[pwiwe]

Hi
I don't understand why this photo is noisy and blurred.

I used auto focus, and it was taken at 1/2000 - f13. See below for more EXIF-info. Camera used was Pentax K-30 and lens was 18-135 (at 48 mm). Accidentially the ISO was set at 640.

Some photos turn out like this, but most of them are fine.

Click here for Original photo.

ExposureTime - 1/2000 secondsFNumber - 13.00
ExposureProgram - Not defined
ISOSpeedRatings - 640
FocalLength - 48.00 mm
FlashPixVersion - 0100
ColorSpace - sRGB
ExifImageWidth - 4928
ExifImageHeight - 3264
ExposureMode - Auto
White Balance - Auto
Contrast - Normal
Saturation - Normal
Sharpness - Normal
SubjectDistanceRange - Distant view


Any suggestions?

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

[Adam]

It's likely a combination of the high ISO, the narrow aperture (which results in diffraction), noise reduction (which blurs fine details), and the overall underexpose.

If you shot in raw this photo should be salvageable pretty easily.

You should probably switch to matrix metering, by the way, as center-weighted metering in bright conditions will often underexpose.

[newmikey]

Hi
I don't understand why this photo is noisy and blurred.

I used auto focus, and it was taken at 1/2000 - f13. See below for more EXIF-info. Camera used was Pentax K-30 and lens was 18-135 (at 48 mm). Accidentially the ISO was set at 640.

Some photos turn out like this, but most of them are fine.

ExposureTime - 1/2000 secondsFNumber - 13.00
ExposureProgram - Not defined
ISOSpeedRatings - 640
FocalLength - 48.00 mm
....
Any suggestions?

Lower your ISO, correct your exposure (this shot is quite underexposed), get rid of any cheap filters you may have left on your lens by accident (or on purpose), shoot at a max aperture of F8 to avoid diffraction softening your image. If tken on tripod, ensure SR is switched off. Try posting a shot which is correctly exposed. The 18-135mm is no standout for corner-to-corner sharpness but it should do perfectly fine on a landscape shot such as this.

Try ruling out human error first.

[pschlute]

It is underexposured, but I dont see much noise or bluriness in the image at all?

[savoche]

Adam and newmikey have it right. The main thing here is underexposure - the image looks a lot better just lifting the exposure. It will also look sharper if you increase the contrast some. And opening up to f/8 and setting the ISO to 100 would take care of the rest. The18-135 should be at its best around 25-70mm and quite up the task for making a good image of a scene like this.

[jatrax]

It's likely a combination of the high ISO, the narrow aperture (which results in diffraction), noise reduction (which blurs fine details), and the overall underexpose.

This ^^^^^^
Underexposure combined with a relatively high ISO will guarantee noise. Search on ETTR "Expose to the Right". You do not show a histogram but I'll bet it was heavily on the left side. The ETTR technique tells you to expose as far to the right as possible WITHOUT going over and clipping. In this shot you still had plenty of room to increase the exposure. I would try to have just a few points of pure white in those clouds, they ARE white after all. Expose for that and everything else will fall into place as best the camera can do.

[twilhelm]

My question, were you hand holding or tripod mount. If hand hold, was the shake reduction on and if so, did you allow time for it to set (green hand)? If you used a tripod, did you leave the shake reduction on? Both cases can cause a small amount of blur to your image regardless of shutter speed.

[Vasyl]

do not use auto focus or at least check where the focus point is/was.
F13 can be a problem too.

[stevebrot]

A few comments on what I saw in the EXIF:

• AF-A (release priority)...it is possible that the lens was not in focus
• AF center point was in focus
• Exposure mode was TAv...the ISO could have been set as low as 200 and still provided adequate shutter speed for hand-held at 48mm focal length. That being said, while noise is present, I don't see noise as the dominant feature of the image. I also don't consider the f/13 aperture to be a particular concern either
• SR was turned on, but the EXIF says that the photo was not stabilized ("hand" icon was not lit)
• SR half-press time was 0.0s meaning that the shutter was released immediately without time for AF or SR
• AE Lock was on (unintentional?)
• NR off
• AF fine adjust +5
• Calculated LV (light value) was 15.5

Based on the EXIF and the appearance of the photo:

• At full resolution there is some (very slight) linear blur that would indicate camera motion, perhaps from an abrupt shutter press without waiting for SR
• I see mild missed focus despite the hyperfocal being satisfied and the AF system reporting "in-focus"
• Contrast is low, possibly due to mild veiling flare and mild underexposure. This would contribute to the perception of softness. The LV 15.5 from the EXIF seems low (at least one stop) from the expected for this sort of scene.

Suggestions? AF-A is problematic, consider using AF-S (focus priority). Wait for the "hand" icon before releasing shutter when using SR. Evaluate whether the +5 AF fine adjust is appropriate. Consider moving to RAW capture where both the noise and exposure issues could be easily addressed in post processing.


Steve

[stevebrot]

You do not show a histogram but I'll bet it was heavily on the left side.

Here is the histogram (courtesy of PDCU)



I figure it to be about 1.5 stops underexposed. ExitTools reported LV of 15.5, a little low for the scene.


Steve

[pschlute]

A little bit of tidying up and its good as new.

ps you have a dust bunny showing up as a mark next to the last cloud on the left.

[mikeSF]

this one was all about the focus point. I feel like the f/13 was wasted by focusing too far back in the scene, causing insufficient depth of field to cover the foreground pond. Also, as others said, ISO 640 is unnecessary here given you had enough light to give you a fast shutter.

I would've shot at ISO 100-200, f/9-11 and focused at the back of the front pond or along that dark diagonal line somewhere. Since you were handheld, you must mitigate a quick enough shutter speed to reasonably handle camera movement, but 1/250th is sufficient.

[pschlute]

It is a shame that DOF scales are not etched on the lenses anymore, although more difficult to do with a zoom.

[stevebrot]

A little bit of tidying up and its good as new.

ps you have a dust bunny showing up as a mark next to the last cloud on the left.

Another photo "saved" in post!


Steve

[pwiwe]

Thanks for all your comments – they give me something to work and experiment with. That said, it is a handheld snapshot, and I'm usually more cautious, and I usually shoot raw. I'll check out ETTR :-).
The photo was taken on the island of Samsø, Denmark. Here's another one from Samsø that gave a more satisfying result :-)
(18mm/ƒ/7.1/1/250s/ISO 200)