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]

> 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. 

The kit came with a tripod and a remote control switch. So I could avoid camera shaking that way too, but I was planning to take this cameras on my walks to the park. It is really not practical to take out the tripod and do all those adjustment, when you see something that you want to take a picture of. 

[Tronhard]

I do appreciate that, 🙂 but I am simply trying to use the scientific method to reduce the number of variables so we can figure out if you have an equipment issue, and if so, what that is.

By all means use the tripod and remote switch, which is great to know you have these things.  If we can reduce the variables we can hopefully find the cause of the issues.

Perhaps it might be an idea to confirm what gear you got and if the camera was new when you purchased it.  Finally, did you get it from an authorized retailer or via the web?  These elements help to give us an idea of the nature of your situation.

[v3anders]

>  Perhaps it might be an idea to confirm what gear you got and if the camera was new when you purchased it.  Finally, did you get it from an authorized retailer or via the web?  These elements help to give us an idea of the nature of your situation.

Trevor, I bought it new from Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08K7CKKB1

I am sure that using the tripod and remote control will eliminate the camera shake.  I was able to take a few good pictures with fast Tv (eliminating camera shake) today when it was really sunny. 

Even a retake of the same scene from my original post came out better:

This is because it was sunny and I was able to set Tv 1/600, Ev 7.1, ISO 400. I could not get a fast Tv when it was cloudy (see the statue pictures). 

[Tronhard]

To be honest, none of these images seem very sharp to me for what I would expect from a lens and camera of this type.
I don't have your model of camera, but I have delved into my museum of gear and found the Canon EOS 600D (Rebel T3i) vintage 2011, with the EF-S 18-55 IS STM lens. This should be close enough for a general comparison to your gear.

I turned the IS from the lens off and mounted it on a basic tripod - to try to emulate what you might be doing, and got these shots: it's almost winter here in NZ and the sun is not even up properly, so things are a bit dull...   I deliberately chose a subject with sharp, clear and straight lines.  All images are straight out of camera with absolutely no processing at all.

First FL: 55mm, f/5, 1/200sec, ISO-400

Next FL: 55mm, f/8, 1/80sec, ISO-400

Finally, FL: 55mm, f/5, 1/200sec, ISO-400

These may not be perfect, but they seem to me to be significantly sharper than the images you are getting, so the question remains why...
I have not seen a response to my question about focusing the lens manually.  I was wondering if you have ever focused the lens using the focus ring on the lens while the AF-MF switch is set to AF, can you please confirm?

[v3anders]

Thank you Trevor. The pictures I posted were magnified and cropped.  The look much better than the thumbnails I posted. I can put the original JPG in the folder I mentioned earlier.

Yes, I do have the lens in AF mode and I do see it focus when I press the shutter button half way.

[Tronhard]

OK, good to know, thank you.  These details, especially anything that impacts what we see as a sample image to evaluate, are very important.  I tried to access the link you sent, but it asked me to send a request to access, which I did, but have no response so far.

[v3anders]

Hi Trevor,

Sorry, I did not see the request (don't check my gmail account too often). You should be good to go now.

[Tronhard]

Yes, onto it! 🙂

[Tronhard]

Hmmm... When you explained: "Trevor, I bought it new from Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08K7CKKB1" I checked this out.  It's a massive bundle of a lot of gear you may never use, and I suspect this is not a Canon authorized dealer.  Checking their feedback someone else has had issues with the lens, so it is possible that this person is selling grey market (i.e. unauthorized) gear, refurbished (by who knows whom), or even repaired equipment.   I am not in North America so, I don't know all the in's and out's of the market there. 

Frankly, if you had come to me before purchasing, and wanted a cheap kit to get going I would have suggested a Canon Authorized refurbished camera, which are essentially as new and have a Canon 1 year warranty.  All you need is the camera, a decent lens (preferably with image stabilization and an STM designation), a memory card and possibly a spare battery.   

[kvbarkley]

You should be able to handhold at 1/80. Are you using the LCD screen to compose or the viewfinder? The viewfinder will give you much better stability because it is closer to your body and the eye pressing against the camera provides additional stability.

You might also want a lens with IS.