Steve's Digicams Forums

Steve's Digicams Forums (
-   Olympus (
-   -   C 4000z Focusing (

Kanji Nov 6, 2002 9:06 PM

C 4000z Focusing
Hi,I have been trying to get consistant results in the pics that I take with my c4000.Sometimes the pics are crisp and snappy and other times,they are very soft and unsharp. I take the pics using the same tripod I use for my 6x6,so camera shake should not be present. What I have found is that if I use the "spot" focusing, I get the crisp pics with the snap that I am expecting from this camera. If I use the default focusing,I get the soft,mushy pics that are disgusting to look at. I am thinking of swapping it for another camera. So,my question is, is this the norm for this camera,is the camera defective,or is there something that I am missing? Thanks :(

Skiola Nov 7, 2002 12:42 AM

Gee, the spot AF is one of the main reasons I upgraded from the C3000 to the C4040. If you look closely at the mushy shots, the background is probably in focus. A person standing in front of a building, bridge, fence, etc. often has that problem. I rarely turn off the spot AF. It's been so long since I last did, I don't remember why I did.

Kanji Nov 7, 2002 12:37 PM

Hi,well,when I look at the soft pics,nothing is in focus. I know what you are talking about...the camera is focusing on an object to the rear of the subject. But, this is not the case...nothing is in sharp focus. I can also improve the sharpness by setting the camera to aperture priority and selecting an f stop like f7 or so,which of course,increases depth of field along with the spot focuing. But the other type of focusing just gives soft pics.....maybe the 4040 has a better lens/focusing setup? Maybe I bought a dud.....

david Nov 7, 2002 6:59 PM

I had all the same problems with my c4000. I got drunk and never see the camera again!! I don't recommend this route by the way. Anyways, I am now going to get the fuji f602. And have it surgically implanted haha!! Beat that!!


Skiola Nov 8, 2002 12:41 AM

Kanji, do you have Continuous AF turned off? When it is OFF, then the shutter won't fire unless the image is focused. This is called "focus priority". With it ON, it will fire whether the image is focused or not. This is called "shutter priority". (NOT the same as shutter priority autoexposure, of course.) Just something to check.

david Nov 8, 2002 12:29 PM

If the camera "thinks" it's in focus, it's going to fire anyway!!

gibsonpd3620 Nov 8, 2002 3:00 PM

Have you contacted Olympus. They have always been helpful when I contacted them. You C4000 must be in warranty. I have shot several hundred pics with the C4000 and was pleased with the results. No focus problems at all.

marcoangels Nov 9, 2002 1:13 AM

I am having similar problems, as are many other C-4000 owners, check out the post 'C-4000 problems', a bit down in the list of posts...portrait focusing has been no problem, but landscape shots put nothing in sharp focus. Olympus has suggested sendin the camera in for repair, but what if it comes back the same, then I've lost camera time for nothing. From what I've been reading, the focusing problem is widespread among this camera, and the Oly techs openly admit it. I guess that's the trade-off for getting 4 mgp for under $400...

Kanji Nov 9, 2002 4:03 AM

Hi, I have experimented for half the day with my c4000 to try to see what works and what won't work in achieving even an acceptable pic with the camera. With the example that i have, the only sharp, snappy pics that I can get are shots taken with the subject taking up a large portion of the screen (portraits,closeups,group pics,etc). Photos taken where the subject is at distance of more than of say ten feet away from the camera are simply not in focus,and the entire pic is soft,and/or breaks down quickly when enlarged even slightly. There is no way that this example that I have is ever going to make use of 4 MPs to get an acceptable 8X10 or indeed,even a 4X6 print. The lens seems to be sharp enough,but sharpness won't get it if the lens is never focused on the subject being photographed. This example that I have is nowhere near worth the money that I have paid for it. I have based my purchase on what the web sites and some mags have shown in their reviews...they have all said that this is a good camera...maybe they should try more than one example before submiting their a little more demanding with their test standards . I have seen the testers mention chromatic aberations with this camera's lens for instance,...what an understatement!!! This c4000 that I own has CA so bad that backlite shots,especially through trees and such is best simply avoided. Anyway,i am going to exchage this camera for another c4000 and see if the focusing is cured. If the new camera is the same,that's the last Olympus for me,I will try some other make. :(

david Nov 9, 2002 3:41 PM

All this focusing stuff has got me a tad confused. The picture below is a curtain taken through glass from a couple of feet away. Looking closely at just left of top centre you can just make out the reflection of Canary Wharf Tower in London docklands. Looks clear to me, and it is at infinity. I thought the depth of field was so great with digital cameras that precise focusing should not be an issue :?:
As I said, very confusing.

I find jaggies and moire patterning an issue with this camera.
Anyways, I got my camera back (earlier posting) seems you can't even give a c4000 away :!:
I agree the results seem better at close range, but I wonder is this just the illusion of things being so much bigger than a small distant subject.
For the money I just don't think the quality control is going to guarantee everybody gets a top notch lens. For this money I guess they are machine produced and not hand corrected. :(
Although that don't answer why there is so much difference as noted on this forum. It would be nice if someone from tech support responded, but somehow I doubt it.

Happy snapping.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:32 PM.