yes! ..The HC1 takes very good stills pics, as well as glorious HDV hi-definition movies. (But its movies are 'grainier' and less quickly focused in low light indoors, than the much bigger, more expensive and cumbersome, 3-chip FX1/Z1.)
..And all of the rest of the pictures run from here to here.
[..Now going off for a cup of tea..]

Blurry photos with zoom lens

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for