Photos always slightly blurry/not crisp

[Lintu]

I shoot with a Canon Rebel T1i and the 50mm 1.8 prime lens.  I have the ISO on auto (which usually comes out at 1600) and usually shoot in AV mode.  Because I'm often shooting indoors, and especially in the evenings around here there's not a TON of natural light, I shoot using a pretty wide open aperture. 

Example:



Is there anything I can/should be doing to get more crisp shots?

[GeekMaster]

That high an ISO causes graininess which could blur the outlines.

I would not use auto ISO, instead set it to no more than 400 (800 when you absolutely have to get the shot and the lighting is very low) for indoors.  In fact, when you can get away with it, do not use higher than 200.  A tripod will, or course, allow you to use slower shutter speeds along with the lower ISO values.

[badger]

She's probably photographing the kids a lot. I have a similar situation and slow shutter speeds aren't a great option with quick moving little people.

[Richard21142]

If you have photoshop, you could play with the contrast, saturation, etc.  It is a really good picture, though.

[GeekMaster]

She's probably photographing the kids a lot. I have a similar situation and slow shutter speeds aren't a great option with quick moving little people.

All too true.  That photo, however, looks well lit enough to have used 400ASA.

[Lintu]

I'll give it a try with the ISO and see.  I can set up the same lighting and give it a go.

[radial]

Try a flash.  The thing I notice about that photo is that the couch cushion at pretty much the same focal plane as the kids is in sharp focus.  Kids are not because they were moving and your shutter speed was (necessarily) too low to filter out the movement.  With a flash, you'll be shooting at a much higher shutter speed, and that should freeze the motion. 

[Lintu]

Try a flash.  The thing I notice about that photo is that the couch cushion at pretty much the same focal plane as the kids is in sharp focus.  Kids are not because they were moving and your shutter speed was (necessarily) too low to filter out the movement.  With a flash, you'll be shooting at a much higher shutter speed, and that should freeze the motion. 

Flash will definitely improve some of these issues, but then I don't like how the lighting looks

[Roxy Poodle]

I've been working on a concert photography tutorial for the last week or so. Your challenges are similar -- low light, moving subjects, etc. -- so I imagine a lot of the same principles would apply. The moral of the story in most circumstances for (fan) concert photography goes a little something like this: With the camera in manual mode:

- Shoot as wide open as possible.

- Shoot at the slowest possible shutter speed that will result in usable photos.

- Shoot at the highest possible ISO that will result in usable photos.

If you're not able to get usable photos at those settings (i.e., if they're still too dark), then I think your only options are to use a flash or to take your pictures outside during the day. My old NEX-7 had a couple different options for the flash. It wasn't just a single high-powered flash that would blow everybody out of the water; there were a couple different strengths I could choose between. Maybe your camera has something like that, thus making flash photography a little more pleasing to the eye?

Some other thoughts:

- Are you shooting single shots, or in bursts? If you're shooting singles, try burst mode. I find that at slower shutter speeds, even just pressing the shutter button can cause camera shake. The first and last shots are always worst when I'm in burst mode. The middle ones are usually clear.

- Does your camera use in-body or lens-based image stabilization? If it's in-body, make sure it's turned on.

- Lastly, radial's comment about the couch cushion being in focus is sticking with me. To my (I emphasize, untrained!) eye, only the hands really look like motion blur. The rest just looks slightly out of focus. I most commonly shoot with a 45mm f/1.8 lens, and I've found it's a really tricky lens to use. The depth of field is so extraordinarily shallow, that I have to be very precise about the focus point. I'm nearly always using auto-focus (because at concerts, my camera is often up over my head). If you're using auto-focus, could it simply be that the camera choosing the wrong place to focus? If this is a new lens, maybe it's just a matter of getting a little better accustomed to how it works?

[radial]

Roxy makes a good point about the auto-focus feature being the possible culprit.  Just for fun, google the name of your camera and "auto focus problems."  Might get some ideas that way.  You could try using manual focus on a few shots and see if it makes a difference. 

[Run Amok]

I don't know anything about photography but my first thought was camera shake (pressing the button is definitely enough to cause blurring) and/or auto focus. My little point and shoot (that does low light really well) does best if I chose the focal point and if I set it on something solid, or use burst mode.

[omega lambda]

The whole image looks soft to me.  I don't know, maybe part of the sofa is sharp?  Hard to tell.  Do you have the shutter speed for that photo?

Have you looked at the image at 100%?  Is any part of the image sharp?  Also, as Roxy says, f/1.8 is pretty shallow, and when you're close to the subject you will definitely see the depth of field.  You can see it in this photo; it is sharper at the front and gradually oof towards the back.  I wouldn't say that it is auto-focus that is the problem, but too many focus points and the camera is picking the wrong subject on which to focus (the closest thing, which in this case is the sofa).  Switch to center focus point only, and always focus on their eyes. 

Also, there's a distance difference between your photos and Roxy's.  Her photos at f/1.8 will have a lot more depth of field than yours because you're much closer to your subject, so getting the focus exactly right is much more important.

[rocketgirl]

I don't know anything about photography but my first thought was camera shake (pressing the button is definitely enough to cause blurring) and/or auto focus. My little point and shoot (that does low light really well) does best if I chose the focal point and if I set it on something solid, or use burst mode.

1.  I simply cannot take a low light or zoom photo without setting the camera on something.  But my hands do actually shake a little.

[sonet]

- Lastly, radial's comment about the couch cushion being in focus is sticking with me. To my (I emphasize, untrained!) eye, only the hands really look like motion blur. The rest just looks slightly out of focus. I most commonly shoot with a 45mm f/1.8 lens, and I've found it's a really tricky lens to use. The depth of field is so extraordinarily shallow, that I have to be very precise about the focus point. I'm nearly always using auto-focus (because at concerts, my camera is often up over my head). If you're using auto-focus, could it simply be that the camera choosing the wrong place to focus? If this is a new lens, maybe it's just a matter of getting a little better accustomed to how it works?

Agree

This is absolutely a focusing problem as opposed to motion blur. The f/1.8 lens has a DOF measured in inches when that close. The focus is clearly on the sofa a little in front of the kids. So either you had the wrong focus point set or the auto focus is not functioning properly or is not fast enough. An f/1.8 lens demands a ton of practice (or luck) to get sharp shots. I always use the center focus point as i seem to get the best results there. Also, sometimes just backing it off to 2.0 helps. That should still get enough light for most scenes.

Why not shoot 100% manual? That way you get to choose your own ISO, Av and Tv settings that will suit what you are trying to capture. The camera is not smart enough to know what you are trying to accomplish. Just choose the shutter speed you need to freeze action, and the Aperture to set the DOF you are looking for. Then adjust the ISO to make sure you get the correct exposure. You may have to play with the Aperture setting if the ISO gets too high to help avoid grain. Then again I always shoot at 3200 ISO with my f/1.8 for indoor gymnastics. There are some great noise reduction add-ons for Photoshop out there that totally eliminate the grain.
 

[Mrtambourineman]

My first reaction was that its a focus issue too.  I don't know about 1600 ISO being a big deal - I was using a friends new T3i the other day at high ISO's and the shots were coming out very clear compared to my Rebel XT.  My neighbour has been showing me some of the shots he's taking with natural light at super high ISO's with his new 1D and they are amazingly sharp (i.e., ISO 20,000 plus).  You may also want to play with your white balance to remove that yellow tone from the photos (unless that's intentional). 

[moroccangirl]

Lintu you should check out a bounce flash. My DH bought me an SB400 (Hi Ellen!) and it makes the lighting so nice and soft when we're inside. And my living room is dark. I'll try to post a pic later with and without it.

[badger]

Lintu you should check out a bounce flash. My DH bought me an SB400 (Hi Ellen!) and it makes the lighting so nice and soft when we're inside. And my living room is dark. I'll try to post a pic later with and without it.

Please do!

[moroccangirl]

This isn't a great example but you can still tell a difference. The one with the bounce flash is softer.

With regular on-camera flash


With bounce flash

[moroccangirl]

I meant to do a better one this evening, but it was melt down city.

[Lintu]

Oh, great idea, mg!!