# 5D Mark III Frustrated Focusing problem



## JohnFrancis (Dec 10, 2012)

I am rather frustrated with some of the shots I am getting, in particular when I have two subjects I want to get in focus, but the one closest to the camera only comes in focus?
Also what is a good setting for getting the whole frame in focus, I have only been get certain parts of an image in focus when I want to get everything in focus?
Please help
Thanks


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 10, 2012)

Sounds to me like you're using too wide an aperture, meaning too shallow a depth of field. Recommended reading: Byran Peterson's _Perfect Exposure_.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Dec 10, 2012)

JohnFrancis said:


> I am rather frustrated with some of the shots I am getting, in particular when I have two subjects I want to get in focus, but the one closest to the camera only comes in focus?
> Also what is a good setting for getting the whole frame in focus, I have only been get certain parts of an image in focus when I want to get everything in focus?
> Please help
> Thanks


Sounds like you are new to DSLR photography. I suggest you go through the videos at dslrtips.com/workshops (especailly "How to photograph landscapes with lots in focus") or just go to youtube and search for DSLR tutorials or Brian Peterson like neuroanatomist suggested. 
Some people here think that if you can afford to buy an expensive DSLR you cannot ask beginner questions ... but nothing wrong with asking questions that to some might look stupid than to remian stupid.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Dec 10, 2012)

When you get into FF sensors, you will get a much shallower depth of field than with a small sensor camera. With a point and shoot camera, for example, almost everything tends to be in focus. That makes them easy to use and get sharp in-focus shots.
With a FF DSLR, photographers use the ability to have a shallow depth of field to isolate a subject and have things in the background be out of focus.
However, there are times when you want as much as possible to be in focus, landscapes, or groups of people. In cases like this, you must use small apertures, f/8, f/11, even f/16.
Setup your camera and take several shots focusing on something fairly close with a few different apertures and you will see the difference in background focus.
Then, step back a ways and do the same thing. Notice that the depth of field is greater when you are back from your subject.
Use a combination of these techniques to control what is in focus.


----------



## M.ST (Dec 10, 2012)

It don´t sounds like an focussing issue.

It seems to be a problem with the depth of field.

Select a small aperture (big aperture number) from f/8 to f/16 to solve the problem or change the distance to the subjects.

Remember:
Everyone can shot a image with a compact camera or APS-C-DSLR and all is in focus. If you use a FF camera you have the benefit to select subjects that are in focus. I recommend to all newbies in photography: don´t buy a FF camera if you don´t have the skills to work with it and you want everytime everything in focus.


----------



## hawaiisunsetphoto (Dec 10, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Sounds to me like you're using too wide an aperture, meaning too shallow a depth of field. Recommended reading: Byran Peterson's _Perfect Exposure_.



The best book ever written


----------



## dexstrose (Dec 10, 2012)

In Byran Peterson's latest video, he cut off all is locks. I liked it better when he had the 80's hair do. Yes, that is a good read!


----------



## nwardrip (Dec 10, 2012)

I assume you are all referring to Bryan Peterson's _Understanding Exposure_?

i.e. http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Exposure-3rd-Edition-Photographs/dp/0817439390/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1355123291&sr=8-1&keywords=perfect+exposure+bryan+peterson

It does seem to be the defacto standard for beginning photographers. As an experienced photographer, I found some things quite oversimplified and some things he said that don't matter really do matter in cameras like the 5D Mark III, if you're going for maximum quality (like choosing f/22 apertures). Also, it won't tell you how to use the AF system of the 5D3, you'll want to read Canon's http://learn.usa.canon.com/resources/articles/2012/1dx_guidebook.shtml. You'll also want to search around for "5D Mark III af tutorial" on Google for more information.

All that said, you really should pick up a copy of _Understanding Exposure_ and read it.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Dec 10, 2012)

JohnFrancis said:


> I am rather frustrated with some of the shots I am getting, in particular when I have two subjects I want to get in focus, but the one closest to the camera only comes in focus?



Don't use all AF points at once, chose on and put it over the subject.



> Also what is a good setting for getting the whole frame in focus, I have only been get certain parts of an image in focus when I want to get everything in focus?
> Please help
> Thanks



stop down the aperture, try f/8 or more and don't focus too much towards the front of the scene


----------



## verysimplejason (Dec 10, 2012)

OP has deleted his account.


----------



## LewisShermer (Dec 10, 2012)

We're cyber bullies


----------



## Gothmoth (Dec 10, 2012)

well i guess he is not trolling like some clowns here think.
but i guess you guys are experts in any field... from photography to quantum physics... :

when someone comes from a P&S camera this question comes up naturally.

i have sold my share of DSLR cameras where the buyer comes back a few days later complainins that he don´t get everything in focus for his EBAY pictures.

they normaly say something like:

_my 200$ point and shoot camera has everything in focus. now with this 2000$ camera everything is blurred_ 

and i have customers who never owned a camera and buy a 5D MK2 or now MK3.. so what?
because you are poor that´s not possible?


----------



## Rat (Dec 10, 2012)

Empathy notwithstanding, OP reminds me of the woman that bought a big Winnebago motorhome, put it on cruise control, left the wheel to make herself a sandwich (or something) and was surprised the unsupervised vehicle crashed. Even won her a big settlement, but I think a little common sense goes a long way. 

If you blindly buy and things do not go as planned, there always is the chance that the fault lies with you; so you probably could expect the - very mild! - criticism in this topic. If you can't handle that, you probably really are spoiled rotten and deserving of disappointment. After all, you best learn through failure 

Unless, of course, it really was a troll. Proficient in more ways than one, in that case


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 10, 2012)

Gothmoth said:


> and i have customers who never owned a camera and buy a 5D MK2 or now MK3.. so what?
> because you are poor that´s not possible?



I am absolutely in favor of lots of people buying expensive Canon gear, that way Canon makes great profit, their execs relax and marketing can be more lenient with cutting down features on less expensive gear, and Canon can do more r&d.

But a question like from the op is great if asked in a camera store where you just have spent a lot of $$$ and think you were ripped off by some clown because you were better off with a p&s. But in an internet forum questions w/o further specifications is strange and bordering on "My friend got a Nikon, the pictures are crisper, my Canon is all dull - what do you think?"



LewisShermer said:


> We're cyber bullies



But actually it's gotten better, when I joined CR my impression that every other post was either answered with either "Begone, Nikon troll" or "Get a job, then you'll be able to afford decent gear and your problems will be over" :-o


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 10, 2012)

nwardrip said:


> I assume you are all referring to Bryan Peterson's _Understanding Exposure_?



Yes, sorry! Although...Michael Freeman's _Perfect Exposure_ is also a good read (I have both, actually).


----------



## Razor2012 (Dec 10, 2012)

For some people it might be easier to point the blame on the camera rather than admitting they are new and need help. Realistically though a person would think that someone with a top-end camera would know a certain amount of technique, but as stated before that's not always the case. The same goes for the example of a person getting a Ferrari as a first car, it shouldn't be a starter for learning how to drive. There's no rule that says a person can't have the best or whatever they can afford, but we always don't like to hear the advice so nothing is asked.


----------



## RLPhoto (Dec 10, 2012)

F/4 sounds like the solution to me.


----------



## Razor2012 (Dec 10, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> F/4 sounds like the solution to me.



Depending on how close they are and what lens they are using.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Dec 10, 2012)

dexstrose said:


> In Byran Peterson's latest video, he cut off all is locks. I liked it better when he had the 80's hair do. Yes, that is a good read!



True that.


----------



## SwampYankee (Dec 10, 2012)

Right out of the box in the "Auto-Everything mode" Scene-Intelligent-auto (the green setting on the mode dial) the camera will focus on the nearest thing. Switch the mode to "P", press the button 1/2 way down and the camera will focus on what ever the little square in the center is pointed at. I'm not trying to talk down to you but if you are new to this camera that's the first thing that comes to mind. BTW, you are going to have to read the manual on this camera.
good luck


----------



## verysimplejason (Dec 10, 2012)

Razor2012 said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > F/4 sounds like the solution to me.
> ...



+1. try F8 or F9 if at least 50mm. Long lens, of course, it will still be different.


----------



## MarkII (Dec 10, 2012)

Razor2012 said:


> There's no rule that says a person can't have the best or whatever they can afford, but we always don't like to hear the advice so nothing is asked.



Part of the problem is that many people assume that best == most expensive, rather than best == ideal solution that meets a need.

For example, for someone wanting a P&S experience but with better IQ, something more like a Nikon1 or u4/3 camera probably would probably be better than a 1DX with full set of f2.8 zooms...


----------



## Standard (Dec 10, 2012)

> Also what is a good setting for getting the whole frame in focus, I have only been get certain parts of an image in focus when I want to get everything in focus?



Since you're using a 5D Mark III John, you may want to try setting the AF to 61-Point Automatic Selection AF rather than Single-point or AF Point Expansion settings. Of course, at 61-Point Automatic Selection, the camera will still focus on the nearest subject. So if you're taking a photo of several subjects, you will want to set your aperture higher such as f/4, f/5.6 or higher. Obviously the higher the aperture setting, the more depth of field will be achieved and the longer the shutter speed will be. Also, as some have stated, this will also largely depends on the distance of the camera to subject, as well as the relation of each subject to each other. I suggest if you're taking a photo of two or more persons is to have them stand closer together with their faces as close to one plane as possible. If it's a group shot with multiple planes of people, ie. people standing front and back, I'd recommend shooting with a tripod and timer/remote. Depending on whether you're shooting in Av (aperture value) or Tv (Time value) or M (Manual) you will want to make sure the shutter speed is high enough to account for handholding shakes. If shooting with a tripod, you can set the aperture much higher, to f/8/f/11+ but you will need to have your subject hold still for the corresponding shutter speed value which will likely be longer depending on lighting. Any movement during the exposure will be out of focus. The more light available, whether existing or artificial, ie. flash, strobes, etc., will allow for the higher aperture value and faster shutter speed.

Hope this helps.


----------



## verysimplejason (Dec 10, 2012)

MarkII said:


> Razor2012 said:
> 
> 
> > There's no rule that says a person can't have the best or whatever they can afford, but we always don't like to hear the advice so nothing is asked.
> ...



That, but sometimes, you had to look in your future e.g., if you're going into serious photography. As the saying goes, the poor man always pays twice. Plan accordingly so as to avoid unnecessary acquisition.


----------



## cayenne (Dec 10, 2012)

spinworkxroy said:


> Wow, someone new into photography and already got a 5D3…yikes…reminds me of how some people's first car is a ferrari..



It isn't that big a deal...the 5D3 was my first DSLR too...and I'm having a blast with it.

I did my research, was about to get the 5D2....saw the 3 was coming out so gave me a few more months to save and research more.

But if he's like me....when jumping into something, you research it till you can quote every spec by heart...and then, try to buy the absolute best you can afford to start with...I do that with most any 'toy' I want to get.

I'm constantly amazed by this attitude about noobs buying nice equipment....why not buy the best that you can afford when getting something...?


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 10, 2012)

cayenne said:


> I'm constantly amazed by this attitude about noobs buying nice equipment....why not buy the best that you can afford when getting something...?



It's great if you've got a steady cash flow coming, as long as a beginner is not confused by the camera's options (but I doubt that even if Canon marketing uses this as a reason to cut features - like Apple computer mice with just one button).

The problem esp. with camera bodies is that when you max out your budget for some time to come with a medium or high-end body, a beginner is likely (= probability) not using the full capability. I for one am happy not to have bought the 7d two years ago, looking back at my shots I wouldn't have really profited from the added features, and now I could spend the €700 saved back then on a (better) ff body - it's just the price difference between a 5d3 and 6d.

Last not least, "the best" isn't necessary the most expensive, esp. when considering size for transport and weight - a beginner might have much less fun when dragging around a 5d3+70-200/2.8 than with a 6d and lighter lens. Ymmv of course.


----------



## mortadella (Dec 10, 2012)

cayenne said:


> spinworkxroy said:
> 
> 
> > Wow, someone new into photography and already got a 5D3…yikes…reminds me of how some people's first car is a ferrari..
> ...



Absolutely nothing wrong with getting the best you can afford.

But....

I can afford a $200 basketball shoe, but its not going to make me a better shooter. I don't think anybody would disagree with that. It takes a lot of skill which is developed by many many hours of practice. If I blame the shoes for not making my shots, it sort of implies that I expected by virtue of buying them that my shots should start falling at a higher rate - essentially I bought my way out of practicing.

I get what you're saying, but take into consideration the type of question the OP asked. This is clearly someone who knew very little to nothing about how an AF system works or what DoF is (perhaps a sign of lack of research/practice done on/with photography or using a DSLR), and yet is blaming the camera. For many enthusiasts that's not easy to take with a grain of salt. We spend a ton of time trying to get better at this and to try and create a great image, which shows a respect for the craft/art, so they are not really going to take kindly to perceived disrespect.


----------



## cayenne (Dec 10, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> <snip> - a beginner might have much less fun when dragging around a 5d3+70-200/2.8 than with a 6d and lighter lens. Ymmv of course.


Hmm...funny you should mention it, my 70-200mm f/2.8 just came in weekend before last, and so far, from the little time I've had to play with it...I like it so far!!!



Magic from that thing so far, and that was just a few snaps of my dog, and the xmas decorations up in the house....


cayenne


----------



## MarkII (Dec 10, 2012)

cayenne said:


> I'm constantly amazed by this attitude about noobs buying nice equipment....why not buy the best that you can afford when getting something...?


How much you can or want to spend isn't really the problem - it is the assumption that spending more is automatically better. What is best. Instagram? Sony RX1? D800? Leica M? Digital MF? Unless all you care about is the fashion statement, the answer depends on what and how you want to shoot - it is not a one dimensional continuum.

It is a shame that traditional bricks-and-mortar camera stores are dying out. Genuinely helpful and knowledgeable staff would might mean less posts like the one that started this thread, since not everyone spends hours reading up every possible piece of information before buying a camera


----------



## Standard (Dec 10, 2012)

Gees. Chill guys.

The original poster simply wanted to learn how to focus better. There's no reason to bash or criticize. If you have nothing to contribute or simply don't care, then don't comment. Who doesn't want better or more expensive equipment? I, myself, wish I could afford a Hasselblad H4D-60 or even a Leica M9. But I don't but I am not gonna bash someone else less skilled or judge whether that person deserve it or not. Sure it's your right to say, comment whatever you want. But remember, we all started at the bottom. As someone once said "Ask a stupid question rather than make a stupid mistake."


----------



## cocopop05 (Dec 10, 2012)

Here is my perspective. 

My first DSLR is also a 5D Mark III with 24-105 f/4 L and Speedlite 600ex-rt. I can afford to buy this system, and am learning very quickly from my mistakes and from when I do get it right, which is happening more often now, but I still have much to learn.

If I had bought a 650D, then I would make the same mistakes as I have with the 5D Mark III, but in the shots I do get right, I would have more noise, less depth of field and with slightly softer images (assuming I would not have bought an L lens to keep within a tighter budget).

I believe I get more keepers with my 5D Mark III as it one of the most well balanced DSLR's around with very few faults.

No it will not make you a better photographer, but you will likely get better results when you get it right, have more keepers and quite simply enjoy using it.

I would not discourage any newbie from buying it, should they have the budget to do so.


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 10, 2012)

cayenne said:


> Magic from that thing so far, and that was just a few snaps of my dog, and the xmas decorations up in the house....



I'm not disputing it's a great lens and I'd swap it with my 70-300L anytime - for free :-> - but that's what I meant when writing ymmv: When shooting your dog from your couch or going a few steps outside the size & weight don't matter, and if you're a strong person or a trained photog that doesn't travel a lot they might not matter at all ...

... but when exploring outdoors I can still dangle 70-300L+60d from my wrist for a long time without problems because of less torque, but with a flash like the 600rt mounted that's the absolute max I'd still consider "fun" (me currently) and not "work".


----------



## Admin US West (Dec 10, 2012)

This is a friendly forum, not a place to criticize those who come for help.

The jerks who ridiculed the poster really need to cancel their accounts as well. Maybe I'll do it for them


----------

