Login System 
IMPORTANT: Please note that you must now log in with your email address and not your username!
 mathecb
Anubis
Team Member
Joined: Feb 2008  GA, USA
 Posts: 4772 Feedback: 100% (1) |
Posted: 8/10/2012 5:58:11 PM
THE IMAGE ABOVE IS A PAID ADVERTISEMENT Camera: Nikon D7000 Lens: 70-300 VR |
|
|
|
beavo451
beavo451
Team Member
Joined: Jul 2005 TX, USA
Posts: 3590 Feedback: 100% (28) Link To This Post |
Posted: 8/10/2012 6:29:42 PM
Example pictures? Is VR enabled? Why don't you open up your aperture to get a faster shutter speed?
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/10/2012 6:33:31 PM
Originally Posted By beavo451:
Example pictures? Is VR enabled? Why don't you open up your aperture to get a faster shutter speed? +87 The more you zoom in the shakier the pictures can be. Use the VR, or a tripod with the VR off. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/10/2012 6:54:43 PM
Read up and understand exposure. Practice better composition, have a focal point. I'd bet your photos are plenty sharp, but lack any kind of pop, thus leaving them flat and boring.
|
|
|
|
mathecb
Anubis
Team Member
Joined: Feb 2008 GA, USA
Posts: 4773 Feedback: 100% (1) Link To This Post |
Posted: 8/10/2012 7:13:21 PM
[Last Edit: 8/10/2012 7:16:39 PM by mathecb]
Ill try opening up the aperture.
The photos are definately not sharp. Ill try and get some test photos up tomorrow. (tonight I will re-read understanding exposure) Thanks so far guys. This hobby is almost as bad as BRD. |
|
|
|
hsvhobbit
Member
Team Member
Joined: Apr 2002 AL, USA
Posts: 1892 Feedback: 0% (0) Link To This Post |
Posted: 8/10/2012 8:02:14 PM
First of all your shutter speed is WAY too low. General rule of thumb is 1/focal length for a full frame (multiply by 1.5 for the dx format) if not using VR. Next, I hate to break it to you but that lens isn't considered all that sharp at max focal length. So without using VR you should use no less than 1/450 sec. Even using VR I'd go no slower than 1/250. Stopping down helps the sharpness but then you lose your SS so it's a balancing act.
Something that can help greatly is use of a tripod or monopod. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2012 12:53:49 AM
Agree with hsvhobbit, use a tripod for all of your shots that you want extra sharpness.
Also use the aperture opening around F/8-f/11, or maybe even f/16. If you are wide open at max aperture you photos will be soft. Most lenses don't are not extremely sharp at wide open. Stop down maybe 1-2 stop for max sharpness. |
|
|
|
beavo451
beavo451
Team Member
Joined: Jul 2005 TX, USA
Posts: 3592 Feedback: 100% (28) Link To This Post |
Posted: 8/11/2012 9:37:53 AM
[Last Edit: 8/11/2012 9:38:27 AM by beavo451]
Originally Posted By warlord:
Agree with hsvhobbit, use a tripod for all of your shots that you want extra sharpness. Also use the aperture opening around F/8-f/11, or maybe even f/16. If you are wide open at max aperture you photos will be soft. Most lenses don't are not extremely sharp at wide open. Stop down maybe 1-2 stop for max sharpness. The difference between two stops down and wide open is not significant. Especially when the problem appears to stem from camera shake and, possibly, subject movement. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2012 10:53:01 AM
Originally Posted By beavo451:
Originally Posted By warlord:
Agree with hsvhobbit, use a tripod for all of your shots that you want extra sharpness. Also use the aperture opening around F/8-f/11, or maybe even f/16. If you are wide open at max aperture you photos will be soft. Most lenses don't are not extremely sharp at wide open. Stop down maybe 1-2 stop for max sharpness. The difference between two stops down and wide open is not significant. That's a horrible blanket statement. Assuming decent glass, it's a f/2.8. Two stops down to f/5.6 or even only one stop to f/4 there is generally a HUGE increase in sharpness. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2012 11:56:05 AM
[Last Edit: 8/11/2012 12:54:21 PM by warlord]
Originally Posted By SDMF_Rebel:
Yes, and I agree.
Originally Posted By beavo451:
Originally Posted By warlord:
Agree with hsvhobbit, use a tripod for all of your shots that you want extra sharpness. Also use the aperture opening around F/8-f/11, or maybe even f/16. If you are wide open at max aperture you photos will be soft. Most lenses don't are not extremely sharp at wide open. Stop down maybe 1-2 stop for max sharpness. The difference between two stops down and wide open is not significant. That's a horrible blanket statement. Assuming decent glass, it's a f/2.8. Two stops down to f/5.6 or even only one stop to f/4 there is generally a HUGE increase in sharpness. beavo451: I a beg to differ, there is a significant difference; 2 stops down or so from max aperture. Even though I don't have the technical equipment to personally measure it, I have seen enough of reports, ie resolving power, contrast, and various lens aberrations, are lessened if you stop down the lens at least 2 stop down; and you can see the difference visually if you look carefully. Even thought the lens quality is significantly improved from years ago ie back then they had no aspherical lens surfaces and ED glass, they still follow the rules of physics. |
|
|
|
beavo451
beavo451
Team Member
Joined: Jul 2005 TX, USA
Posts: 3594 Feedback: 100% (28) Link To This Post |
Posted: 8/11/2012 5:25:21 PM
[Last Edit: 8/11/2012 5:32:48 PM by beavo451]
Look at his post. High ISO, small aperture, low shutter speed. He already has the lens stopped down. It is very likely that his problem is camera shake and subject movement. If he increases his shutter speed to compensate, his ISO is going to go up the same number of stops. His IQ is already taking a hit. So yes, the difference between wideopen F/5.6 and two stops down is not going to be significant.
Edit to add: We don't look at photos @ 100% crop. We look at photos at a reasonable size at a reasonable distance. If I am shooting a subject that requires absolute maximum sharpness, then yeah, I'm going to worry about stopping down. But, in most situations, worrying about lighting conditions and DOF is going to be more significant than worrying about the little bit of sharpness lost by shooting wide open. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2012 7:06:21 PM
Originally Posted By warlord:
Originally Posted By SDMF_Rebel:
Yes, and I agree.
Originally Posted By beavo451:
Originally Posted By warlord:
Agree with hsvhobbit, use a tripod for all of your shots that you want extra sharpness. Also use the aperture opening around F/8-f/11, or maybe even f/16. If you are wide open at max aperture you photos will be soft. Most lenses don't are not extremely sharp at wide open. Stop down maybe 1-2 stop for max sharpness. The difference between two stops down and wide open is not significant. That's a horrible blanket statement. Assuming decent glass, it's a f/2.8. Two stops down to f/5.6 or even only one stop to f/4 there is generally a HUGE increase in sharpness. beavo451: I a beg to differ, there is a significant difference; 2 stops down or so from max aperture. Even though I don't have the technical equipment to personally measure it, I have seen enough of reports, ie resolving power, contrast, and various lens aberrations, are lessened if you stop down the lens at least 2 stop down; and you can see the difference visually if you look carefully. Even thought the lens quality is significantly improved from years ago ie back then they had no aspherical lens surfaces and ED glass, they still follow the rules of physics. Beavo is correct. Shooting 1/25 to 1/100th on a 300mm lens handheld is WAY more of a problem than the aperture or ISO. Ideally you'll have it all perfect: low iso, optimal aperture (which is often stopped down on the cheaper lenses) and fast enough shutter speed. But the one that is most important is shutter speed. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2012 5:43:20 PM
[Last Edit: 8/13/2012 6:07:23 PM by trg42]
As already mentioned to slow SS can result ( even with VR , VC, IS etc ) in blurry images
You need to learn how to use the hi iso capability and Auto Iso feature of your camera ISO - although you hear lots of people claim that lower iso is always better, that is not really true any more with todays higher end cameras. As it turns out , the D7000 actually has excellent ( even compared to my D700 ) hi iso performance . That thinking is a throwback from film days The D7000 is far better than the D3100 , D5100 etc , so much so that I now use one as a backup to my D700 See some comparisons..please note that these are 100% crops for scrutinizing. It would not be as noticable in real word picture http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/comparisons/2010-11-08-d7000-d300-5dmarkii-d3-iso/index.htm Bottom line , shoot all you want at iso 400 if it makes you feel better, but in order to get the SS up, don't be afraid to push the ISO on a D7000 ISO Sensitivity Settings The great thing about the D7000 is you can set this in one your U1 or U2 settings, or just using your "Shooting Menu Bank" Go to your shooting menu ( camera icon ) and scroll down to ISO Sensitivity Setting. Go down to ISO Sensitivity Auto Control Set ISO sensitivity ( what it starts at to 200 or 400 ) Turn Auto Sensitivity to "ON" Set Maximum Sensitivity to some higher number ( I use for my "low light" bank 3200 ) , you may not want to get that greedy...try 1600 or 2000 Set minimum shutter speed to 1/500 or faster Use this as your 70-300 lens setting . For example, if you are shooting wide angle architecture etc , you can have a much lower min SS What happens is this : you take a picture ( lets say aperture control ) at F11 ( typical landscape F stop....shooting landscapes at F2.8 doesn't work well ! ) The camera will not force the minimum SS down, until it hits the max ISO sensitivity you chose. Only at that point does it start lower the SS to achieve proper exposure This ensures that the SS is always fast enough for your zoomed out 70-300 This way, you don't have to think to hard about it. The camera will decide when to raise , and to what level the ISO to Keep in mind that even in manual mode, the auto iso will be auto unless you turn it off ! What you should do is set your custom shooting blanks and call them " 70-300 " , "out door" , "indoor" etc . This way you can set what min SS you want and max ISO depending on what you are doing Cropping vs Zoom - as already mentioned, the 70-300VR is a good lens but not the greatest at long end . This is not untypical of consumer lenses - keep in mind that your 300mm is actually 450mm on DX body like yours . - food for thought, you are better off having a sharp picture at 200mm ( on lens ) and crop in , than a blurry 300 mm picture - try limiting yourself to 250mm or so and crop in if need to get in closer - keep in mind that you have a huge file to play with...you can crop in like crazy and still get a huge jpg out of it - I assume you are shooting in RAW ? IF you have any doubts on the capabilities of this lens, see here http://www.nikoncafe.com/vforums/showthread.php?t=180440 Focus Issues Also ensure that your lens is not front or back focusing . You can easily remedy in Autofocus Fine Tune Often people chase their tail trying to fix soft picture issue without verify thi first Its in setup menu ( wrench ) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4jUXryI8Jk |
|
|
|
beavo451
beavo451
Team Member
Joined: Jul 2005 TX, USA
Posts: 3597 Feedback: 100% (28) Link To This Post |
Posted: 8/13/2012 7:41:14 PM
[Last Edit: 8/13/2012 7:50:06 PM by beavo451]
Some decent information, but....
Originally Posted By trg42:
ISO - although you hear lots of people claim that lower iso is always better, that is not really true any more with todays higher end cameras. As it turns out , the D7000 actually has excellent ( even compared to my D700 ) hi iso performance . That thinking is a throwback from film days Yes, high ISO performance has gotten very, very good. However, it is still a factor in IQ; albeit, a smaller one with newer cameras. It's not "thinking", it is fact. Faster (more light sensitive) films have larger light sensitive grains. This results in less detail. With electronic sensors, the sensor has a native sensitivity. To replicate faster films, the signal from the sensor is amplified to the desired level. Any interference or "noise" that is inherent to electronics is also amplified. Sensors and films have a limited amount of information that they can record. As the signal is amplified, it can obtain information that was captured by the sensor. Higher ISOs will have lower saturation and dynamic range due to the limited amount of information recorded at the sensor's native sensitivity. Set minimum shutter speed to 1/500 or faster Use this as your 70-300 lens setting . For example, if you are shooting wide angle architecture etc , you can have a much lower min SS Shutter speed should be at least 1/focal length to minimize camera shake. A photographer will need to utilize his experience to counter subject movement. What happens is this : you take a picture ( lets say aperture control ) at F11 ( typical landscape F stop....shooting landscapes at F2.8 doesn't work well ! ) Really? You need to read up on hyperfocal distances. - keep in mind that your 300mm is actually 450mm on DX body like yours . Negative. A 300mm lens is a 300mm lens on any camera. When used on a camera body with a crop (DX) format sensor, the recorded image will have a field of view equivalent to a 450mm lens on a 35mm "full frame" sensor. Focal length does not change. - food for thought, you are better off having a sharp picture at 200mm ( on lens ) and crop in , than a blurry 300 mm picture - try limiting yourself to 250mm or so and crop in if need to get in closer - keep in mind that you have a huge file to play with...you can crop in like crazy and still get a huge jpg out of it Shooting this way is not a crutch to good shooting techniques and technical understanding. A blurry image taken at 300mm is not magically going to become sharp at 200mm. The camera will record less information in a given area so that the movement will not be as apparent. Also ensure that your lens is not front or back focusing . You can easily remedy in Autofocus Fine Tune Often people chase their tail trying to fix soft picture issue without verify thi first This is very good advice. Also, understanding how your camera's AF system detects and achieves focus is beneficial. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2012 9:50:49 PM
[Last Edit: 8/13/2012 10:26:42 PM by trg42]
Originally Posted By beavo451:
Some decent information, but.... Originally Posted By trg42:
ISO - although you hear lots of people claim that lower iso is always better, that is not really true any more with todays higher end cameras. As it turns out , the D7000 actually has excellent ( even compared to my D700 ) hi iso performance . That thinking is a throwback from film days Yes, high ISO performance has gotten very, very good. However, it is still a factor in IQ; albeit, a smaller one with newer cameras. It's not "thinking", it is fact. Faster (more light sensitive) films have larger light sensitive grains. This results in less detail. With electronic sensors, the sensor has a native sensitivity. To replicate faster films, the signal from the sensor is amplified to the desired level. Any interference or "noise" that is inherent to electronics is also amplified. Sensors and films have a limited amount of information that they can record. As the signal is amplified, it can obtain information that was captured by the sensor. Higher ISOs will have lower saturation and dynamic range due to the limited amount of information recorded at the sensor's native sensitivity. Ummm, ok . I am still blown away that someone would buy a body like a Canon 5DMII , D700 , D800 , D7000 that has great high iso performance and not use it to their advantage I will take a , as you will call a theoretically noisy picture , over over a soft picture since you SS was so slow it blured because you are scared to push the hi iso Real word...not theoretical, i typically shoot ISO 400 base . Wedding pics ( no flash ) I take at ISO between 1000 to 2500 show no visible noise on print. In all fairness this is with a D700 body . Only time I notice is when I crop in crazy to touch up blemishes on people . Won't even bother mentioning the noise reduction capabilities of Lightroom / photoshop . I will say both Nikon and Canon are getting a bit crazy with the stupid super hi iso stuff over 24k ! I would much rather use the evil high iso than have a crappy blurry picture Just take a look at you typicall no professional indoor wedding picture....blurry as hell Set minimum shutter speed to 1/500 or faster Use this as your 70-300 lens setting . For example, if you are shooting wide angle architecture etc , you can have a much lower min SS Shutter speed should be at least 1/focal length to minimize camera shake. A photographer will need to utilize his experience to counter subject movement. Good rule of thumb , but its silly to constantly go back into shooting bank for every single different focal length. For that lens, just as easy to set min SS in ISO Sensitivity Auto control BTW, that rule of thumb, as handy as it is is broken all the time with certain situations when using lenses with the new VR / IS / VC etc . Actually, with some lenses, that rule of thumb is just BS. Shoot again, real world at SS 1/8 to 1/10 with my 16-35VRII , and shoot at 200 with my 70-200 VRII at SS of 1/80 all the time ( obviously static subjects ) Pains me to quote Ken Rockwell, but the OPs lens review ( see near bottom ) gives a pretty good indication on the actuall min ss for that lens. I would agree with him since I used the same lens for years http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/70-300-vr.htm What happens is this : you take a picture ( lets say aperture control ) at F11 ( typical landscape F stop....shooting landscapes at F2.8 doesn't work well ! ) Really? You need to read up on hyperfocal distances. Know about that.....but I wouldn't be shooting landscapes at 300mm and F2.8 anyways ( unless I'm looking for specific detail ) You may get away with this if there is nothing in the foreground shooting wide open I shoot at F2 to F4 all the time for portraits . Fail to see the advantage of these wide open apertures for landscapes I often shoot outdoor portraits at 150 to 200 with my 70-200 and I assure you I don't need a online hyperfocal calculator to tell me that the dept of field is actually pretty shallow at F2.8 Only time I start shooting large aperature landscapes is low light with my ultrawide 16mm. - keep in mind that your 300mm is actually 450mm on DX body like yours . Negative. A 300mm lens is a 300mm lens on any camera. When used on a camera body with a crop (DX) format sensor, the recorded image will have a field of view equivalent to a 450mm lens on a 35mm "full frame" sensor. Focal length does not change. Sorry I was not more clear , my point is 300mm is a long focal length for DX sensor . Similarily 16mm is very wide for FX, but not for DX crop sensors - food for thought, you are better off having a sharp picture at 200mm ( on lens ) and crop in , than a blurry 300 mm picture - try limiting yourself to 250mm or so and crop in if need to get in closer - keep in mind that you have a huge file to play with...you can crop in like crazy and still get a huge jpg out of it Shooting this way is not a crutch to good shooting techniques and technical understanding. A blurry image taken at 300mm is not magically going to become sharp at 200mm. The camera will record less information in a given area so that the movement will not be as apparent. Not what I said at all. A lens that is just ok ( at 300mm ) but sharper at 200 due to SS etc is a better RAW file to start with. Don't know what you shoot for a body and lens, but I crop the hell out of my 24-70 pics and get great prints that are as good as my wifes 18-200 zoomed out This is the biggest problem in consumer photography....everyone wants the 18-200 or 18-300 now . Look at the corners sharpness on any of these lenses zoomed out. Everyone is convinced they need 300mm...they don't realize a sharp good 200mm or less is a better place to start , since you can always crop in. I'll stick with my feeble 200mm This is especially true with OP who has 16mp RAW files to play with Also ensure that your lens is not front or back focusing . You can easily remedy in Autofocus Fine Tune Often people chase their tail trying to fix soft picture issue without verify thi first This is very good advice. Also, understanding how your camera's AF system detects and achieves focus is beneficial. |
|
|
|
MotorMouth
Highly evolved idiot
Team Member
Joined: Oct 2008 OH, USA
Posts: 13712 Feedback: 100% (12) Link To This Post |
Posted: 8/14/2012 1:59:51 PM
One thing I haven't seen mentioned in all of this discussion is depth of field.
OP, depending on focal length and aperture, your image will have an area of focus in between two distances. e.g., Everything from the lens up to 10 feet is out of focus, everything from 10 feet up to 20 feet is in focus, and beyond 20 feet everything is out of focus again. In order to improve focus remove blur, you need understand depth of field, minimize camera movement (faster shutter speed or more camera stability), and freeze moving subjects with faster shutter speed. Also, in order to get really tack sharp shots, especially with a long lens, you need a good tripod. |
|
ARCHIVED
CAN
