[WMBP]

I don't know whether this is relevant, but I used (still do) have the same problem, and after some (a lot) of troubleshooting, I found that at the moment of depressing the shutter my hand would move a little, to the right and down, and thus rarely had any precisely focused pictures!

This is a good point. Bad technique can cause a variety of problems.

It certainly is the best idea to test using a tripod, since only then do you completely eliminate bad camera-holding technique as a factor. If you use a tripod, though, you'll have to use a cable release or at least a timed release. I vaguely remember talking once to an amateur who was getting blurry photos even on a tripod. Apparently the photographer was mashing the shutter button pretty hard.

Still, it should be possible to take tack sharp photos without a tripod, if you use a fast enough shutter speed. I just walked outside and took some photos while I was actually walking. Shutter was 1/500th sec and the photos were sharp. Boring, but sharp.

*

I'd add one more thing to my earlier post. If your images really aren't turning out sharp, ever, then there probably is a problem somewhere - with the photographer or the lens or the camera or something - that should be found and fixed. But it's possible to make a fetish of sharpness. To expect too much. Somebody in this forum used to have a signature with the line "We live in the age of the oversharpened image." It was/is true. You just need your images to be sharp enough, sharp enough that they don't look like they they're out of focus. Beyond that, it starts to look unnatural.

Will

[flyer]

Just a thought. Everybody is trying to find a solution within the camera/lens system, but did you have an eye exam, lately? It might be a shot in the dark, but...

[jimH]

The 3rd photo is pretty much in focus and my guess is that you need to set your aperture to about F8 or F11 to get that crisp sharpness. Looking at the Bokeh on the first two photos tells me you had your aperture at about F2.8. Hope this helps.

I agree! I set my Hyper Program settings to use the f-stop and shutter speed settings to obtain the sharpest settings for the lens that I am using. The aperture will rarely be set on the smallest available aperture. Generally some aperture somewhere in the mid range will give the sharpest focus.

[jimH]

This is a good point. Bad technique can cause a variety of problems.

It certainly is the best idea to test using a tripod, since only then do you completely eliminate bad camera-holding technique as a factor. If you use a tripod, though, you'll have to use a cable release or at least a timed release. I vaguely remember talking once to an amateur who was getting blurry photos even on a tripod. Apparently the photographer was mashing the shutter button pretty hard.

Still, it should be possible to take tack sharp photos without a tripod, if you use a fast enough shutter speed. I just walked outside and took some photos while I was actually walking. Shutter was 1/500th sec and the photos were sharp. Boring, but sharp.

*

I'd add one more thing to my earlier post. If your images really aren't turning out sharp, ever, then there probably is a problem somewhere - with the photographer or the lens or the camera or something - that should be found and fixed. But it's possible to make a fetish of sharpness. To expect too much. Somebody in this forum used to have a signature with the line "We live in the age of the oversharpened image." It was/is true. You just need your images to be sharp enough, sharp enough that they don't look like they they're out of focus. Beyond that, it starts to look unnatural.

Will

I've noticed that my ability to hold the camera steady and not pull to one side when I trigger the shutter has decreased considerably since my early thirties. I find that I need to lean on something or steady myself a bit in order to get a critically sharp shot. Though, a good lens can help a lot too.

[WMBP]

Just a thought. Everybody is trying to find a solution within the camera/lens system, but did you have an eye exam, lately? It might be a shot in the dark, but...

Autofocus should work as well for a blind person as for someone with 20/20 vision.

[flyer]

Autofocus should work as well for a blind person as for someone with 20/20 vision.

If I take off my glasses, I can't see where I autofocus, and with my glasses, it's difficult to see the info below the viewfinder screen. Some people will take off their glasses because of that, thinking the AF will be alright, but if you can't see where you aim... And,no, the diopter adjustment won't cut it for me.

[HGMonaro]

Apparently the photographer was mashing the shutter button pretty hard.

hehe! I was watching my mother-in-law take a pic the other day and she was getting an inch or more 'run up' with her shutter finger... I advised her just to gently squeeze it!!!

[WMBP]

If I take off my glasses, I can't see where I autofocus, and with my glasses, it's difficult to see the info below the viewfinder screen. Some people will take off their glasses because of that, thinking the AF will be alright, but if you can't see where you aim... And,no, the diopter adjustment won't cut it for me.

Well, I'm all in favor of photographers have their eyes examined. Some of us ought to have our heads examined fairly thoroughly, but that's another topic.

However, if you set the autofocus point to the center, then you don't have to wonder about it. Unless you are having trouble finding the center of the finder, which I suppose is possible.

Will

[KierraElizabeth]

You know, this thread is cracking me up, because I really think that some of the simple solutions may be exactly my problem, whether it be camera movement or the eye exam (I actually did have an exam about 2 months ago, but haven't gotten around to buying new contacts and glasses yet... ops:
Alright, so I will do some text trial shoots, making sure to be very careful not to move the camera, and maybe adjusting the diopter for the slight correction between my current glasses and the Rx I need. I also have a AF lens on its way to me. (Which was the case before starting this thread, but will hopefully help anyway.) Thanks for all the help, and if there are any other suggestions, I will take em!

[brecklundin]

Kierra:

hahahaha....I KNOW the feeling. And remember one of the best things about digital, the "film" is, well, essentially free.

Practice, Practice....PRACTICES...

I would also recommend a couple books for a beginner trying to get a handle on exposure/shutter speed and more. I LOVE the books by a guy named Bryan Peterson. He has a number of books and they are all under $20/ea last time I checked and ya don't need them all at once. I will list them in the order I feel worked best for me, it might be different for you:

• Understanding Exposure
• Understanding Shutter Speed
• Beyond Portraiture: Creative People Photography

And here is a link to all of his books on Amazon:
Amazon.com: Bryan Peterson: Books, Biography, Blog, Audiobooks, Kindle

While all of the info in these books can be found online, I am a book and practice sort of guy...did I mention I think practice is important? hehehehe....anyway, Peterson has an easy to read way of writing which a lot of folks can relate to. I think the first two are the most important for me. The third was something which sounded interesting and turned out to bring things into a clear, oh dear may the camera gawds forgive me, but the book brings everything into focus for me.

If you get into lighting techniques it can often be presented in a very overly complex fashion. I found Light: Science & Magic by Fil Hunter just an ideal book on covering lighting in depth but without the over the top physics side of things, I mean I just wanna learn to think about lighting not understand the mechanics of light. Know what I mean?

More info on lighting, beside the lighting section here, can be found on these sites:

• Strobist.comFlickr Group for Strobist.com
• Light: Science & Magic (the book) Flickr Group

I hope I am not being redundant for where you are photography wise, so if I am, sorry about that, I just wanted to pass along some sources which I return to time after time. Often just seeing a shot, reading the EXIF & photographer's description of the shot is enough to recreate or extrapolate from there to create your own technique.

Just from looking at your shots in the first post I think you have a good eye for shots already...I think the shot of the leetle one (the last shot) is just really nice.

Anyway, I hope some of this is helpful or made sense...and like ya say, the best solution is always the simplest one that works.