T6 blurry images wedding photography

[Bbphoto]

I am a starting out photographer, using a t6 with kit lens 18-55. I have been getting a lot of work and everything is great. But I keep seeing some of the “far away” images are coming in blurry and I just can’t seem to figure it out. I thought that it may have been the md filter on the front of my camera but even when I took it off, they were still blurry even if I was only ten feet away. So I guess I have to start making all my shots up close? Please help me figure this out. I shoot in either creative auto or sport due to the fact that I just can’t seem to get crisp images in other settings. And I’m honestly scared to shoot in other modes because this works best for me. Please put in your input and help me solve this problem. Thanks.

[Wildsoldier]

Then in that case if the softness still there at 18 megapixels, it could be that multiple focus points were used in lieu of single point focus but that is a guess. Does any one have a T6 that gives the same results? I believe you shall not get blurry pictures with any camera when zoomed 100%.

[ebiggs1]

"... it could be that multiple focus points were used in lieu of single point focus..."

Multiple focus points still have just one critical focus point.  A lens can never have more than one critical focus point. Generally this is the closest focus point to the camera. What this means, if focus was achieved, than something in the photo should be in critical focus.

[Waddizzle]

---

@Wildsoldier wrote:

Then in that case if the softness still there at 18 megapixels, it could be that multiple focus points were used in lieu of single point focus but that is a guess. Does any one have a T6 that gives the same results? I believe you shall not get blurry pictures with any camera when zoomed 100%.

---

The camera does not have as much to do with it as the lens.  Your images will never be better than the glass that you put in front of it.  In fact, I would almost go as far to say that your camera really nothing to do with how sharp your photos are.  It is also a bad habit to keep looking at photos zoomed in to 100%.  That is called pixel peeping.

BTW, when your camera illuminates multiple AF points in the viewfinder in One Shot mode, the camera is showing you which AF points have the potential to capture an AF lcck, NOT the actual lone AF point that will be used to set final focus.

[Wildsoldier]

In my experience the kit lens efs 18-55 stm is not the perfect lens but is not a bad lens either. Is for shure less sharper than a prime(at equivalent focal lengh) and less sharper than the efs 17-55 f2.8.

Me and my wife still use it with pretty good results.

This have nothing to do with the topic but is something that a wedding photographer shall consider. Weddings have a lot of items that are pretty much white in color. White dress, white benches, white tables etc. if you use a lens at its maximum apperture it may give you some purple fringing at the borders of the object. Try not to shoot always at maximum aperture in a wedding. This may not happen on expensive lenses or if it happens is minimal but on cheap lenses is posible. The canon efs 17-55 f2.8 is not cheap compared to kit lens pricing but is terrible at this, is up to the point that is unfixable in post.

[ebiggs1]

I will have to disagree with you on almost every word you just said.  There is no spec where the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM bests the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM.  There is no way I would choose to use a 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 in favor of the 17-55mm f/2.8.  Not one! Not ever!

"...and less sharper than the efs 17-55 f2.8."

Not according to any experience I have had with them. And not the findings of DXO, either.

"...up to the point that is unfixable in post."

You need a refresher in how to use Photoshop. 

[Wildsoldier]

I dont care if you agree or not. But I respect your opinion. As I said I wrote comments based on my experience. Also, seems that you didnt read my last comment well. I never said that the kit lens was better than the 17-55mm F2.8 I just said that the 17-55mm was really bad in chromatic aberration. From what I read I believe you are one of those people that thinks you knows everything. I dont like to discuss ideas with people like you. Sorry but thats the way I am.

[Bbphoto]

[Bbphoto]

Thanks for the replies!!!

Here is what consists in my wedding day bag - canon t6 with two kit lenses, 18-55 and 75-300 I believe. I also have a wide angle attachment. I have a yongnuo YN 560 which is great. I have two tripods but never seem to use them due to it slowing me down. I have a flash diffuser box cover, and wireless trigger for the camera. Also, some Nd/UV filters. This is usually what I use but I also keep a Nikon d3000 in my bag with a kit lens as well (in case my canon fails). I am going to try to upload a few images. It’s not that they are that blurry - I feel like when you zoom into their faces it shows blurry ness and it drives me crazy! Ang input is great and I appreciate everyone’s advice, as I am learning and establishing my business. I’m about a year into it now (not as a hobby, but as my second income job) and I am really loving it a- I just can’t stand to see a beautiful image and then look at the brides face and see that it’s not crisp. Thanks guys!!

[RobertTheFat]

---

@shadowsports wrote:

Wadizzle,

Right...  the difference being your Cine quality lens.

This is not the lens I'd chose for a wedding.  Landscape yes.  That photo is magnificent. Very dramatic.  Really like it.

---

I agree with Rick's opinion of Waddizzle's shot. But I'd try applying an additional 1° of counterclockwise rotation.

[Waddizzle]

---

@RobertTheFat wrote:

---

@shadowsports wrote:

Wadizzle,

Right...  the difference being your Cine quality lens.

This is not the lens I'd chose for a wedding.  Landscape yes.  That photo is magnificent. Very dramatic.  Really like it.

---

I agree with Rick's opinion of Waddizzle's shot. But I'd try applying an additional 1° of counterclockwise rotation.

---

Thanks, Bob!

I appreciate the critique, too.  Always do, always welcome.  Your observation is spot on with something I wrestled with in post. I could not decide how to level the horizon, because the original handheld shot was, while steady, not perfectly level.  LR has really good tools to correct for this sort of stuff.

The problem was barrel distortion.  I had to angle the lens upward to capture the whole house.  With a full frame sensor body, I could have angled upward far less than with an APS-C sensor body.  But this was a “training day” shoot, so I was forced to zoom with my feet and compose before I pressed the shutter.

The house is not in the exact center of the image.  When I rotated the image to where vertical lines would look vertical, the house would look a little distorted, just a little too distorted. I settled on a final rotation that “cancelled” out the barrel distortion on the house.  

I had to find a happy medium between making the house distortion look balanced, and the image looking level..  I decided  to put a priority on “balancing” the barrel distortion of the house.