Newborn shots but questions about Canon 50mm f1.8

GadgetRick

Not sure were to post this so sorry in advance if it's the wrong place.

So, long story short, we have a surprise nephew in the family. I figured I'd shoot some newborn shots (he's 2 weeks old today) and I figured I'd give my 50mm f1.8 a shot as I've not used it much in the past because, well, I just find it to be way to soft. Not to mention I HATE the AF with it. Figured I could try and get a little creative with a large aperture, etc.

Set up in my living room. Canon 580 EX II bouncing off the ceiling. Was shooting wide open (f1.8). Now, I understand no lens is its sharpest wide open. However, I shoot wide open with my 28-70 f2.8 L all of the time and it's plenty sharp. So I still feel I should get a little better sharpness out of this lens but have never been able to. I haven't tried to micro adjust it--will try that before I get rid of the lens though.

Anyway, focus point should be on the eyes in all photos unless I made a mistake. Just showing what I mean by softness in the photos.

Also, shot him in a basket with a bunch of yarn in it. I did that because my wife's mother--her parents are taking care of the baby, part of the long story) knits like crazy and I thought it would be cute for her.

Here are the photos:

1: Not sure what the sploches on the leg is... (one of the LR3 preset settings)


2:



3:


4: This one is especially soft. I'm thinking this one was my fault but not sure.


5:


6: Another VERY soft one--softer than the others anyway.


7:


He wasn't really moving for the bulk of these shots so I don't see it being subject movement. Just not liking this lens...

Nikonic1

Can you post some image info (EXIF) so we can see what settings you're using? Some of these look like they may be soft due to the slightest bit of movement. Another thing....DOF at 1.8 (at least with my Nikon version) is TINY!!! Like in #6 for example....it looks quite sharp right around his nose but starts to get soft as you get out farther from what seems to be the focal point.

Also, there is a possibility you got a bad copy of the lens I suppose, I have heard of that happening as well.

Nikonic1

After looking a little closer, #4's focus point seems to be off a tad too. The focus seems to be most on his hands/or the yarn right below. It's quite sharp there but only for a small amount, likely due to the tiny DOF.

heatherfeather

Yep. 1.8 is too shallow for you to get more than the tip of his eyelashes in focus from that distance, and definately wouldn't get two eyes in focus.
You were at ISO 100... why not go to at least 3.0 or more and ISO 400-600 ish... Shooting under 2.0 really takes a great deal of practice and a steady hand and is quite hard to pull off.

(It isn't the lens... there are sharp spots in your photos.)

Hackbone

A 50mm lens wide open will give you less of an area in focus compared to a 70-200 wide open which will have a greater area of focus. That one redish ball of yarn by his right hand seems to be in focus alot compared to him. It seems as you camera was focusing there instead of him.

GadgetRick

Hmm, ok, I can handle operator error. I knew the dof would be very shallow--was trying to play with that--maybe it was a bit more shallow than I thought. I'll have to work with this lens a bit more to get to know it I guess. I just don't use it much because I've found it not to be terribly sharp (even at smaller apertures) so it's been sitting in my bag. Just figured I'd work with it a bit.

Thanks for the comments. Exactly what I was looking for.

Nikonic1

For comparison's sake, here's a shot I took of my niece with my 50mm 1.8, @ f/1.8.

You can see how much having some distance from your subject has an affect on how much of the frame is in focus. Shot wide open, the 50mm can be quite sharp with some practice in finding its sweet spot. It's certainly a great low price lens. It'd be a shame to get rid of it.

met

When I first started playing with my 50mm, I tried to shoot almost exclusively at 1.8 - both for practice and because for some reason I thought wide open was best. I have found that I prefer it at least at 2.0 and it quickly became my favorite lens. Here's an example at 2.0 with a little distance.

ckaspar

I did a little "math" using my DoF calculator on my Iphone.

With a 50mm lens at 1.8 and, I will assume, 5 feet away from the subject you hav a DoF of .2 feet which comes to 2.4 inches.

Now lets assume you had the same settings at 2.5 feet. That gives you .05 feet or .6 inches.

I use a 50 1.8 for shooting r/c car racing all of the time and I am typically 6-8 feet away and it provides me enough DoF to get the whole car in sharp focus and I shoot at 1/200 or even below.

I suspect it was a DoF issue and not a lens or handling issue. I bet even at 1/200 if would not have created that soft of a shot when the baby moved. It is simply a matter of trying to fit too deep of a subject in a small field.

My .02

Agnieszka

heatherfeather wrote: »

You were at ISO 100... why not go to at least 3.0 or more and ISO 400-600 ish... Shooting under 2.0 really takes a great deal of practice and a steady hand and is quite hard to pull off.

Totally agree

Btw. love the yarn idea, BUT whyyyyy didn't take you the labels away??? :cry Haha. I think that would have looked much better ... the labels somewhat distract (my) eye.

GadgetRick

Agnieszka wrote: »

Totally agree

Btw. love the yarn idea, BUT whyyyyy didn't take you the labels away??? :cry Haha. I think that would have looked much better ... the labels somewhat distract (my) eye.

I agree with the labels needing to come off. I thought about doing that, unfortunately, I wasn't, "authorized," to do so. Gotta keep the mother-in-law happy ya know.

awoo

Baby laying in soft yarn - great idea for newborn photo shoot!! adorable.