Reading mode: Light Dark

Advice with 70-300, just not sharp....

Go to last post
Check these out, I can't believe this is MY lens doing this!

Our dog from across the room (lens wide open on these btw!)



100% crop



You know those tiny baby breath flowers they put with a rose at the flower shop?

( for those that don't their about the size of a corn kernal)

Here they are from across the kitchen, lens wide open. 100% crop



--
My Photo Album
http://www.flickr.com/photos/7561880@N05/
 
Ron777 said:
wow that eagle is SHARP!!!

Those fuji pics were 'out of the cam jpegs' so those looked too sharp
to you?
Click to expand...
Yes, they definitely looked over-sharpened to me. If you like that look, then it's possible that the D40 simply isn't capable of doing that in-camera.

[snip]
Ron777 said:
I'm going to try another test, same subject but outside, better
light, no UV filter, F8 and tripod with VR off. I'll post the results
here so we all can see if it helped at all.
Click to expand...
BTW, that pic I posted was hand-held, VR on, no filter. But for your test, a tripod and VR off makes sense. And definitely lose the filter but keep the hood on.

larsbc
 
Ron777 said:
OH man I can't beleive this, over a year suffering, I never
considered the UV filter. It looks so clean and nice to the neked eye
but...
the results speak for themselves. It's like I got a new lens!!!!
Click to expand...
Wow, glad to hear that you found an easy solution to your problem!

larsbc
 
Glad you figured it out. For most people it is a very sharp lens and can't be beat in that price range. Almost without exception a cheap filter = a bad filter. ; )
--
Lora

I've been on Dpreview since June 2006. Unfortunately, some posting history has been lost along the way...

 
I think he looks very sharp on my monitor. Don't you think he is sharp? Dave
--
Visit my gallery at http://www.poperotzy.smugmug.com
There is a link for saving 5.OO on your own Smugmug account.

 
Hmmm, I read the thread (and the fuji one too) with great interest.
So many thing to learn and glad the main source of problem was found.

However without any intention to offend I think OP's personal taste is for over sharpened images.

I'm OK with Fuji shots coming way over sharpened out of camera.

I just think that Nikon D40 shots are also over processed. And twice in fact - once in camera and once in PP.

Why you need to dial -.7 exposure compensation and in the same time Contrast in camera is set on Hard? It contradicts each other!

Probably it is OK that Sharpness in cam is set to Hard for your taste. But to do USM again in PP is a bit over the top.

I also have D40 and find it very well balanced using jpg out of cam (usually all settings are at Normal). If I had D90 I would sure use +4 for Sharpness as it is different camera.

I think what OP should do is rise up a bit shutter speeds and ISO - that might give better sharpness than pumping it artificially in cam and PP!

Just my 2 yen!
Bogie
 
Horses for courses, i suppose its a matter of personal taste. how much P&P one likes how much colour, contrast, modes ect, ect, we all like different amounts and see differently regards Alan.
 
Hi,

Just read the tread, I recently had a similar experience with my 18-200. I changed to a Hoya Pro Digital and immediately noticed the difference. Ibelieve a great number of peole would benefit from checking the quality of filters, cheap ones just don't seem to work. For 70-300 results see flikr below
--
Raymond

Box Brownie, Zeiss Nettar, Practica, Fuji DX10, Fuji S602, Fuji 9500, Nikon D80 18-200 VR, Nikon 18-135, Nikon 50mm 1.8D Nikon 70-300Vr
Printers Epson 2100, Canon MP600

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rpjbexhill/
 
I am delighted to hear that you have sorted this problem.

Filters have their merits, so don't be put off using them. But make sure you buy top quality: Nikon, Tiffen, Hoya Pro grade, or B&W should be OK. I use B&W and Hoya. You should expect to spend up to $70.

S.
--
Wait, watch, listen, then pounce !
 
Bogie-Beppu said:
I just think that Nikon D40 shots are also over processed. And twice
in fact - once in camera and once in PP.
Click to expand...
There might be cases when this is needed, depending on the settings in camera and the subject. It is hard to get the settings completely correct in camera. Also, remember that output sharpening varies depending on the use of the pic.
Bogie-Beppu said:
Why you need to dial -.7 exposure compensation and in the same time
Contrast in camera is set on Hard? It contradicts each other!
Probably it is OK that Sharpness in cam is set to Hard for your
taste. But to do USM again in PP is a bit over the top.
Click to expand...
Exposure comp has nothing to do with sharpening.
Bogie-Beppu said:
I think what OP should do is rise up a bit shutter speeds and ISO -
that might give better sharpness than pumping it artificially in cam
and PP!
Click to expand...
That is true if the softness is due to motion blur or camera shake. Also, a tripod is the best way to test sharpness. But for 300 mm with a DSLR, you need a sturdy tripod for getting the best sharpness, many people don't realize that.
http://fling.zenfolio.com
 
wow you too eh? Man can't beleive I never heard about this before... all this time!
Ray Jeffery said:
Hi,

Just read the tread, I recently had a similar experience with my
18-200. I changed to a Hoya Pro Digital and immediately noticed the
difference. Ibelieve a great number of peole would benefit from
checking the quality of filters, cheap ones just don't seem to work.
For 70-300 results see flikr below
--
Raymond
Box Brownie, Zeiss Nettar, Practica, Fuji DX10, Fuji S602, Fuji 9500,
Nikon D80 18-200 VR, Nikon 18-135, Nikon 50mm 1.8D Nikon 70-300Vr
Printers Epson 2100, Canon MP600

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rpjbexhill/
Click to expand...
--
My Photo Album
http://www.flickr.com/photos/7561880@N05/
 
Bogie-Beppu said:
However without any intention to offend I think OP's personal taste
is for over sharpened images.
Click to expand...
I guess that's relative, to me that's normal sharp and other would look undersharpened to me.
Bogie-Beppu said:
I just think that Nikon D40 shots are also over processed. And twice
in fact - once in camera and once in PP.
Click to expand...
No, shot in raw, all processing down in Nx.
Bogie-Beppu said:
Why you need to dial -.7 exposure compensation and in the same time
Contrast in camera is set on Hard? It contradicts each other!
Probably it is OK that Sharpness in cam is set to Hard for your
taste. But to do USM again in PP is a bit over the top.
Click to expand...
contrast and exposure do not affect the image the same way. I use neg exposure comp when the BG is bright but I still like a contrasty image.
It's all just individual tastes. I hate washed out soft photos.
Bogie-Beppu said:
I also have D40 and find it very well balanced using jpg out of cam
(usually all settings are at Normal). If I had D90 I would sure use
+4 for Sharpness as it is different camera.
Click to expand...
I shoot raw though so my in camera settings really aren't locking anything in. It's just how the photo 'starts' in Nx, but I adjust from there with contrast, sharpness, etc.
Bogie-Beppu said:
I think what OP should do is rise up a bit shutter speeds and ISO -
that might give better sharpness than pumping it artificially in cam
and PP!
Click to expand...
Can't raise shutter in dimmer light without going iso 1600 and that is not acceptable with bird shots, too much noise and detail loss.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top