how to do MFA? - EOS 7D Mark II pictures coming out dull

[iphonemaster93]

Hi guys

So after a few weeks of owning the 7DMKII, I realize that even when I manually focus my shots (I don't use a tripod and I do automotive photography), If I zoom in to the maximum in Lightroom, the photo is still dull (on the lowest ISO at 1/320 as I realize that 1/320 is when the photos are 'sharpest'). Is this because the lens that I'm using isn't calibrated to the camera (using a 17-55 2.8) or is it because I'm just shooting wrong? I've tried both manual focus and the different AF zones, all of them, when zoomed in on LR, are dull. Thanks!   

[TCampbell]

I'm not sure what "dull" means.  It sounds like you're unhappy with focus (some people would describe missed focus as being "soft" instead of crisp/sharp).  I'm wondering if you're thinking of color saturation (which is a different topic.)

Can you post an image "straight out of the camera" so that it has all of it's EXIF data including focus point selection data embedded within the image?

This would help us determine if the camera is missing focus... vs. focusing on something you didn't expect... vs. a shallow depth of field that simply isn't broad enough to get everything in focus that you want in focus.

[iphonemaster93]

---

@TCampbell wrote:

I'm not sure what "dull" means.  It sounds like you're unhappy with focus (some people would describe missed focus as being "soft" instead of crisp/sharp).  I'm wondering if you're thinking of color saturation (which is a different topic.)

Can you post an image "straight out of the camera" so that it has all of it's EXIF data including focus point selection data embedded within the image?

This would help us determine if the camera is missing focus... vs. focusing on something you didn't expect... vs. a shallow depth of field that simply isn't broad enough to get everything in focus that you want in focus.

---

my bad haha, yes I mean soft. Oh geez I was having problems with uploading photos including exif data in the EOS rebel section (didn't know how to). I'll see if I can do it later today after work.

[ebiggs1]

"... on the lowest ISO at 1/320 as I realize that 1/320 is when the photos are 'sharpest' ..."

Your whole question is confusing me.  Are you trying to say 1/320 is the sharpest setting?  Because it's not,... necessarily.

"... using a 17-55 2.8 ..."

This is not the sharpest lens made and if used wrong can show its short comings.  Try a test shot or two with these settings, ISO 100, lens set to 35mm and f5.6.  For this just shoot a large jpg and set the picture style to Standard.  Try to find light that will keep the SS above 1/125 for this test.  U/l the results here on the forum.  Simply resize in LR (10in and 72 dpi) and use the picture tab.

[amfoto1]

Hi,

If you are manually focusing the lens accurately and the image is still soft, then MFA will do you no good at all. MFA only adusts the autofocus system. To manual focus very accurately, switch to Live View and zoom in on the LCD screen to magnify what you see there and be able to check your focus. Alternatively, an angle viewer accessory with magnification can be used via the viewfinder.

There are a number of possible reasons for "soft" images:

1. Do you have a "protection" filter on the lens? If so, try again without it. Filters.... especially cheap ones... are notorious for causing softer images. It also may help to use a lens hood, if not already doing so. That protects the lens physically better than a filter and also from oblique light. Reducing the oblique light striking the lens may help autofocus be more accurate.

2. The max magnification in Lightroom is something like 400% or more and absolutely no camera is capable of producing an image that will be sharp at that extremely magnified view. Even 100% is ridiculously large. If your computer monitor is relatively modern and set to it's native resolution, 100% is equivalent to viewing a five foot wide print from 18" away! In other words, it's unreasonable to expect an image to look great at 100% either. So, back off! 50% (1:2) or 33% (1:3) are still quite large and more sensible levels of magnification to judge sharpness and focus accuracy.

3. All digital images require some sharpening. Some might be done in the camera, depending upon your settings (Picture Style). But most sharpening should be done after all other post processing has been done, only after the image has been cropped and re-sized for it's final use. This allows you to watch for unwanted artifacts and other issues that oversharpening can cause. Viewing the image at actual size (i.e., an 8" wide image should measure very close to 8" wide on your computer monitor, for example... which may or may not be 100% in your software... it's more like 33% in my Photoshop), adjust sharpening as needed. The reason that digital images need sharpening is because they have a filter over the sensor called an "anti-alias" filter that actually blurs the image slightly to counteract an optical effect called "moiré". Google these terms if you want more info about them. This deliberately softens the image a little and makes it necessary to re-sharpen it later.  

4. 1/320 shutter speed has little to do with it, except that image softness can be caused by camera shake at too slow a shutter speed. 1/320 is reasonably fast and should be easily handheld. If you were using much slower shutter speeds such as 1/15 or slower, I'd be more concerned. But, with practice, reasonable care and good technique, you should be able to handhold your lens at 17mm setting at about 1/30 and, zoomed to 55mm at about 1/90. Actually, that lens has Image Stabilization, which should help insure reasonable success handholding the camera even at slower speeds. Another way to help insure a sharp shot at slower shutter speeds is with support such as a monopod or tripod. If you have "camera shake" issuse with too slow shutter speed, your images will be blurry throughout.

Another consideration with shutter speed depends upon whether or not your subject is moving. Too slow a shutter speed and the subject will be blurred. IS, tripods, etc. can't help with this at all. You simply have to use fast enough shutter speed to freeze the movement and avoid subject movement blur. If you are having this problem, other parts of the image will appear sharp, while just the subject itself is blurred.  

5. Assuming a reasonably fast shutter speed (such as 1/320) and no camera shake or subject movement issues, the lens aperture you use can have a lot of effect on apparent image sharpness. Your lens has ability to shoot at f/2.8, which is a large aperture. And it's pretty good and sharp even "wide open" like that. However, most lenses get even sharper when you stop down a little, such as to f/4 or f/5.6. But... and this is important... you don't want to stop down too far. Really small apertures see an optical effect called "diffraction" which robs images of fine detail. The smaller the aperture, the stronger the effect. Try to avoid f/22 and f/16... f/11 is better and f/8 would be pretty close to ideal with your camera.  You also use the aperture to control the depth of field in an image.. which is how much appears sharply in focus. Stopping a lens down a bit also creates some range of "forgiveness" for slight focus errors (at 17mm your lens has inherently pretty deep depth of field even at f/2.8... at 55mm it has somewhat less at that largest aperture).

6. The ISO you set also can have some effect. Keep it as low as possible to minimize image "noise", but also to maximize resolution. High ISO images can require noise reduction, done either in-camera or later in post processing... or both, which also tends to cost some resolutions and make images look a little softer.

Until you have explored all the above, I wouldn't start fooling around with MFA other than to do some quick checks that AF is reasonably accurate. Here's how to do that...

1. Put the camera on a tripod so it cannot possibly move.

2. Set the mode dial to M, the aperture to f/2.8 and the shutter and ISO to anything that will give correct exposure.

3. Set up a target that's 50X the focal length away... about 8 or 9 feet at the 55mm setting of your lens, or about 3 feet with the 17mm setting. Either way, choose one extreme or the other to start with.

4. Set the camera to One Shot focus mode, Single Point focus pattern, and select the center AF point.

5. Focus on the target (half-press the shutter release or press the AF On button on the back of the camera).

6. Now turn on Live View and, while carefully observing the camera, focus once again. 

Ideally, the lens shouldn't move or change focus at all with step 6. If it does, repeat the test several times to be sure. If it just a tiny bit it may not matter, or you can "dial it out" using MFA. If it's a lot, the lens (or camera) might need professional calibration.  

If you did the above at the 17mm setting, repeat the process at the 55mm setting of your lens (don't forget to move the target to the correct distance). The 7D Mark II has a newer form of MFA that allows you to make two separate adjustments with a zoom lens, one at each end of the focal length range.

Finally, I have to add that missed focus can cause image softness, which you can often see in images because something closer than the subject or farther behind them appers sharp, while the subject itself doesn't. It's more apparent at larger apertures and longer focal lengths, when depth of field is shallower.

There can be many reasons for missed focus. One is that you have the wrong focus mode selected (One Shot for stationary subjects, AI Servo for moving subjects). Another is using the wrong AF pattern (All Points Auto, Single Point Manual, Zone, Spot, etc.) It takes a while to learn when and where to use those... so I encourage using the simplest initially (Single Point/Manually Selected) until you have time to experiment and practice with the others, to learn when to use them... and perhaps more importantly, when not to!

Yours is a USM lens, which is quite fast focusing, especially when used on an equally fast focusing camera such as the 7DII. So you probably won't have issues with slow focusing unless shooting in low light, low contrast situations. I don't have one so don't know if the 17-55mm is a true parfocal zoom or not, though. If not, if it's varifocal, that means that it doesn't maintain focus when it's zoomed, and when shooting in One Shot mode you have to remember to re-focus after any change to the focal length or you'll have focus errors. If shooting in AI Servo, where focusing is continuous in order to track moving subjects, there is no need to refocus a varifocal zoom because the camera will automatically update as you change the focal length. I suspec the 17-55mm is parfocal though, just based upon it's rather premium quality and pricing. You cna check simply by testing it yourself. Put the lens and camera on a tripod, select One Shot and focus on something. Then carefully zoom the lens to a different focal length without re-focusing, and watch to see if the lens loses focus as you zoom. If it does, it's varifocal and you'll need to treat it one way. If it doesn't lose focus when zoomed, then you don't have to worry about it. Note: it may help to do this in Live View, with the image magnified on the LCD screen.    

Hope this helps! The 7D Mark II is one of the most sophisticated and capable APS-C cameras available and the 17-55mm lens is top quality, too. I don't know you or your level of experience with DSLRs or photography in general, but you may be in for a fairly steep learning curve with a complex, pro-oriented camera like that. Spend some time with the user manual (which I see has grown to over 500 pages!) There are also guide books available that can expand upon the user manual... I always make a point of getting one or two of them whenever I get a new camera, to help shorten my learning curve. Depending upon your experience, you also might find Bryan Peterson's "Understanding Exposure" very helpful, in a general photography sense and much more detail than we can ever provide on a blog like this.

---

ebiggs1 wrote:

"... using a 17-55 2.8 ..."

This is not the sharpest lens made and if used wrong can show its short comings...

---

I am not sure where ebiggs1 is getting his info about this lens. Most online reviewers and the majority of users give the EF-S 17-55mm very high marks and rave about it's high optical quality. The only reviewer who I've ever seen seriously pan it is Ken Rockwell and I can't help but wonder if he somehow got a "bad copy" of the lens or maybe was just having a bad day. Most users and reviewers feel the 17-55mm is an "L-series in disguise", matching or exceeding the image quality and overall perfomance of many more expensive lenses. (An EF-S lens like this will never be labelled an L-series, no matter how good it is, simply because one of Canon's criteria defining L-series is that it must be compatible with all EOS cameras past, present and future. EF-S lenses are only usable on APS-C cameras, not on APS-H or full frame models like ebiggs1 uses.)

Early on, the first 2 or 3 years after it was introduced in 2006, there were some complaints of 17-55mm seeming to gather dust under their front elements easily and a lot. And I recall some reports of failed image stabilization. But I suspect Canon has quietly corrected some things inside the lens because I can't recall anyone posting about either of those issues the past 4 or 5 years.  I've almost never heard anyone... other than Ken Rockwell... report any issues with the image qualities of the lens! The other primary complaints include that the 17-55mm is fairly pricey (it's more than some comparable, but less capable crop-only lenses... but less than some premium L-series that may be full frame-capable and better built/sealed, but don't have any better or even as good image quality). And, like all non-L-series Canon lenses, the matching lens hood for the 17-55mm is sold separately... That always brings out a few complaints.

Anyway, unless it got a hard whack in shipping or was dropped sometime, I really doubt it's your lens at fault. Still, you might go to a store and compare with another copy... and if it appears off in some way, exchange it if that's still possible or send it in for warranty repair if less than a year old.

***********

Alan Myers
San Jose, Calif., USA
"Walk softly and carry a big lens."
GEAR: 5DII, 7D(x2), 50D(x3), some other cameras, various lenses & accessories
FLICKR & EXPOSUREMANAGER 
 

[ebiggs1]

"I am not sure where ebiggs1 is getting his info about this lens."

I also think it a good and sharp lens I only meant at the widest aperture it is possibile to see some issues. Especially when coupled with other situations.  Poor lighting for instance, shallow DOF, etc.

"If you are manually focusing the lens accurately and the image is still soft, then MFA will do you no good at all."

I totally glossed over this but this is an extremely important point.  Does the lens focus properly in MF? 

[iphonemaster93]

I've tried several of the tips mentioned above. I've tried shooting at 1/320 and 1/125, both 2.8, 4.5 and 5.6, I've tried both manually and automatically focusing on the same subject, both of which aren't sharp until after post process editing and even then sometimes afterwards, it's still not sharp (object doesn't pop out). When it does pop out, it's because I outline the object with the drawing tool in Lightroom with sharpness at over 50% to make the entire object as a hole to stand out. I almost always shoot with a CPL on during the day time, I don't use any UV filters unless it's at night when a CPL is basically useless to me. I don't however like to use the live view, after learning that it drains the battery a lot quicker on the T3i, I switched over to the view finder and kept shooting in the same way as I found out that the battery on the 7DMKII doesn't last that long either.

[TTMartin]

---

@iphonemaster93 wrote:

I've tried several of the tips mentioned above. I've tried shooting at 1/320 and 1/125, both 2.8, 4.5 and 5.6, I've tried both manually and automatically focusing on the same subject, both of which aren't sharp until after post process editing and even then sometimes afterwards, it's still not sharp (object doesn't pop out). When it does pop out, it's because I outline the object with the drawing tool in Lightroom with sharpness at over 50% to make the entire object as a hole to stand out. I almost always shoot with a CPL on during the day time, I don't use any UV filters unless it's at night when a CPL is basically useless to me. I don't however like to use the live view, after learning that it drains the battery a lot quicker on the T3i, I switched over to the view finder and kept shooting in the same way as I found out that the battery on the 7DMKII doesn't last that long either.

---

How much did you spend on your CPL?

By the way, if NOTHING in the photo is sharp, it probably isn't a focus issue. When focus is off, usually something in the photo will be sharp, just not what you want to be sharp.

[iphonemaster93]

I believe $140? I have the B+W MRC coating CPL. The entire picture is in focus, just the object that I want to be sharp, doesn't have that 'popping out' look to it even when I have the single point AF on it when in auto focus and the same with manual if I'm not shooting anywhere close to 55mm (I shoot at all ranges). 

[TTMartin]

@iphonemaster93 wrote:

I believe $140? I have the B+W MRC coating CPL. The entire picture is in focus, just the object that I want to be sharp, doesn't have that 'popping out' look to it even when I have the single point AF on it when in auto focus and the same with manual if I'm not shooting anywhere close to 55mm (I shoot at all ranges). 

---

You really need to get a book or take a class on basic photography concepts.

First there is only one plane of focus in a photograph. Then there is a depth of field which is an area of acceptable sharpness in front of and behind the plane of focus. 

It sounds to me like you want a shallow depth of field, which is what makes your subject 'pop out'.

Instead you are using settings that give you too large of a depth of field so you have no subject isolation. 

While focus does come into play, it is not the primary thing that creates the effect you are looking for. Shallow depth of field comes from a large aperture (small f/number) long lens focal length, short subject to camera distance, and larger distance between the subject and the background. 

Until you understand how to control your depth of field you are wasting your time worrying about micro focus adjustment.