Please help me to understand what's wrong with this lens (or me)

Hi everybody,

I am bit desperate with my tele zoom Sony E 55-210mm F4.5-6.3 OSS. I new that it needs to be stepped down etc. so I shot pictures with these settings with my Alpha 6000

Aperture Value: 8.0

Brightness Value: 9.29453125

Color Space: sRGB



Compressed Bits Per Pixel: 3

Contrast: Normal

Create Date: 2015:09:08 04:05:35

Custom Rendered: Normal

Date/Time Original: 2015:09:08 08:05:35

Digital Zoom Ratio: 1

Exif Image Height: 4000

Exif Image Width: 6000

Exif Version: 0230

Exposure Compensation: 0

Exposure Mode: Auto

Exposure Program: Aperture-priority AE

Exposure Time: 1/350

F Number: 8.0

File Source: Digital Camera

Flash: Off, Did not fire

Flashpix Version: 0100

Focal Length: 210.0 mm

Focal Length In 35mm Format: 315 mm

ISO: 200

Lens Info: 55-210mm f/4.5-6.3

Lens Model: E 55-210mm F4.5-6.3 OSS

Light Source: Unknown

Max Aperture Value: 6.3

Metering Mode: Center-weighted average

Recommended Exposure Index: 200

Saturation: Normal

Scene Capture Type: Standard

Scene Type: Directly photographed

Sensitivity Type: Recommended Exposure Index

Sharpness: Normal

Shutter Speed Value: 1/350

White Balance: Auto

Bits Per Sample: 8

Color Components: 3

Encoding Process: Baseline DCT, Huffman coding

Exif Byte Order: Little-endian (Intel, II)

File Type: JPEG

Image Height: 4000

Image Width: 6000





As you can see, sharpness is bad. And this is one of the better images. I had much worse, too. It seems that focus is not the problem, as nothing is in focus really.

Bad lens? Unskilled photographer? What can I do?

Thanks for any opinions / hints / help.

Cheers, Mixx

mixx@gmx said:

Hi everybody,

I am bit desperate with my tele zoom Sony E 55-210mm F4.5-6.3 OSS. I new that it needs to be stepped down etc. so I shot pictures with these settings with my Alpha 6000

Aperture Value: 8.0

Brightness Value: 9.29453125

Color Space: sRGB

Compressed Bits Per Pixel: 3

Contrast: Normal

Create Date: 2015:09:08 04:05:35

Custom Rendered: Normal

Date/Time Original: 2015:09:08 08:05:35

Digital Zoom Ratio: 1

Exif Image Height: 4000

Exif Image Width: 6000

Exif Version: 0230

Exposure Compensation: 0

Exposure Mode: Auto

Exposure Program: Aperture-priority AE

Exposure Time: 1/350

F Number: 8.0

File Source: Digital Camera

Flash: Off, Did not fire

Flashpix Version: 0100

Focal Length: 210.0 mm

Focal Length In 35mm Format: 315 mm

ISO: 200

Lens Info: 55-210mm f/4.5-6.3

Lens Model: E 55-210mm F4.5-6.3 OSS

Light Source: Unknown

Max Aperture Value: 6.3

Metering Mode: Center-weighted average

Recommended Exposure Index: 200

Saturation: Normal

Scene Capture Type: Standard

Scene Type: Directly photographed

Sensitivity Type: Recommended Exposure Index

Sharpness: Normal

Shutter Speed Value: 1/350

White Balance: Auto

Bits Per Sample: 8

Color Components: 3

Encoding Process: Baseline DCT, Huffman coding

Exif Byte Order: Little-endian (Intel, II)

File Type: JPEG

Image Height: 4000

Image Width: 6000



As you can see, sharpness is bad. And this is one of the better images. I had much worse, too. It seems that focus is not the problem, as nothing is in focus really.

Bad lens? Unskilled photographer? What can I dThanks for any opinions / hints / help.

Cheers, Mixx

Click to expand...

Hi, I too find this lens inconsistent to say the least! From your exif it looks as if you're in the right territory exposure wise. F8 should be OK shutter speed is a little slow, especially if the animals are moving. I assume you were on a vehicle? Was it stationary or moving?

Thanks. I was on a vehicle but don't remember if it moved for this shot. But very often it did move. D you think that the shutter speed was to low?

Regards, Mixx

My best guess is that the shutter speed was too low given the focal length and a (potentially) moving vehicle.

I find that 1/1000 sec for animals works best. Even slight breathing will result in a blur.

mixx@gmx said:

Thanks. I was on a vehicle but don't remember if it moved for this shot. But very often it did move. D you think that the shutter speed was to low?

Regards, Mixx

Click to expand...

+1 about 1/1000s. In this shot however I suspect you are moving more than the animals because the vegetation is not sharp either.

mixx@gmx said:

Hi everybody,

I am bit desperate with my tele zoom Sony E 55-210mm F4.5-6.3 OSS. I new that it needs to be stepped down etc. so I shot pictures with these settings with my Alpha 6000

Click to expand...

Unfortunately I don't own this lens (I use the Minolta Beer Can for my tele) but... I've seen some great, very sharp images taken by it.

mixx@gmx said:

Aperture Value: 8.0

Click to expand...

I know this lens is supposed to be sharpest between f5.6 and f8. So your Av should be good at f8.

mixx@gmx said:

Contrast: Normal

Click to expand...

Typically, long telephoto lenses don't have a lot of contrast (especially if your're use to shooting mostly primes) which can make them look soft - you'll likely need to 'punch-up' the contrast either in camera, or in post.

mixx@gmx said:

Focal Length In 35mm Format: 315 mm

Click to expand...

You're at 315mm, and photographing (potentially) moving subjects (negating steady-shot / low shutter speeds) soo... that means your starting point is 1/500th (rounding up from 1/315)... add to that the speed that the subject is moving, and how much stability you have, how practiced you are at your shooting technique, and you're likely looking at at least 1/1000 for this shot?

mixx@gmx said:

Shutter Speed Value: 1/350

Click to expand...

Ah - here-in lies the problem I think.

mixx@gmx said:

Click to expand...

Cute baby elephant!

--
http://marsweekly.wordpress.com/

I have never had good results with this lens at 210mm but it is much better at about 195mm and stopped down to f/9.

I can see evidence of "shake" in your image.

Some say that 1/350s is a bit slow, but OSS should have taken care of that, however...

I think the key to your problem is that you were shooting from a vehicle. Presumably the vehicle was stationary, but even an idling engine can upset the OSS, since the engine vibration could be at a frequency that the OSS is not meant to handle (faster than about 20Hz).

I first saw this effect when taking a shot from a cruise ship and resting the camera on the railing. The image went crazy, and I realised that it was the throb of the engines "interferring" (in both senses) with the optical stabilisation.

Another interesting effect when shooting from a small boat is that the rocking of the boat can impart a rotational motion to the camera (about the line of sight axis), and simple stabilisation systems will not handle this. This is where "5-axis" comes in handy.

I have this lens and agree with the other posters for how to manage in a vehicle. Wider aperature, crank back on the focal length (210mm, oddly enough, seems to be quite sharp at shorter distances, at least with my copy of this lens).

To test for pure sharpness, use a flash and photograph something about 10 feet away. The farther the distance, the more very small movements are magnified. Also there's an issue with lens design -- it's possible this one is sharper at shorter distances at 210mm than at infinity.




Flash photo at 210m

Thanks everybody, I blew it quite a bit then. Wanted to have a small aperture, not too high ISO and figured 1/350 will suffice. Of course I was almost always on 210mm, as it is natural to zoom in as far as possible, when an animal appears.

I bought the lens literally 2 days before the as my other camera broke down, did not have the time to learn its ways. And I never shot from a vehicle before, either.

A noob, indeed.

Thank you for the posts / opinions / explanations.

Best, Mixx

To put your mind at rest, grab a tripod, fit the camera and photograph a stationery object like a barn door, parked car etc take a range of shots at various shutter speeds and apertures, don't forget to use the self timer and take notes. you will probably find the lens is fine and as everyone else has said, you have used to slow a shutter speed for the given focal length. Remember the rule of thumb, whatever the focal length choose a similer shutter speed if hand holding, and don't be frightened to up the ISO to make sure the shutter is fast enough, better a bit noise than camera shake.

Good luck

Another thing to consider is the type of auto-focus you are using. Continuous AF and spot focus point if there is a lot of bush around the subject.

And of course at maximum zoom, you will have some user induced shakiness.

Yes that's for sure. Any shutter speed lower than the rated focal length could induce camera shake. Just trying to cover all the bases.

mixx@gmx said:

Thanks everybody, I blew it quite a bit then. Wanted to have a small aperture, not too high ISO and figured 1/350 will suffice. Of course I was almost always on 210mm, as it is natural to zoom in as far as possible, when an animal appears.

Click to expand...

I still think the vehicle engine was the culprit; I've done plenty of low SS photography where I rely on image stabilisation.

LynniePad said:

mixx@gmx said:

Thanks everybody, I blew it quite a bit then. Wanted to have a small aperture, not too high ISO and figured 1/350 will suffice. Of course I was almost always on 210mm, as it is natural to zoom in as far as possible, when an animal appears.

Click to expand...

I still think the vehicle engine was the culprit; I've done plenty of low SS photography where I rely on image stabilisation.

Click to expand...

Stabilization may help with stationary objects, but it doesn't enter into the equation when the subject is in motion; when you're on a moving vehicle, the subject's movement relative to you is further increased.

santiclaws said:

Stabilization may help with stationary objects, but it doesn't enter into the equation when the subject is in motion; when you're on a moving vehicle, the subject's movement relative to you is further increased.

Click to expand...

You mean to say that that clever little swinging lens won't stop an elephant in its tracks? ;-)

Yes I know about stabilisation; I was referring to my earlier post where I mentioned that the engine vibration of a stationary vehicle can upset the stabilisation system.

If I remember correctly, I calculated that at an idling speed of 600 RPM, that's 10 revolutions per second; a 4-cylinder car has two power strokes per revolution, so expect 20Hz vibrations from this secondary effect. 4 cylinder engines are popular on safari vehicles, and they are notorious for vibration at idle.

Human shakiness is at about 10Hz or less.

think there is also a bit of a focus miss - adult backside seems to be in better focus even though its in the corner

not sure if its because it has a much more pronounced texture to its hide though

i have had a lot of problems with this lens @ 210mm using AF

i find its rarely sharp tbh but use of DMF can get it much sharper, very small focus ring adjustments can make a big difference even if it says it has a focus lock

quite awkward though

brilly said:

think there is also a bit of a focus miss - adult backside seems to be in better focus even though its in the corner

not sure if its because it has a much more pronounced texture to its hide though

i have had a lot of problems with this lens @ 210mm using AF

i find its rarely sharp tbh but use of DMF can get it much sharper, very small focus ring adjustments can make a big difference even if it says it has a focus lock

quite awkward though

Click to expand...

Using continuous AF with spot focus set to small would probably be the most effective in this situation. But I wasn't there so who knows.