I've been having some issues with my R6, and I'm not quite sure what I'm doing wrong or if there's an issue with the camera/lens itself. Some photos, even in bright direct lighting, look extremely pixelated once they're zoomed in even a little bit. I mostly shoot in servo with 1 point af, but have had the same issue using one shot. I chatted support and they said my focus settings should be good— just recommended switching to an expanded af mode if the subject's moving a lot.
Example 1- I had focused on his face
vs a sample image-
So it's not in every scenario, but I didn't change any camera settings (other than iso, exposure, and shutter) between the first and second example
Hi and welcome to the forum:
When you say that you focused in on the subject's face, is this referring to zooming in on the actual first image after it was taken, or zooming in on the subject's face and then shooting the second image? If it is the former, I would say you were pushing the image to an extreme.
It would help if we had some more info:
lens, FL, aperture, s-speed, and ISO for each. Were you shooting in JPG or RAW and what PP have you done?
I tried to look at the 3rd and 4th links and access was denied.
Thanks for the quick reply! When talking about focusing, I just meant that in camera I clicked on his face on the lcd to set my focus point. This one was shot on my 35m ii at 1/400, ISO 200, at f 2.2 in RAW and this is a screenshot of the raw image with no post processing.
Here are the 3rd and 4th links with access— this photo did not have the pixelation issue:
This one was on the same 35mm and shot at ISO 100, f 1.6, 1/250 also in RAW and no post processing
Good to get your response. To be honest screen shots are of very limited use - they add a whole layer of complication and of low resolution in themselves. We need to see the original Image, so include a link to your RAW files please.
I am still slightly confused about the nature of what you are viewing. Obviously, you are looking at these on screen, but did you blow up the original image on screen so that the subject's face was close to filling it?
Here are the links to the RAWs:
Yes! Sorry about the lack of clarification— the second links for each example were just cropped in to show the quality looked up close
I just looked at each of these image in Photoshop and zoomed into 100% on each. I am using a 24"Asus monitor with approved built-in calibration for Adobe, so it should be rendering accurate results.
TBH, I think the second one is absolutely fine at 100% - I see absolutely no pixilation whatsoever. The first one does not show pixilation, but does look like the groom is slightly out of focus and is showing some movement. The bride's veil looks more in focus to me and she is still so it looks sharp.
My question are:
What degree are you zooming in to see pixilation?
What will you be producing with these images - large Art prints, smaller prints, on-screen viewing or whatever?
TBH, you were very challenged by the location and direction of this image. The background is blown out and there is slight noise inside the image as your camera struggles to cover the dynamic range you are working with.
Looking at the first image of the bride and groom, I zoomed in to 200% and at this level there is definite noise, but not pixilation, which is not surprising, as the camera struggles to cope with the light. Still, one does not normally zoom in to that degree in PP, better to get closer in the field.
Thank you so much for taking the time to help! That definitely makes sense. I didn't realize the camera would produce noise when trying to work with the dynamic range, I thought the lower ISO and exposing for the subject would keep it clear. I was also zoomed in 200% and it really only became an issue because I was retouching skin and the quality just wasn't there. As for the motion, shooting at 1/400th I wouldn't have expected it, should I have just quickened my ss more to avoid that?
My first reaction is that you chose a really challenging position for your shot. Putting your subject in dim light with a very bright background is making it difficult for any camera. You are either going to get massive blowout of the background or underexposure of the subjects. In this case your exposure of the subjects came at the cost of some noise - but that is most noticeable above 200%.
So, I would have put the subjects in shadow, but with a background certainly not much different, if not even darker, but with the filtered light from ahead of them, so they are the brightest thing in the image.
I asked what you are going to produce because whatever you do is ALL about that. Are your clients likely to view the images at 200% - I hope not! Don't pixel-peep for no good reason, always focus on the outcome for the client, and beware of over-processing your images - it's always better, and much less effort to get it right in camera than deal with it in post production.