Struggling with Sony A6000 - blurred photos

C

clicktor

Messages
863
Edit My Images
Yes
I think I'm having a moment here. Can someone give me some help? I took my new Sony A6000 out for the first time today and just wanted to take some simple shots of kids. This is something this camera HAS to do well for me and is top priority. One of the main reasons for buying it was for the AF being good with tracking and fast moving things due to it's speed, compared to other mirrorless cams.

My shots I took today don't look sharp to me. This is all with the SEL5018 or the Sony 50mm OSS f/1.8 prime. This lens is also top priority to me to work well for portraits.
Most of the shots I took where at f/1.8 as I wanted to test the lens wide open. Sometimes the shutter went as "low" as 1/80th which keeps in line with the 1/focal length even with crop factor. I had optical steady shot turned on in the menus. I tried various different focus methods and settings and decided that:

a) Tracking is no where near as good as I expected and about 95% of shots were way out of focus
b) Even in single shot AF mode, it's not as fast as is made out
c) In low light it can hunt just like most cams out there
d) It has a hard time deciding what to focus on and is almost too clever
e) The machine gun like FPS is actually no help if it won't focus (as cool as it is, spray and pray is hardly something to rely on).

I tried enabling eye focusing as well and if anything it was more unreliable.

I looked back over my shots and to me, they look like movement blur which I can't understand. Am I going mad? Have I suddenly become unable to take a sharp photo? I have used various digital cams since 2002 but do question if I am doing something really basic wrong here.
Am I expecting too much of the lens? The best shot I got all afternoon in terms of sharpness was the below one. She was stood very still posing. At 100% the eyes are not as sharp as I would expect. (ISO 100, f/1.8, 1/250, single shot AF I believe) Keep in mind there are others that look a lot worse.

Would appreciate some help as I need to now decide sharpish whether to send all this kit back.
 

Attachments

  • resized.JPG
    resized.JPG
    72.1 KB · Views: 173
  • 100_crop.jpg
    100_crop.jpg
    208.9 KB · Views: 165
Looks like it is in focus, no shutter shock and no motion blur. It doesn't look that bad to me especially as you are shooting a fast prime wide open and in fact, that's where I would lay the blame without any further info.
 
Nawty said:
Looks like it is in focus, no shutter shock and no motion blur. It doesn't look that bad to me especially as you are shooting a fast prime wide open and in fact, that's where I would lay the blame without any further info.
Click to expand...

i.e. The wide open prime is just going to be soft and this is to be expected? Maybe I have been spoilt with my other primes then. Panasonic 20mm f1.7, Olympus 45mm f/1.8, Canon EF 50mm f/1.8....these are all sharp as tack wide open in my experience. This Sony 50mm prime is meant to be a very sharp lens on the lens charts/reviews.
 
How have you processed your shots? to me it looks pretty sharp in terms of detail (look at her lips) but it does lack contrast (which in reality is more important to perceived sharpness than resolving detail).

One of the joys of the m4/3 primes is that they are super sharp wide open which is a novel thing with fast primes. The most modern lenses seem to be better (and I note the charts or your lens looks good) but they are never so good wide open.

Maybe focus isn't 100% but it's difficult to tell at this resolution - could it be her arm is in better focus than the eyes?
 
Tracking may be fine but if you're not setting the shutter speed yourself then you're relying on the camera to get it right - don't. For fast moving kids set a commensurate shutter speed.
Of note I just sent back the 50mm back because it was soft wide open, unlike my trusty, razor sharp Sigma 30mm.
The shots you've posted look fine to me.......
 
Any shots I post are out of camera jpegs on the highest (fine) full 24mp. Ok here is one where I took 3 in a row (not bursts) with eye focus and the camera confirmed lock on the eye on each one. Yes it is "only" 1/80th but I asked him to pose still and he did plus steady shot was on.

EDIT: You can't really tell. Hang on I will upload 100% crop of eyes.
 

Attachments

  • 1.jpg
    1.jpg
    72.3 KB · Views: 103
  • 2.jpg
    2.jpg
    72.5 KB · Views: 95
  • 3.jpg
    3.jpg
    75 KB · Views: 97
I'm certain there's a video about exactly this on you tube iirc. Some guy takes his a6000 back to the shop and they resolve the issue by changing a setting in the menu. I'm not 100% sure about this but I know it surprised me when I saw it.

Hope this helps

Andy (y)
 
clicktor said:
Any shots I post are out of camera jpegs on the highest (fine) full 24mp..
Click to expand...

Don't shoot jpeg then. It throws away tons of data and makes images looks soft
 
whats the iso?
the boy looks noisey at 100%, could be noise reduction softening stuff

other thing to is if your in af c some sony cams hunt continously
 
^^Thats it...it's a setting to do with noise reduction that sorted out the problem for the guys a6000 in the you tube video. Do a search and you should be able to find it along with how it was rectified.
 
daugirdas said:
Don't shoot jpeg then. It throws away tons of data and makes images looks soft
Click to expand...
I've never found a problem with A6000 jpegs, indeed I never use RAW with that camera. Mine are not soft, especially with the Sigma 30mm.
I've also tried to use A6000 eye detection AF and given up - I've never found the results satisfactory and stick with Face detection or selecting focus points myself.
Further, I'd never use a speed as slow as 1/80 for any sort of kids' photo.
 
Thats high ISO noise reduction causing lack of fine detail/smearing, shoot RAW. As has been said, the shutter speed is to slow. I use AFC with a single point and move it as required or subject tracking if the subject is far away enough that I know I will have enough DOF for the subject to be in focus.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the comments.

'F-Stop' said:
^^Thats it...it's a setting to do with noise reduction that sorted out the problem for the guys a6000 in the you tube video. Do a search and you should be able to find it along with how it was rectified.
Click to expand...

Hmm. Ok, something to think about.

davek said:
I've never found a problem with A6000 jpegs, indeed I never use RAW with that camera. Mine are not soft, especially with the Sigma 30mm.
I've also tried to use A6000 eye detection AF and given up - I've never found the results satisfactory and stick with Face detection or selecting focus points myself.
Further, I'd never use a speed as slow as 1/80 for any sort of kids' photo.
Click to expand...

Forget that they are kids for a minute. I deliberately posted examples of there the kids were specifically told to pose for a second. They were as still as any adult would be. So think about what shutter speeds you would use for general portraiture. I would like to think 1/80 would be fine but yes, ok, point taken it could have been faster. The first example posted of the girl is 1/250th and still the eyes are not sharp.

twist said:
Thats high ISO noise reduction causing lack of fine detail/smearing, shoot RAW. As has been said, the shutter speed is to slow. I use AFC with a single point and move it as required or subject tracking if the subject is far away enough that I know I will have enough DOF for the subject to be in focus.
Click to expand...

1: I thought RAW would look even softer naturally. Is this not the case?
2: Sony RAW is not quite RAW is it? They are not lossless?
3: The ISO on the girl is 100 and the boy is 320. Hardly "high ISO". Are you saying that Noise reduction runs all the time unless turned off and is causing the smearing?

I won't be keeping the camera if the solution to shooting JPEGs that are not sharp is to shoot RAW. That's not acceptable to me.
 
I don't think that the first shots you posted are blurred - the 100% crop shows the eyelashes which is fine IMO. I know its hard not to pixel peep, but realistically no one you show the photos to will ask for a 100% crop :)
 
clicktor said:
1: I thought RAW would look even softer naturally. Is this not the case?
2: Sony RAW is not quite RAW is it? They are not lossless?
3: The ISO on the girl is 100 and the boy is 320. Hardly "high ISO". Are you saying that Noise reduction runs all the time unless turned off and is causing the smearing?

I won't be keeping the camera if the solution to shooting JPEGs that are not sharp is to shoot RAW. That's not acceptable to me.
Click to expand...

1. No, because if the noise reduction is causing smearing then RAW is better and sharpen in post when required.
2. You'll not see the difference
3. The girl shot does look sharper (theres not much wrong with that photo in terms of sharpness) and the smearing is more evident in the boy shot and it looks as if theres very slight movement.

Yes, the camera is processing the image so it will be applying some sort of noise reduction all the time. If you must shoot jpg turn it off and check results again or try RAW + jpg and compare your results.

I think youve already decided the camera isnt for you.
 
Last edited:
twist said:
1. No, because if the noise reduction is causing smearing then RAW is better and sharpening in post IF required, I dont need to sharpen my A6k and 50 or 35mm shots at all.
2. You'll not see the difference
3. The girl shot does look sharper (theres not much wrong with that photo in terms of sharpness) and the smearing is more evident in the boy shot and it looks as if theres very slight movement.

Yes, the camera is processing the image so it will be applying some sort of noise reduction all the time. If you must shoot jpg turn it off and check results again or try RAW + jpg and compare your results.

I think youve already decided the camera isnt for you.
Click to expand...

Well I want it to be for me because I don't currently own anything else and threw all my eggs in this basket and purchased a 55-210 as well. :( If the basics aren't there and I can't take pictures that are sharp without major effort then no, I don't want it. I'm going to do some more tests today. Maybe I am expecting too much. I just turned off noise reduction completely as it was set to NORMAL, as opposed to low or off. When set to off, I can see a clear difference in more noise/grain obviously but I'm not seeing it obviously smudge/smear details to be honest. I guess I need to manually focus as best I can to eradicate this as focus issue or something else.
 
clicktor said:
Well I want it to be for me because I don't currently own anything else and threw all my eggs in this basket and purchased a 55-210 as well. :( If the basics aren't there and I can't take pictures that are sharp without major effort then no, I don't want it. I'm going to do some more tests today. Maybe I am expecting too much. I just turned off noise reduction completely as it was set to NORMAL, as opposed to low or off. When set to off, I can see a clear difference in more noise/grain obviously but I'm not seeing it obviously smudge/smear details to be honest. I guess I need to manually focus as best I can to eradicate this as focus issue or something else.
Click to expand...

Check out the link I posted, I can see quite a big difference at ISO400, noise reduction at OFF looks and acceptable compromise between NORMAL and RAW.

Dont give up on the A6k AF, its very good, it just needs to be set correctly to be effective, WIDE is fine for slower lenses but not for fast primes where focus is critical. Use flexible spot or center and C-AF for moving subjects and S-AF flexible spot or center for still subjects.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c18PHEa5cUo
 
clicktor said:
Yep, thanks swift. I will shoot raw and check. Currently my Adobe doesn't want to open the files as I'm using old version.
Click to expand...

Good luck with it mate, its a really nice camera once youve figured it out, best mirrorless AF Ive used and Ive used a lot of them.

I think the A6000 comes with some RAW software so you could try that before spending, I also think Capture One Express is free for Sony users.
 
Last edited:
I just compared RAW to JPEG with NR set to off and even with it "off" the raw file is cleaner. I'm not sure how much of it is just basic JPEG compression though. When viewing images at normal size, if anything the JPEGs look nicer which is to be expected as they are less grainy. I'm quite surprised by the lack of sharpness in the JPEGs even with it set to fine. I expected RAW to look poor without processing but actually it looks to have better detail and just the cast/white balance needs more tweaking.

But, I don't really want to shoot RAW when I can shoot Fuji or Olympus JPEGs which in my experience are very good.

I'm not convinced it's so much to do with the above. It feels like a focus issue. Hmm. Dunno what to do now. Practice with it I guess.
 
Could I suggest sitting your "model" in front of a bright window in the house and take some shots there with a reasonable shutter speed (1/80 is too slow I think for 50mm even with OIS). With good lighting, a fast shutter and an excellent camera you should get a great result on your eyelashes etc. And try stopping down your lens a bit too and see if that makes a difference.
Without sounding like a broken record my jpegs are razor sharp with my 30mm, wide open.
Worth a try.
 
I agree with @davek. 1/80 is too slow for a portrait shot - even people trying to stand still and pose move a bit, your hand may move causing a blur. Did you shot at 1/80 in similar situations with previous cameras and get results you were happy with? Try a slightly higher shutter speed for the posed shots (1/125), and much faster if the kids are moving (1/320 or quicker), and see if this improves things for you.

As others have already pointed out, there's nothing wrong with the sharpness of the first shot (taken at 1/250).

ETA: IS won't be any help if the subject is moving, it will only help reduce camera shake.
 
Last edited:
I'm a Canon man myself clicktor, but I've been reading this thread with interest.

I'm sure you don't have, or maybe want to, have the time processing each image by using raw, to get images you are happy with.

You should be getting sharp, well exposed jpeg images pretty much straight out of this camera if you are using one of the Auto modes (Program Av Sp )

I personally would start again, but this time:

1. Change the subject to something central and static, with good contrast for the focus to grab
2. Get more light on your subject
3. Make sure you get a decent shutter speed for aperture used (1/100 rule)
4. Use the single shot AF mode and central focus point on your subject
6. Choose ISO 100
5. Use a tripod
6 Use the self timer to avoid shake

Starting from the widest aperture take a shot every half stop till you get to F8

Compare each shot at each aperture value to determine whether it's you or the camera at fault.
 
Heres a big tip for a jpg shooter using Lightroom. There are RAW camera profiles that simulate the jpg files very accurately, so you don't need to know anything, you have all the benefit of RAW in terms of recovery and sharpness but with the processing (colour / contrast / levels) of the jpg files with 1 click!

It would be well worth your while to download the latest Lightroom trial to see how these work for you instead of dumping the system.
 
theres dxo too, which u can use fairly half heartidly to batch convert raw files with a bunch of corrections easily

other things i can think of is try setting the camera on a tripod or something stable, 100 iso, 2 sec delay or longer and shoot at something static with a bunch of detail, teddy bear or something

oh and a cheap uv filter will degrade the image too, worth mentioning that

given the high res sensor it will have noise even at 100 iso, and f7.1 is about just below diffraction limit

try another lens, sonys quality control on lenses hasnt been good for a year or more :/

you might be able to configure the jpg with extra sharpening in camera, but im not sure
 
I will have a play around tonight with the cam. Maybe it's just the 50mm is not a good copy.
 
It does seem more than likely it could be the lens, but how does this lens fair compared to others on DXO mark? I have to agree the first test shots with the girl does seem acceptable. As so it should, because out in the field is what matters when shooting.
 
All the photos look like expect. Maybe my bar is set too low. I don't think that any of the lenses for this camera are that great.
 
The focus box size often seems too large and I can't make it any smaller. In fact, it's not adjustable in any mode from what I can see? Often I will aim for an eye to be in focus but the focus area box is covering much more than the eye so picks up hair/nose etc and misses focus.
 
clicktor said:
The focus box size often seems too large and I can't make it any smaller. In fact, it's not adjustable in any mode from what I can see?
Click to expand...

Pretty sure with flexible spot you can change box size from S/M/L
 
One of the worst features of the A6000 is the random menu layout. I really don't want to have to spend time programming the custom functions. I want the key ones in the right place to start with. Going back to a Canon after using a Sony made me realise the clever choices Canon had made.

I actually have a cheat sheet on my phone so I can locate the menu items I want.
 
Neil Pho said:
One of the worst features of the A6000 is the random menu layout. I really don't want to have to spend time programming the custom functions. I want the key ones in the right place to start with. Going back to a Canon after using a Sony made me realise the clever choices Canon had made.

I actually have a cheat sheet on my phone so I can locate the menu items I want.
Click to expand...

You spent all the time creating a cheat sheet for your phone, instead of seconds customising keys and making your life far easier :confused:

The Fn key and 4 way dial on the back allow access to 99% of whats required anyway.
 
Reading this thread... and no undue disrespect meant, but.. I'm beginning to seriously wonder If the Sony and indeed this sort of camera is suitable?

These higher end enthusiast type cameras aren't suitable for everyone and maybe a more automated compact camera used exclusively in green square mode or indeed a smart phone might be the way forward? Pin sharp and in focus action shots of the children may be pretty much impossible but maybe short videos are the way forward and on the positive side there'll be less need to dive into menus or to read the manual as is generally required with the more advanced and more complicated and more customisable higher end cameras like the Sony A6x series.
 
Neil Pho said:
One of the worst features of the A6000 is the random menu layout. I really don't want to have to spend time programming the custom functions. I want the key ones in the right place to start with. Going back to a Canon after using a Sony made me realise the clever choices Canon had made.

I actually have a cheat sheet on my phone so I can locate the menu items I want.
Click to expand...

I suspect that someone used to a Sony would say similar things on using a Canon for the first time - each manufacturer has a different way of doing things (sometimes the same thing has a different name with a different manufacturer as well, just to increase the confusion).

The A6000 is an amazing little camera, and using as a small and light alternative to my A900 I found the controls a bit strange at first, but soon got to grips with them - the biggest issue is the huge range of options - and the solution of allowing the end user to program a set of custom buttons, plus the Fn quick menu (also customisable) means everyone can set it up in a way that suits them.

Interestingly, I have the 50 f/1.8 and have not experienced the problems you are seeing - last week we had a circus visit my daughters school, so was taking a number of shots of the performance using both the 50 f/1.8 and 55-210 - low light, but AF seemed good on both single spot and wide.

Dyxum gives the 50 f/1.8 a decent rating, so I woudl suspect that either there is a problem with the set-up of your A6000, or the copy of the 50 you have.
 
how much do you actually need to change all the time?

iso can be left on auto most of the time, aperture proierty or manual for most things, on my mums i set c1 for exposure comp, the main dial adjusts aperature, and in manual the rear wheel next to screen will adjust shutter speed

ael? is set to magnify for manual focusing, and c2/c3 is set to benign stuff so if accidently pressed she wont get in a pickle xD

the custom memory functions are quite handy, you need to set them up in the normal modes then menue dive and save them to 1 of 3 slots, which isnt alot

1 is hdr, 2 black and white, 3 different focusing mode. to bring them up u just go to mr on the dial, hit ok and choose a number
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top