EOS 2000D Blurry pictures as compared to my old Samsung Galaxy S9 phone

[v3anders]

I just got the entry level 2000D in preparation for taking a photography class. I gave it a test drive. I see that the pictures are blurry and fuzzy compared to old phone, which has half the pixels. Is this normal? or do I have a defective camera?

[jrhoffman75 · Accepted solution]

I assume it is a typo, but the EXIF data says 2000D; you posted 4000D.

In P mode the camera should take very good images. But, modern smartphones are dealing in computerized photography, so they are doing a lot of processing to the image. Often that produces images that initially look great and are fine for Instagram and Facebook, but really aren't quality images that you would enlarge and place on your wall.

It's like the television wall in Best Buy or Wal-Mart. In the aisle the bright crisp model catches your eye, but look closely and its over-saturated  and  over sharpened. Tiring to the eyes in the long run.

The Landscape Picture Style favors smaller aperture for depth of field at the expense of a lower shutter speed since it assumes that the landscape is stationary. It also accentuates blues and greens since they are predominant colors in most landscapes.

Set the camera to Program mode and Standard Picture Style, Auto ISO, Evaluative Metering and One-Shot AF with a singe center focus point. Then go out and shoot. 

[jrhoffman75 · Accepted solution]

I did get the files this AM Valentin.

My assessment is that the statue images prior to file 348 show motion blur. In all cases the shutter speeds were at or below 1/focal length. You want to have the shutter speed to be equal or faster than 1/(2xfocal length). 

348 achieves that and the image is sharp. (FL=18; SS=1/40)

The field picture on the cellphone looks sharp, but most serious photographers will likely tell you it is over sharpened. Look at the halos around items like the power lines and even some of the grass blades. It's not realistic. But it depends on your use. If your end use is Instagram or Facebook posts (that's all my granddaughters use their images for) then it is fine and works. Even on a iPad it would look fine.

The rabbit was right on. 

No image is going to stand up to examining a small portion of the image. 

I don't think there is anything wrong with your camera, but Trevor's recommendation of trying a different lens is worth pursuing.

I also suggest you shoot in RAW and use the free Canon DPP software. DPP will utilize all the in-camera settings that the camera uses to create the JPEGs but you can more easily edit.

I mentioned in an earlier post (and it may have come across harsher than I intended) this camera may not be the best tool for your use case. I have friends who have switched from high end Canon cameras (5DIII and 7DII) to using iPhones for ease, weight reduction, and the amount of processing and customizing that can be achieved with apps. Their end use now is web posting and our camera club competitions with 1400x1050 pixels max.

[Tronhard · Accepted solution]

Hi again:
I just caught up on your interchange with John during my night.  He has given some well-considered and expressed analysis and advice.  I noticed one comment you made about the relative merits of the camera against a cell phone as regards aperture. 

The field picture on the cellphone looks sharp, but most serious photographers will likely tell you it is over sharpened. 

Yes, I was able to simulate what the cellphone did in post processing (test-244), but that is not the reason the cellphone picture is more in focus. It was able to take the picture at f/2.4, 1/593 and ISO-50, while the camera could only manage f/8, 1/80 and ISO-100.

Rather than send a lengthy explanation in this never-ending series of posts and replies, for mutual easy reference I am sending you an article I wrote that may explain why the numbers between your cell phone and the camera are so different and why all is not what it seems.

[Waddizzle]

Compare the Shutter Speed and Aperture Value settings.  The DSLR is using a very slow shutter speed.  The DSLR is also using narrow aperture setting, which is causing it to use a slow shutter speed to get a proper exposure.  

The camera does not always use the smartest settings when it is set to one of the automatic shooting modes.  Switch it to P mode.  Av mode might be even better to use.

[Tronhard]

You said you were getting this camera in anticipation of doing a course on photography.  Personally, I would hold your reservations until you have taken that photographic class.  You have a capable camera, but you have yet to learn the appropriate technique for using this technology.
If you want to prepare for your photography course, then I recommend spending a couple of hours watching a video by National Geographic photographer Chris Bray on You Tube: HERE 

[v3anders]

Waddizzle: Thanks, getting in AV mode, decreasing the aperture and increasing the ISO, I was able to take clearer pictures.

Tronhard: Thanks for the advice. So you are saying that it is normal for this camera to take bad pictures in fully automatic landscape mode, and that I need to complete the photography course and manually set the controls for each picture? I was hoping that the software in the camera would be better than that. 

[Tronhard]

No, I am not saying that the camera is programmed to take bad pictures, but depending on the metering characteristics of each image, and they vary a lot, then the sensor can be fooled.  Hopefully, the point of the course is to take you away from P and Auto modes, and teach you to use the strengths of this type of camera, which are centred around your ability to control the camera not the camera to control you.
If you are going to live in P or Auto mode, then use a cell phone, they are usually better at that.  The other modes on the dial: Av, Tv and M are where this type of camera shine, because they let you control the camera and the creative processes.  However, to do so you need to learn the principles of exposure and composition, which is what a good photography course should do.

Modes like sport, landscape etc. make assumptions on your behalf to take what it thinks you want to achieve. When you get into your course you will learn about a thing called the exposure triangle: which is an interplay between what is in focus, how fast the shutter works and the sensitivity to light of the sensor.  When you chose landscape mode the camera assumed you wanted everything to be in focus, that meant that the camera made settings that biased towards things near and far being in focus, but at the expense of shutter speed.  If you were hand-holding the camera, the resultant very slow shutter speed would result in camera movement, which will give fuzzy results.

If you really want to prepare for your photography course, then I recommend spending a couple of hours watching a video by National Geographic photographer Chris Bray on You Tube: HERE 

[v3anders]

Tronhard> When you chose landscape mode the camera assumed you wanted everything to be in focus, that meant that the camera made settings that biased towards things near and far being in focus, but at the expense of shutter speed.

This was just an example. I also got blurry pictures on all the other modes, on different subjects.

Yes, I wanted everything to be in focus as you can see how my phone did:

And compare with my camera:

[Tronhard]

Yes, and you will continue to have those issues as long as you keep blaming the camera and realize that you have to get a basic level of knowledge, including theory, under your belt.

This is a lot different from a cell phone.  A cell phone has a very small lens, with a very narrow aperture for the light to reach the sensor.  Those two combined mean that you will likely get most things in focus and it will tolerate a bit of camera shake.

Waddizzle's comment about it being a much more complicated thing to control is what I am trying to tell you as well.  A modern conventional camera is much more complex in order to give you much more control - in a way it's like learning to drive a car with a manual gear box instead of a fully automatic one.  Without being instructed, if you just get in and drive, you will not use the car as it is intended or achieve the result you want, and you're going to grind the gears. That's going to be frustrating.   At this point, the logical thing to do is to get someone to teach you how to drive a manual car.  

This is the same principle, but more complicated, as there are multiple variables at work here.  Including (but not limited to) how you hold the camera, what lens you are using, what is your shutter speed, what is the aperture of the lens, what is the sensitivity of the sensor (measured by the ISO value).  Is either the subject or you moving - as you have already discovered slow shutter speed can result in camera shake, for example?

We cannot teach you the basics of photography here, we can resolve specific issues with the technology or technique.  However, IMHO, that is not your issue - it is that you need the basic groundings in the principles of photography. That is why I am trying to help you when I have given you a path via the link I recommended to start to learn some of the things you need to know.  

[v3anders]

Thank you. Yes, I get it, but if the camera is unable to take decent pictures in the auto modes, as compared to an old cell phone, it should just get rid of them, and market the camera only to people who have completed a photography course.  18 wheelers do not have automodes for empty, fully loaded, freeway, up hill, down hill, etc., nor I expected them to have them. However, my Jeep Wrangler has an automatic transmission with a manual mode, that works pretty well, when I switch into it to first gear and climb a rock. This is supposed to be an entry-level camera....

I will keep the camera a little longer. I will play with the AV mode. I have been reading a photography book so I am familiar with the basics..... 

[Tronhard]

To be honest, you seem to be putting all of the responsibility onto the device when you have not learnt how to use it, which requires a combination of the general understanding of photography with also understanding the specific controls of your camera. 

Cellphones get some astounding results in auto modes because they use a lot of computational photographic algorithms to modify the image and give you results that may be pleasing.  That is not usually a characteristic of conventional dedicated cameras, because the idea is that the user provides the 'intelligence' rather than an algorithm - but it does mean that one will get poorer results initially, as one learns.

The camera can take decent images in auto modes but it's not a panacea for good imagery under all conditions - in Auto, P, scene modes - in fact in ALL modes, it basically offers a suggestion for exposure scenario, based on that the camera sensor read.  It is up to the user to decide if this is appropriate or not: that's where the control comes in even at this level and that is different from a cell phone in many cases.  Sensors can be fooled by certain types of exposure, depending on the sensor configuration and the degree of contrast in an image.  That is why there are controls (exposure compensation, for example) to allow the user to override the automatic efforts of the sensor.

One of the important things in photography (or any activity) is to be able to analyze your results to improve, but this requires a grounding in the understanding of the functions and interrelationships of ISO, aperture and shutter, and technique.

If, for example, you were to go to P mode, and rotate the front control dial you will see that the exposure settings for Shutter speed, aperture and (maybe) ISO change, because the camera is adapting to what you feel is more important depending on what you dial into the system - for example, you may reject a suggested shutter speed, based on the fact that you are hand-holding the camera in lower light and the shutter speed is too slow to avoid camera shake, and so you dial in a faster one.  The impact of this could be that the aperture, which governs Depth of Field (DoF) may be reduced; or the ISO may be increased, possibly introducing noise into the image. 

How one holds the camera can have a huge impact on the stability of the system and how sharp photos are.  DSLRs are not like cell phones, the best way to hold one is with the left hand under the lens, cradling the body on the heel of the hand, then with the viewfinder to one's eye, and the arms tucked with elbows against the chest to create three points of support.  Holding a camera like a cell phone with arms extended is a going to produce a much less stable platform.

As far a dispensing with auto and scene modes, if you were to look at the more expensive cameras designed for experienced photographers, they have dispensed with these modes because it is assumed by the makers that the users don't need suggestions any more.

If you are frustrated with the results you are getting then learn to overcome them - I have no idea how many images you have taken, but likely not a lot.  As one of the most celebrated photographers of the 20th Century, Henri Cartier-Bresson, said: "Your first 10,000 images are the worst."  Photographic skill is a journey, rather than a destination.  You learn by failure more than success, as long as you see each as a stepping stone to learning and improvement, rather than an as a barrier. 

I see you have been reading a book on the subject and that's good, but that alone is not necessarily enough.  You need to be able to grasp the concepts and different presenters or writers give you other ways to understand the principles through explanations and examples.  Certainly videos are very appropriate as they deal in the visual medium itself.
Perhaps try this explanation of the elements that influence exposure:
What Is Exposure? (A Beginner’s Guide) (photographylife.com)

If you are suggesting disposing of your camera before you take the course you mentioned, that would be a great pity.  Above all, you need to take photos, accepting many of your first efforts will be less than successful - that's part of the learning process.  Take heart: at least you have the benefits with digital of immediate results, and not having to pay for each shot as one does with film, so you can and should take a lot of images, and where they are not successful, look at the settings to analyze the results, using your knowledge of the principles involved.

We can look at your photos and do some analysis, but we can't be there in real time to help you with hands-on assistance, which is where the course you mention comes in. 

So, please, take a breath, then go to the course with an open mind, and you should find it all works out ok. 🙂

[jrhoffman75]

“will keep the camera a little longer. I will play with the AV mode. I have been reading a photography book so I am familiar with the basics....”

My suggestion is minimize variables while you get comfortable with the camera. Put it in “cellphone” mode by setting it at green square auto. Your lens likely has image stabilization, switch it on. 

I see three issues: expectations, technique and equipment. 

Expectations - As I posted previously, cellphone images are heavily processed in the device. They are going to produce images that will look different than a “conventional” camera under the same conditions. 

Why your iPhone or Android phone takes better images than a DSLR (photographyacademy.com)

A typical photo forum post:

Technique - The manual for your camera will have a few pages in the beginning pages that give basic hints for picture taking. Holding the camera steady is critical. 

Equipment- As I previously posted please post a few images to Dropbox or One Drive. Preferably RAW files, but at least Large-Fine JPEGs. Let’s be sure there isn’t a hardware problem. 

Your camera has a lot of capability, and taking some photo courses will help you tap into those features, but there are millions of Rebel/XXXXD cameras in use. That wouldn’t be true if folks couldn’t use them without going to school.