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.

[v3anders]

Yes, I am using a "Canon EF-S 18-55mm F/3.5-5.6 DC III Zoom Lens". It is the kit lens. I do not see an image stabilization switch. Note it is the DC, not IS model. 

[Tronhard]

I must admit I cannot find any information on a DC version of that lens. 🤔
Looking at the lens, does it have a AF-MF switch: usually this model does.  If so, have you manually focused the lens with the switch set to AF, by any chance?

[Tronhard]

Well, I just found an error in the image from DPReview.com!  It shows an IS switch but according to a couple of other sources, and the specs details, the lens you are using does NOT have image stabilization!  Amazing in this day an age... 😕
That said, as long as you are using a shutter speed at least as fast as the inverse of your focal length multiplied by 1.5.  So if you are using a focal length of 20mm, your minimum shutter speed should be 1/30sec;  if you are shooting at 50mm, your minimum SS should be 1/75sec, and so on.

[rs-eos]

As already mentioned earlier, your DSLR has a much larger sensor than your phone.  This will let you achieve shallower depths of field at the same aperture.  And, one of the primary reasons I moved to a DSLR.  While not for everyone, I absolutely love the look that a 50mm f/1.2 can achieve on a full-frame camera.

If you want everything in focus, you'll need to be at smaller apertures and use wider angle lenses and learn about things like hyper-focal distance.

Give it time; learn as you go.   A DSLR is very complex.  But you'll find that it can really help you achieve your vision as an artist.  One of the biggest benefits being that you can change out the lens leading to endless possibilities.

[v3anders]

Sorry, about the link. I fixed it.

Yes, I understand camera shake. The point is that the only way I was able to get a shutter speed of 1/80 in Av mode, was to reduce the AV to 4.5 and increase ISO to 400. The statue pictures were from this morning, when it was cloudy. Now that is sunny, I can increase the AV to 14 and get still get a fast Tv (125). The picture came clear with the statue in the sun.... but I do not want to be limited to take pictures only on sunny days.

[jrhoffman75]

Increasing the ISO can result in increased noise. Different cameras have different higher ISO capabilities. Post processing can compensate for noise. Also flash or auxiliary lighting. 

[Waddizzle]

The camera likes to have lots of light.  Taking photos indoors can be very challenging.  Try using Av mode outdoors on a sunny day.  

I noticed some discussion about your lens.  The camera can only capture what the lens sees.  Most kit lenses with entry level cameras are designed to teach you how to use a camera, not to take magazine cover quality photos.

[rs-eos]

You're not limited to only taking photos on sunny days.

Already mentioned, but worth mentioning again.  Take the time to learn.  Start with the exposure triangle (how to balance aperture, shutter and ISO).

[v3anders]

> Start with the exposure triangle (how to balance aperture, shutter and ISO).

Isn't that what I am doing with the pictures of the statue that I posted, where I changed the ISO, Tv and Av???. And the picture still came out mediocre, with the settings that would get me enough Tv to avoid camera shake.

[Tronhard]

Looking at the EXIF data from your first shot, it seems you were not using Live View (i.e. the LCD) to compose those images.  Perhaps I can make a suggestion to eliminate the possibility of camera shake in the equation.  

If you set the camera to self-timer delay, with the full 10 sec, delay; put the camera on a firm surface, such as a table or similar, focus on the statue or some other distinct object and then take a series of shots at different settings of aperture and shutter speed and see if they come out sharp.  Use auto ISO.

If you can do that and let us know the results please.