Not great images with new 6D. Please take a look and give me your thoughts

[Brad]

I'm going on a 2 week trip to Japan in 3 days so I'm hoping to figure this out before I leave.

I got my new 6d with 24-105 L lens kit, and also the 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM. It doesn't seem like any of the photos are that sharp without a very high contrast shot in full sunlight. Indoor shots or those with lower contrast (tree bark, leaves, something in the shade, etc.) seem pretty unsharp to me. I'm not sure if the AF just can't get a precise focus, or if the sensor just can't get good detail unless those conditions are met.

This is my first DSLR, although I've had film SLRs for 30+ years before that, and digital point and shoots for the last decade or so. I'm not sure if my expectations were too high or if there's something wrong with the camera, lenses, AF, or IS systems, or if I'm doing something wrong.

Some photos are below. I shot them all above the 1/focal length rule and some 2x or 3x or more above that, so in theory that would eliminate the camera shake issue, and also in theory the IS system should give you 2-3 stops so it doesn't seem to me that camera shake should be the issue. (I've also taken tripod shots and had the same issue so I don't think it's camera shake.)

All are large fine jpegs (20mb) straight from the camera, blown up to 100%.


santa1 Indoors daylight, no interior lights on, 24mm focal length, 1/30, ISO 1000

santa2 Indoors daylight, with interior lights on, 105mm focal length, 1/125, ISO 6400

santa3 Indoors daylight, with interior lights on, 300mm focal length, 1/320, ISO 10000

santa4 Indoors daylight, with interior lights on, 300mm focal length, 1/640, ISO 20000

wall1 outdoors, 105mm focal length, 1/500, ISO 100

wall2 outdoors, 270mm focal length, 1/500, ISO 100

treebark1 outdoors, 70mm focal length, 1/125, ISO 25600

treebark2 outdoors, 300mm focal length, 1/320, ISO 25600

license1 outdoors, 300mm focal length, 1/320, ISO 25600

leaves1 outdoors, 70mm focal length, 1/320, ISO 25600

leaves2 outdoors, 300mm focal length, 1/320, ISO 500

truck, 105mm focal length, 1/250, ISO 100

Other than the truck badge and maybe the wall photos (high contrast, full sunlight), most of them don't seem that sharp to me. What do you guys think? Most people are raving about how good the low light performance is on the 6d but I'm just not seeing it, not even in moderate light.

Here's a link to where someone compares a few different cameras one of them being the 6d. My images are not as sharp as them as far as I can tell.
http://www.etherpilot.com/photo/test/misc/6d_5d3_d600_colfix.jpg

Any thoughts or suggestions you can give are greatly appreciated! Thanks! 

[Skirball]

---

@adamsnapper wrote:

I use the camera professionally...

I nearly always use single shot AF with the centre spot, then hold and reframe then shoot. 

---

Focus and recompose has its uses, but a professional shooter should know better.  If you're shooting wide apertures using this technique then you're not going to get consistent focus.

---

@adamsnapper wrote:

I take two shots of each couple, but on checking back through all the images there will be only five or so from the whole session which are razor sharp, most are muzzy and a select  few are almost unusable the focus is that bad.

---

Sorry, but something is wrong with your technique or your camera.  True, the 6D AF is lousy compared to many modern AF systems when it comes to moving subjects.  But there is no reason why you can't get consistent sharp photos of posing subjects with the camera.

[adamsnapper]

Thanks but there's nothing wrong with my 30 years of technique, When shooting with the 28-70 I have two stop in. Focus and recompose was done as there is a portrait of the Queen between both parties and a centre point focus would hit that. I've tried focus points left and right but the miss rate was enough to switch me back to manual focus. I never had the issue with the 1d IIn (or indeed any of the various Canon 1's I've used over the years). The focus on the 6d is skittish...nothing more needs to be said  and I cannot trust the camera.

[Skirball]

---

@adamsnapper wrote:

The focus on the 6d is skittish...nothing more needs to be said  and I cannot trust the camera.

---

No, more does need to be said before you so dismissively judge the 6D based on focus and recompose technique. The belief that Canon released a mid-range SLR that can't reliably focus on a static subject is asinine.   The 6D is proving to be a reliable tool for many photographers, I’m sorry you’re not finding the same.  But your results are not normal, despite the much discussed 6D AF system.   It’s either technique or faulty equipment.  Since you’ve had 30 years to perfect your technique, it obviously must be the equipment.

[TCampbell]

The only way to properly evaluate focus accrately and objectively is to use a valid test target and testing conditions.

When I do this, I have a commercial test target (you can an improvise as long as you have a high-contrast target with enough fine detail ... a sheet of newspaper on the wall could be a valid test target).  Commercial targets typically include an inclineded scale which runs a distance nearer and farther than the main target so that if the camera misses focus, you can inspect the inclined scale and determine how far the focus point was either forward or behind the intended target.   This is ideal BECAUSE many cameras allow for focus adjustment ... but you need to know which way to adjust and how much adjustment is required.

Regardless of the target, it needs to be stationary and the camera needs to be stationary as well.  This means the camera really needs to be on a tripod.  In "One Shot" AF mode the camera focuses until it locks, then stops focusing.  If your body leaned forward or backward just a small amount  after locking focus this can mean the difference between sharp focus on the eyes themselves... vs. the eyebrows or nose, etc.   This is especially important when using low focal ratios with very narrow depth of field.  But even focus inside depth of field isn't necessary "tack sharp" -- it's only "accepatble focus" because at most print sizes nobody will notice.

It is entirely possible the camera needs calibration and each lens can throw focus.  The fact that a lens worked extremely well with one body does NOT mean it will work as well with a different body AND... this is NOT the fault of the body or the lens.  In other words... I can grab a different lens of the same make and model (just a different copy) and get different results.

You might want to read Roger Cicala's blog titled "'This lens is soft' and other myths"

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2008/12/this-lens-is-soft-and-other-myths

He explains why this happens (btw, he owns a lens rental company... so he's got hundreds of bodies and lenses to validate this) and what you can do about it.

It's possible your camera needs nothing more then an AF Microadjustment (this is something you can do in your menus - it doesn't even need to go in for service).  But before you fiddle with it, I _strongly_ suggest you carefully use valid test targets and testing conditions as you can certainly make things worse than before you started.

When I test a lens, I set up my focus target and camera, then manually run the focus all the way IN, then let the camera focus and shoot.  I repeat this about 10 times.  After each shot, I deliberately de-focus by running the focus all the way IN.

After enough of those shots are completed, I note the frame number, then run the focus all the way OUT and let the camera refocus and shoot.... repeating that about 10 times.

Don't just take one shot.  You want enough to establish a trend to determine if the camera is CONSISTENT.  The reasons I do a number of shots with focus run to the limit in each direction is I want to know if there's any "slop" or backlash in the focus mechanism.  In other words... if the camera is bringing focus forward, it might usually miss focus.  If the camera is running focus outward then it might usually nail focus.  The direction in which the camera has to change focus can effect the result (hopefully it doesn't... but if there's a backlash or slop problem then it would.)

If the camera consistently misses focus and always off by roughly the same amount in the same direction (e.g. suppose it consistently front focuses by about 1 cenitmeter, etc.) then that's easily corrected in the AF microadjustment menu.  

[butchdon]

I'm late to this thread, since I just bought a 6d two weeks ago. Shot a wedding a couple of days later. Most of my images were shot with the 24-105. MOST were OK, some a little soft, a few were gross. Like the ones of the groom with his family. There was only one I could salvage after using some "focus" sharpening plugins. 

So I try to do the Micro adjust. The 105 end adjusted fine. The mid range and lower had a very wide AF acceptance window. So I did some shooting outside and found that the AF point would flash red, but when I looked at the images in LR they were quite soft. 

So I put on my 70-200 f2.8 II IS, and 100 f2.8 11 IS Macro and they were tack sharp. I was having issues with the focus when mounted on my 5d classic and hoped it was the camera, so I bought the 6d while there was a $300 rebate.

I'm not sure if sending the 24-105 to Canon CPS will fix the AF. It does not always fail. I think since I am semi-retired if I need a WA lens, I can rent  24-70 2.8L Mk II for $35/day.

So I would suspect the 24-105 lens. You almost have to de-focus, re-focus, shoot, and repeat if the image is really import. I'm going to practive focusing manually to see if my acceptance rate improves.

[TTMartin]

---

@butchdon wrote:

I'm late to this thread, since I just bought a 6d two weeks ago. Shot a wedding a couple of days later. Most of my images were shot with the 24-105. MOST were OK, some a little soft, a few were gross. Like the ones of the groom with his family. There was only one I could salvage after using some "focus" sharpening plugins. 

So I try to do the Micro adjust. The 105 end adjusted fine. The mid range and lower had a very wide AF acceptance window. So I did some shooting outside and found that the AF point would flash red, but when I looked at the images in LR they were quite soft. 

So I put on my 70-200 f2.8 II IS, and 100 f2.8 11 IS Macro and they were tack sharp. I was having issues with the focus when mounted on my 5d classic and hoped it was the camera, so I bought the 6d while there was a $300 rebate.

I'm not sure if sending the 24-105 to Canon CPS will fix the AF. It does not always fail. I think since I am semi-retired if I need a WA lens, I can rent  24-70 2.8L Mk II for $35/day.

So I would suspect the 24-105 lens. You almost have to de-focus, re-focus, shoot, and repeat if the image is really import. I'm going to practive focusing manually to see if my acceptance rate improves.

---

Try using DotTune: Autofocus fine tuning in under 5 minutes to MFA your lens. That way you get the MFA set to the middle of the depth of field.

[Peter]

---

@TTMartin wrote:

---

Try using DotTune: Autofocus fine tuning in under 5 minutes to MFA your lens. That way you get the MFA set to the middle of the depth of field.

---

If you are comfortable about the idea of installing Magic lantern, you can use DotTune like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58enf18Q0l4

It is just microadjustment, but maybe better than nothing. Here in Sweden focus adjusting will cost me +120€. In Japan it will cost 10€. I don't know where you live, but if you someday travel to a country that has the same kind of price level for Canon service, bring your lens.

BTW, there is an issue with the 24-105 if you have an early version, UT0001-UT1000. Just good to know.

[butchdon]

Peter, the ML looks pretty interesting. Unforetunately, you need to be running 1.1.3 version firmware which has disapeared from the web for downloading.

I did try the Dot Tune method earlier and it worked with the lens in tele at 105 (10 point focus acceptance window), but at 65mm and below it was like 28 points.

My lens version is UV1112, so I'm safe there.

[Peter]

I haven´t tried the ML for 1.1.6.

Else you have the firmware 1.1.3 here.

[butchdon]

Thanks Peter. Got it loaded. Can't wait to try it. Haven't even had the chance to use my hardware interloper thingy. I guess i can still use it on my 20d and 5d bodies.