 Chris W. |
Grainy, Not Contrasty, Soft Edges in Photos Howdy, I recently took pictures at a wedding. I used 400 speed film and used my tamron 70-300 lens all day. The weather ranged from overcast to bright sun. I metered all subjects by using their faces for light readings. I used the lens on AF setting with the body on "program", although I used a custom function to isolate one small section of the screen to take light readings (Canon eos Elan allows one of seven focus boxes to take light readings if you program it in). I did use a focal range averaging 100-300 mm. Now the problem with the finished pictures was that they just didn't have the crispness of a perfectly focused picture. Many of the edges on faces were slightly hazy even though many of the subjects were posed and not moving. Most, if not all, of the pictures were also very grainy. The black tuxedos were not true black at all, but appear grainy in color. We have a trip to Alaska planned for later this year and we don't want our pictures to turn out that way! Should we invest in a new lens, try slower/different brand film (I used fuji 400), or just stay away from the longer focal lengths on the zoom? please help!
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jeff S. Kennedy |
Well, I'm not familiar with the lens but I would guess it's not the sharpest one around so that may account for some of the softness. Since you were shooting on program do you know what your shutter speed was? It could have been setting it too low to handhold. Buy a book on exposure so you don't have to use program. 400 speed film will tend to be grainy. From your description it sounds like your shots were underexposed. Again this is a metering problem. If your subjects were Caucasians and you used their faces to meter then your shots would come out underexposed by one stop. When metering Caucasian skin you need to add a stop of exposure.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jon Close |
(a) Most 70-300's are not as sharp at maximum aperture (f/4-5.6) as they are stopped down 1 or 2 stops (f/5.6-8) (b) Most 70-300's are not as sharp in the 150-300 focal length range as they are at 70-150. (c) When shooting hand-held you need a shutter speed of at least 1/focal length to eliminate blurriness or unsharpness that is due to camera shake. At 100mm you should use 1/100 or faster, at 300mm you should use 1/300 or faster. (d) The partial metering of the Elan 7/7e is an area around the focus mark = to about 9.5% of the total viewfinder area, much larger than the focus box. Partial metering gives the correct exposure for a subject that is "18% (medium) gray". If the metering area was mostly filled with a Caucasian face, you should get the right exposure. If it was filled with the white of the bridal gown or other white objects (about 2 stops brighter than 18% gray) then you'll be underexposed, which will cause excessive graininess. If the metering area was mostly filled with the black of a tuxedo then you'll be overexposed by a couple stops, but that usually doesn't cause much of a problem for 400 speed consumer print films. The partial metering should only be used if you are very familiar with how and when to use exposure compensation. Otherwise you'll more likely to get better results using the 35-zone evaluative meter. Enjoy Alaska!
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jon Close |
I goofed on the caucasian face thing. ;-) Jeff K. is right. Caucasian face (or the palm of your hand) is 18% gray + 1 stop.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Chris W. |
Thanks so much for your quick response. I did fail to mention that the pictures were developed at a 1 hr photo processor (don't hate me). Also, I used partial metering since most conditions at the wedding were backlit. There was plenty of light out and shutter speeds were well over focal length. I don't know if this will make a difference, but someone is taking the negatives to a reputable camera store and reprinting them. Maybe that will make a difference too? Thanks again for your help. Chris
|
|
|
|
||
|
Tracy Smith |
Hi, Chris. Obviously this is just my opinion, but I wanted to comment on the 1 hr processing. I have very little concept of delayed gratification when it comes to my pictures, so I've mostly always gone to a 1 hr processor. Most I've hated! However, I have found one particular 1hr machine that I like...the new Fuji Frontier processer!! I've found a photography place that takes very good care of my negatives and they use this processor. So, my point is...if you can find yourself a professional place to go to that uses a top of the line machine, you can get really nice prints even in an hour. Also...make sure the people processing your prints know that skin tones are what you are concerned about in your prints.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Tom Darmody |
Chris- Have you ever gotten sharp photographs from that lens? 70mm to 300mm is quite a range to cram into one lens. I know I sound like a broken record, but if you want crisp sharp photographs you need to use a prime lens. I hear the argument all the time that a zoom offers more variety than a prime, and you have to lug around a bunch of lenses. While both arguments are valid to a degree, do you want "good" photographs or slightly out focus grainy photographs? Do you really think you can replace $2000 worth of lenses for $300? Your trading clarity, resolution, detail, tone, and quality when you use a "super zoom."
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||