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.

[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.

[jrhoffman75]

Hi Valentin and Trevor. I was in the midst of composing a similar response to Trevor's when his came in. 
I wish you lived nearby so we could sit together and go over the various topics/settings. 
Based on your desire for landscape photography you need a camera and a sturdy tripod. Landscape photography is all about good depth of field since one generally wants foreground to distant horizon to be in focus. That is why the Landscape scene mode chooses f/8 to f/11. A faster lens with a larger max aperture doesn’t make any difference in that situation. Since the subject is not moving shutter speed isn’t critical. As a consequence lower ISOs can be used. With good hand holding techniques and a lens with image stabilization sometimes a tripod can be dispensed with. 

Your camera is a capable camera, but it is an entry level camera, meaning it lacks performance at the extremes. High ISO performance isn’t as good as a $6000 body. Fewer AF points, lower frames per second speed, poorer AF tracking capability. But, there are some very good AI enhanced noise reduction software tools available. The other items don’t impact landscape shooting, general travel photography or portrait photography. 
There is no reason your camera cannot produce very nice landscape shots. If you want large enlargements I will acknowledge that your current lens isn’t up to that task, but you can work up to that. 
My suggestion is to set the camera to Av mode, f/8, single center point focus and Auto ISO. The camera will balance ISO and shutter speed, picking a shutter speed fast enough to avoid motion blur while minimizing ISO. Go shoot a variety of situations.

[v3anders]

I borrowed a lens with Image Stabilization (EF-S18-55mm f/3-5.6 IS II). Did not look to make much of a difference.

Pic 568 lens with IS, Tv 0.5, Av 5.6, ISO 6400, FL 18.0:

Pic 565 lens with no IS, Tv 0.5, Av 5.6, ISO 6400, FL 18.0:

Pic 756, Samsung Galaxy S9 phone Tv 1/10, Av 1.5, ISO 1000

All these pictures have been cropped at the focal point. You can see the whole picture in the Shared  Drive: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1q7Gmb24qoacX-BdCjrM-IGNLYIKUilIb?usp=sharing

[v3anders]

Just noted that I did not have the Av as low as I could. So here is one (572) set to 3.5:

[jrhoffman75]

Why do you want Av as low as possible? A wide aperture has a low depth of field and is generally used in portrait photography where one wants the subject to stand out from the surrounding. 

[Tronhard]

Looking at the photos in this and your following post, I recommend you look at the fence line.  The fence seems to be in focus and not the statue. Setting the Av value to 3.5 is only going to reduce your DoF even more, making getting exactly the right spot to focus on even more critical. 

What I suggest is trying a different subject with more contrast.  The images you took of the park and of the dog didn't have those challenges, so I suspect your statue is an unfortunate standard for choosing as a benchmark subject.

I suspect that the camera is not finding enough contrast in the face of the statue to get a decent lock.  The cell phone has no issue as it has a fairly massive DoF, and is likely focusing around the whole picture area.  Furthermore, looking at the face of the statue in the camera shots, it is over-exposed while that in the cell phone isn't.   This suggests that again, the readings for the camera are being taken off the fence, which has more the correct exposure.

There are three systemic variables here: the lens, the camera or the use.  It seems that changing the lens has little impact on the images, so it's down to the camera or how it is being used.

You managed to get access to a lens to test from your associate.  Would they let you try taking a couple of test shots with their camera (and their lens)?  Take the same subject, and then try something with more contrast - even is you take the shot of the path without the rabbit.

 What I hope to do is control both what is in focus and what is being metered more... Are you still using single point autofocus?  I recommend the following settings:

Make sure the camera is not using servo mode, this will confuse focus if you switch subject.

Under the 2nd Red Group, 3rd menu item, set metering mode to spot (see manual P115)
Using the AF selection Point button, very top right of the back of the camera, set it to the centre point only

Back at the menu again...
On the wrench group #3, menu item 1, Custom Functions:
On the selector at the top scroll to menu item #4 (Fn 8: Shutter/AE lock button) Ref manual P265
Set the value to 1. AE Lock/ AF.  the first value sets the half press of the shutter, the second the <*> on the back of the camera

What you have just done is set the camera up for single point back-button focus and metering.

To take a photo, what you do is point the centre of the camera exactly on the point that you want to be in focus and press the * button to lock in the focus precisely.

Then point the camera at some part of the image that has the right tonal value, and half-press the shutter button to lock that in.  (these tow may not be at the same place, as your subject might be very dark or very light and simply using one spot for focus and exposure settings you could get an over or under exposure reading if you just took the exposure off the point of focus).

Then recompose to place that subject where you want in the picture frame and then fully press the shutter to take the photo.  This method is used by a lot of experienced photographers and is supposed to make sure you have control over exactly the exposure, the subject in focus, and the composition.  It takes a wee while to get used to but once you do, you may find it super efficient and successful.  I have been using this for decades.

[jrhoffman75]

Hi Valentin. Not sure what you are trying to demonstrate here. IS isn’t a cure all. Your test shutter speed is much too slow. Your shutter speed was ½ second. IS can give you about a reliable 3 stop benefit. ½ - ¼ - ⅛ - 1/16. 1/16 would be too low for an 18mm focal length. You would want a minimum of 1/40 to hand hold that FL without motion blur. That is for typical hand holding. You stated you have shaky hands. That is going to require a higher speed. I have stability issues due to leg problems. I need to use a monopod or IS, but always try and have shutter speed twice my FL. 

[Tronhard]

I went for a walk today (since it has actually stopped raining!) and took the following images with the 600D and the 18-55 IS STM, with IS on, using the picture style of Landscape.  Spot metering and exposure, not in servo mode).

All images reduced in size in Photoshop with minimal PP.  One thing they all have in common is that they all have some contrast where I was focusing.

32mm, f/5.6, 1/100sec, ISO-20035mm, f/7.1, 1/250sec, ISO-20040mm, f/7.1, 1/30sec, ISO-20055mm, f/9, 1/500sec, ISO-20023mm, f/7.1, 1/25sec, ISO-200

[v3anders]

Hi Trevor,

I did take pictures with my friend's camera last night, but I was not able to read the SD card with my computer. I used a different computer this morning and was able to read it. The quality of the picture was the same (pic 30003):

I took a picture with your recommended settings this morning, but it made the picture too dark (pic 590)

Compared with one that I took with my original settings (589):

or the phone

I also played with a tripod and delay 2 seconds dely.  This did not make much of a difference this morning, because there was more light.

[v3anders]

Sorry, just realized that the picture came out dark, because I had it in M mode instead of AV. It is much lighter in AV (pic 593)