Canon gear producing flat or 2 dimensional photos ?!!

I've been a Canon DSLR user for 2yrs now. It seems that my experience has been "experimental", for lack of a better description. My hobby started when I starting photographing eagles, and I've obsessively been trying to get perfect shots. I'm currently using a 50D with an EF 100-400mm lens, and I can't seem to get ANYTHING worth printing. The end results of hundreds of pictures of eagles, hawks, finches, squirrels, woodpeckers, and raccoons are pictures that show no texture with a serious lack of sharpness. The best way to describe the end results, is to say that If I took a pic of an owl, it would turn out looking like one of those molded plastic owl decoys that people use to keep other birds away from their pools and stuff. Even when using a monopod with a steady hand at close or long range, high/lo shutter speeds, small/big apertures, IS in mode 1 or 2 or turned on or off...I still end up with a bunch of bad picks that end up in the recycle bin. I get slightly better pics using my 70-300mm, and then cropping. Light and coloring are good, but the subject just appear to be flat and boring. My buddy uses a NIKON with a SIGMA 50-500mm lens, and his pics look awesome. Even when he uses a smaller lens, handheld, in "automatic" mode his shots are totally crisp and printable without editting. I've seen pics online taken with my same equipment that look really good too tho. Am I doing something seriously wrong, is this typical for my setup, should I sell all my stuff and buy NIKON and start getting great results right out of the box like my buddy. I'm pulling my hair out over this, and I'm tired of spending countless hours carrying around a heavy camera only to come home and dump every shot into the recycle bin !!! I know it's hard for anyone to give advice without knowing the settings I use, but basically I'm in Manual mode, using a single AF point. I get pretty clear shots using my 18-200mm lens for everyday shots, but it's too small to use for wildlife. Any help or suggestions would be great !!!

Doug - First of all, this should have nothing to do at all with Canon vs. Nikon. It can't, or you'd never see all the great Canon pics that you do.

It sounds like the most likely things to me are either a bad body, out of spec lens(es), or poor technique (either unsteadiness, or post-processing). One thing to try, if you get the chance, is to take something highly detailed - like a piece of currency, or a stuffed animal - and photograph it in bright light, with manual (live view magnified) focus, from a tripod. That should tell you the max amount of detail you could expect out of your system. If that's unacceptable, then the likely culprit is your lens or body. If that's OK - then it's likely technique.

First of all, thanx for the quick response David ! As luck would have it, it's a beautiful day here in Indy. I took a bill and tacked it to a box 30ft away. Shot a few times (IS on and off) from a tripod using the self timer to avoid any camera shake at all. Yea, I can tell it's a $100 bill (not sharp tho), and as I start to crop, it lacks any crispness at all. The serial # for example in all shots, appears to have a blurred shadowing left/right...as if I'm looking at it with the astigmatism that I had before LASIK. I can "make out the #'s", but not easily identifiable. This is the same kind of blur I'm getting when I take a shot at say a squirrel...I can identify the squirrel obviously, but the tail for example is blurred and the individual hairs are blended together. I have to say, I'm not too impressed with Canon tho. The first DSLR I bought 2yrs ago was a Rebel XSI, and it had to be repaired under warranty because the LCD quit working...and now this. The lens is out of warranty by now, but the 50D isn't...It's turning into a huge hassel for me. I know Canon and Nikon users...both camps are happy with what they've got, but I'm finding it hard to believe that I keep getting all of Canon's lemons. Thanks again, I think I'm going to write Canon a letter and see what they can do !!!

David,

Also see if your combo is back or forward focusing. I have the same combo and found I was back focusing 5ft. In the menu items their is a focus fine tune adjustment that is overall or lens specific. Also lighting and long lens technique is critical for sharp shots. It took me a year to get it and I questioned my equipment on several occasions. Basically what I have found is a rock steady camera sun to my back with proper exposure = sharp shots. With me it took some time.

David, before you decide you have a hardware issue, tell us how you have your camera set for color space, quality mode, image size, focus mode, live view on/off, etc.

A single point focus may work ok in certain circumstances, but I have found that if you use more sensors, you are more likely get what you are looking for in focus. Are you shooting RAW, or JPG? Have you tried manually focusing your lens? The manual mode you refer to - is that exposure setting or something else?

IS is only useful for static subjects. Tripod and self timer will not eliminate shake, you still have to deal with the mirror slap. What ISO are you using? What camera support are you using? How much of a crop are you attempting?

I am going to describe the worst case scenario from a technique point of view that would give you lackluster results - using lens either wide open or at F22, shutter speed longer than 1/250, IS on, hand-held or on monopod and not properly braced, moving subject, too much coffee this morning, attempting to crop more than a full 11x19 portrait image from a landscape shot, camera set to take raw images with AdobeRGB as the color space and zero post-processing. Possible camera equipment problems aside, that particular combination of settings and technique would be frustrating.

The best thing would be if you could post an image - there are far too many variables to begin to guess what the issue(s) are.

Doug - I agree with everything Gene said. In particular for the dollar bill shots, I would want to try to manual focus, using the magnified view in live view mode. That eliminates a lot of variables. I would also want enough light for a very fast shutter speed at base ISO. That eliminates a lot of variables as well. Posting examples is also always helpful.

Thanx again for everyone taking the time to read and post to this. Let me say first of all that Michael may possibly have the solution. I had never messed with the AF fine adjustment, to be honest I never knew it was there. I had been getting pretty good results with my smaller lenses, until I upgraded to the 100-400, so I had no reason to delve into that area. Assuming that it would take a little more skill to get good results using the longer focal length, I thought it was probably a technique problem. So for the last year I've been struggling with different settings for my shots, and trying and trying again to figure out the problem...thinking I HAD to be doing something wrong. Then like I said, my buddy gets a new 50-500mm lens and immediately starts posting great shots with no previous experience with anything over 300mm. So now I'm thinking it's not something I'm doing wrong, it HAS TO BE the equipment...turns out thanks to Michael, it might be the equipment, but my lack of experience kept me from knowing how to easily fix it. It does appear that my combo as his, has been "backward focusing" by either 5,6, or 7ft. I didn't get a chance to pinpoint it before I went to work, but I was able to read the serial # on the bill in at least a few shots from each of those adjustments. Tomorrow I'll try to figure out which one is the most consistent and go with that setting. Then I'll and try to get some shots of something with fur or feathers, to verify that this did the trick. Thanks again, you guys in this forum are always full of good suggestions and advice !!! ...and btw, if this doesn't fix it I'll post a sample, and fill you in more on the settings I'm using, I'll definitely look forard to your advice !!!

Doug - Note that those types of adjustments can change a fair amount depending on subject distance. So it's still possible that it won't entirely fix your problem, in which case calibration done by Canon might be the only real fix. (And not a 100% certainty either depending on what you read.)

Stuffed animals work well for a fuzzy test. Unlike pets, they don't move.

OK...my results still haven't improved. I adjusted the backward focusing to where I could read the serial #s...but still not sharp. I'm trying to add an eagle pic taken in Keokuk, IA this winter. It was shot with my Canon 50D/L seires 100-400mm set at 400mm, f9, ISO 400, 1/640 from a monopod, and from about 20yrds. It has been brightened via software, since I didn't have the expos/comp set correctly, and seriously cropped to see the faint "blur" that seems to outline every part of the image. I used this pic as it seems to be the "best" of the worst. I've got pics from last year using my 70-300mm, where the talons are sharp as tacks. I know I've probably done a lot wrong from a technical standpoint in this shot, but I'm getting the same thing in well lighted situations, and using a tripod. What can I say, the eagles were slim pickins this year I had to take some kind of shots !!!

Well I'd do some more static testing if I were you Doug, but it is sounding like there's something wrong with your 100-400. I'd expect it to be a little soft at 400mm, but not like what you're seeing above. Maybe try the static shots again, at 300, so you can get an exact comparison to your 70-300. If the 100-400 isn't at least as good, I'd say there's something wrong with it.

Wow, that photo is a mess! No wonder you are concerned. Given your specs, I really would have expected something sharper, even on a monopod. With the halos, I don't think this is completely a focus issue. Those halos are moderately sharp, as if something moved during the exposure. Was IS turned on? Do you notice any difference with it being on or off?

I really appreciate you guys following up on my posts !!! To be honest, I'm not sure if IS was on or off in the eagle pic. Like I said tho, I've been getting the same results for over a year, and I've compared IS on/off/mode2, with/without monopod...and nothing seems to be any better or worse in either mode. My shots of the currency showed the same "shadowing" and that was from about 30ft and on a tripod with IS OFF. I have to say tho, that I took some shots of the Thunderbirds over the summer and some of those came out pretty good. When blown up tho, the shadowing is easy to see since the jets have straight lines and brightly colored contrasting paint. It surprises me that I can get a somewhat descent pic (until cropped) of an airplane 1/4mi away traveling @350mph, but can't get a clean shot of a finch on the feeder in the backyard. Thanks again guys, you've been great. I've blown up some of the mentioned pics, and I'm gonna take them to the camera shop this week to see what they think as well.

A quick update...I had decided to quit using the 100-400mm for awhile, and use my 70-300mm instead. I was getting GREAT shots at my kids soccer games, then I decided to go out for some nature shots. I put on my SUNPAK polarizer filter, and ventured off. I also took some shots at my oldest sons baseball game. ALL of the nature shots, and baseball shots were totally useless...same problem, now with a different lens...is it an intermittent problem with the 50D, what's going on ??? Wait a minute, I added the same style and brand of filter to my 70-300 that I'd been using on my 100-400. So, I removed both polarizers...and guess what?...sharp pictures !!! I don't really understand why, but after a Google search I've noticed others have had the same issue with these SUNPAK polarizers...I guess I'll go get some better flters. Thanks for all your advice, and I did pick up some good tips here despite the real problem !!!

Good news then! For filters you can definitely get what you pay for, although with diminishing returns on the more expensive ones. Still since it (as you've seen) can have such a direct effect on image quality, I'd stick with multi-coated (at least) filters from Hoya, B&W, or Heliopan (among a few others).

Good to hear Doug, personally, I think you can't go wrong with a good b+w filter. I use them on all of my lenses with tack sharp results. There a bit pricy, but worth every penny!